In post-war Bosnia and Herzegovina, almost every story about culture is a saga of turbulent struggles, uncertainty, bureaucracy, disappointments and rare victories. Cultural workers, who have been through a lot in the past 30 years, can testify to this best. Most of them will first remind us that the concept of culture is often linked to the political program of the nationalist parties. For the ruling structures, if they even think about culture at all, it primarily represents a nation-building project. If it does not serve to emphasize the supposed beauty of ethno-national or religious affiliation, then it is not important. This goes along with the fact that almost half of the budget for culture is allocated to folklore programs and projects of a religious nature. Such content, of course, has its place in the culture of almost every society, but what proportions are we exactly talking about?

One does not need to be an expert in local conditions to notice that, from the 1990s onwards, culture has all but lost its role as a cohesive force between different experiences and identities. Putting some exceptions aside, the role of culture today is mainly reduced to the promotion and fortification of existing and recently tailored mythologies, i.e. narratives about a proud big-small nation whose history sounds like a recipe for a cocktail of bitter tears. In the end, it can be said that the absence of a clearly articulated cultural policy is actually a policy, be it intentional or unintentional.

And while the capital of the country somehow manages to hold its own when it comes to emphasizing cultural and social content, the situation in smaller towns is much more difficult. It suffices to look at the municipalcultural centers – the role they had during socialism, as a place for meetings and fostering community through cultural engagements, has all but disappeared. What's worse, many cultural institutions are either closing down or lingering in their deathbed for a long time. Where to next?

Perhaps all is not lost after all. In the vacuum that came to the fore, we are gradually witnessing important attempts to revive culture and our relationship to it. These are the initiatives of individuals, smaller collectives, citizen associations and non-profit organizations, which return the focus on culture as a public good and, perhaps most importantly, offer a perspective on the present that is significantly different from the one advocated by the ethno-national caucus. The example of Bihać's KRAK, a center for contemporary culture, which in its less than four years of existence has produced a broad range of interesting content, is particularly worthy of attention. But, in order to write in more detail about KRAK and its activities, it is necessary to first look at the wider context.

Writing about late capitalism in the 1990s, American literary critic and philosopher Frederic Jameson noted that there was an expansion of capital into previously uncommodified areas. He pointed out that this new, burgeoning economic model includes culture as one of its main areas of focus. The result of that process, as Jameson added, is an unprecedented proliferation of cultural activities – to the extent that everything in social life, in one way or another, becomes “cultural”. It also implied that the boundaries between the economic and cultural domains would blur even more, resulting in “the disappearance of the ‘cultural’ as an autonomous and differentiated sphere of the logic of capital”.¹ Among today's examples of what Jameson sensed back then, one can find that the emergence of digital economies introduced a whole new realm of culture, subculture, and related communities – many of which stand out for being short-lived and, in some cases, cryptic and inaccessible. Accordingly, the ongoing – dubious and forced – symbiosis of professional occupations, trades and culture prompted the rise of the so-called creative industries, which subsumed culture into business models and profit margins. Influencers on social networks stand out as perhaps the most current (most bizarre?) example of such an unusual fusion of capital and culture.

All this is, of course, present in BiH as well, which only confirms that we are not facing an exclusively Western phenomenon, but tectonic shifts on a much wider scale. What is alarmingly different for Bosnia and Herzegovina, however, is the country’s steadfast departure from the cultural policy of the socialist period and understanding of culture as a public, collective good. The result is the gradual demise of community-fostering programs, which promoted sociality through various cultural activities at the level of municipalities, cantons, etc.

The new uncertainties, of which there are many, bring forth various questions about culture. What awaits us? After all, what is culture anyway, where is it and what is its social role today? In a small country such as Bosnia and Herzegovina, where there is a problem of articulating the role of culture, a lack of strategy at the state level, and a crisis of cultural production in general, the answers to such questions are remarkably complex. The root of the problem with culture can be found in the Dayton Agreement, which contributed to the collapse of cultural policy and failures of the ruling structures to reaffirm the core social values of culture and therefore ensure its autonomy.

At the forefront are public cultural institutions, which are terribly neglected and underfunded; to the extent that vital institutions are forced to shut down. The most infamous example is the National Museum, which was closed for three years due to lack of funding, i.e. neglect by the governing structures. It is astonishing that the same Museum managed to remain open even during the wars of the 1940s and 1990s. Not to mention that the financing of the National Museum, including a number of other cultural institutions, costs only a small fraction of the state budget. Be it as it may, the Museum eventually managed to survive thanks to an independent initiative called Action. Concerned citizens and cultural workers coordinated a series of in situ interventions to bring attention to the catastrophic situation; they found temporary solutions and finally reopened the Museum.

In order to survive, cultural institutions, organizations and associations increasingly rely on external grants and concessions, i.e. leasing their facilities for various purposes from weddings to corporate parties. Some may not see this as a big problem, and they are right. But the uncertainty in which cultural institutions find themselves significantly limits their freedom of curating and offering strong programs on a continuous basis.

​As I mentioned earlier, the situation is much more depressing in smaller municipalities like Bihać. It suffices to take a look at the report of the Council of Ministers on the allocation of funds for culture at the state level. The amounts listed can barely cover basic operational costs, let alone finance projects and publications. In addition to the disproportionate allocation of funds to religious and folklore programs, geographic distribution also appears to be unbalanced. For example, out of the total amount of over 3 million KM (convertible marks) for this year, the Una-Sana Canton received only 35 thousand KM. Some cantons received even less! Even distribution is, of course, impossible, since Sarajevo, as the capital city with a number of major cultural institutions of vital importance, arguably deserves the largest piece of the cake. However, something is fundamentally wrong if the Una-Sana Canton, with its population of 300,000, receives only 1% of the total amount allocated for culture. Is it a lottery?

Let us go back to the example of Bihać’s KRAK. The team behind this Center correctly assessed that the struggle for culture is actually the struggle for space. Learning from previous crises and extraordinary situations – including the rescue operation of the Bihać City Gallery, which in 2015 narrowly avoided a shutdown when a foreign credit institution attempted to take over its lucrative location in the city center – the founders of KRAK strategically sought a space for the revival of culture through new social practices and a strong connection to the local community. Almost by chance, they stumbled upon a space in the (then) neglected premises of the former workers' club of the defunct Kombiteks textile factory. After a decades-long hiatus, the doors of the club were opened to the public on May 14, 2016, when, in collaboration with the now-defunct informal curatorial platform Kuriranje grada, I held a performance/presentation titled "Kombiteks, Time Machine, Bihać 1982: Memories and Spaces Lost in Transition". Taking place in the dusty and damp premises of the club, the event featured a screening of rare, recently discovered film documentation about the life of Kombiteks workers. A couple of years later, in December 2018, by decision of the City Council, the workers’ club building was given to the local Revizor Foundation, which also designed the project to create a center for contemporary culture.

Located at the entrance to the former textile complex in the Hatinac neighborhood, KRAK represents both physical and symbolic intersection of the city's past and present. Its architectural design, a testimony to the stature of socialist Yugoslavia’s industrialization, features elements of the so-called brutalism as well as local masonry. This identity not only reflects the cultural ethos of KRAK, but firmly anchors it within the community and its history.

Recognizing the exceptional importance of this initiative for the development of civil infrastructure, the Open Society Fund of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Brussels-based European Foundation for Democracy supported the building's renovation. After extensive construction efforts, the facility was finally returned to function in 2020, and shortly thereafter the first program activities of KRAK began, despite the extremely complicated and uncertain situation caused by the global pandemic. Since then, a lot has happened.

Looking back, KRAK was founded in the twilight of various struggles, and amid a combination of unexpected, often fortunate circumstances. First of all, it was a miracle that the workers' club had not been already promised, sold or leased to a private company – as was the case with most of the buildings that belonged to bankrupt industries of Bihać. Next, at the time, the city elected a new mayor, Šuhret Fazlić, who, despite some omissions and controversial decisions during his mandate (the Vučjak case, for example), actually cared about the state of culture and cultural institutions in the city. The same, for instance, cannot be said for the previous mayor, whose priorities were nowehere near culture and cultural workers. With Fazlić's support, the KRAK project received a crucial wind at its back as well as the backing of the City Council, which ultimately decided to give the building to the Revizor Foundation. For everything else, the credit goes to the small circle of individuals who stand behind KRAK, and without whose sacrifice, persistence and deep belief the Center would not exist today.

At the forefront is Irfan Hošić, the founder and artistic director of KRAK, who must be singled out for his contributions. Hošić conceived the project in almost impossible conditions and advocated for the importance of culture by soliciting advice and knocking on the doors of numerous political appointees, bankruptcy trustees, foundation directors, urban planners, architects and lawyers, as well as neighbors, friends and close colleagues. A team of professional, capable and above all proactive members of KRAK is gathered around Hošić, including Mehmed Mahmutović, Majda Piralić, Sead Okić, Adnan Suljkanović, Jasna Pašić, Sijana Hošić and Mirza Šišić. For the sake of transparency, and to avoid any confusion, I should add that I have known Hošić for years and that we have collaborated on several projects. This includes some of the events that were a warm-up for what would later become KRAK. Not wanting to turn the remainder of this text into songs of praise to my friend, although he deserves it, I will look back at what KRAK as a collective has done in the past few years, putting emphasis on things that I consider critical for reaffirming culture as a public, collective and local good. On the Center's website, one can read the following:
“KRAK is an urgent response to the permanent crisis and social environment in the country, which wants to believe that culture, science and art can and should be the initiator of social changes. As such, KRAK wants to position itself as a platform of alternative learning, collaboration and coexistence with a focus on contemporary artistic strategies and inventive protocols in the field of contemporary culture.” 

At a first glance, this statement sounds very ambitious, declarative and reminiscent of a sort of manifesto. Given that KRAK is located in a smaller town in the northwest of the country, where the public discourse mostly revolves around expanding tourism capacities, the question arises as to what this “urgent response” looks like in reality. Fortunately, it is enough to do a little research into the relatively short past of this organization to see that KRAK, in practice, is largely what it claims to be on paper/screen; and that's no small feat.

The program activity of the center is surprisingly rich and diverse, as is its stated mission. It involves participation of a wide range of professionals and amateurs – artists, curators, architects, designers, educators, lawyers, activists, gardeners, environmentalists and chefs – united in the pursuit of shaping a new social reality. Over the past three years, numerous guests from all over the world have visited and/or worked in and with the Center. This includes guests and collaborators from the region, as well as Austria, Italy, the Netherlands, France, Germany, Britain, Denmark, Canada, Brazil and many other places that are impossible to list here. This collaborative and transnational approach permeates almost all aspects of the center’s activity, and lies at the heart of KRAK's philosophy.

The events organized by KRAK range from exhibitions, performances and music events to public discussions and symposia – nearly all tailored to reflect on the pressing social, urban and environmental issues. Among the key events is the recent symposium Our Spaces, which brought together participants from Banja Luka, Bihać, Mostar and Sarajevo to discuss different methodological approaches to urban development and spatial interventions in BiH. This symposium is just one of the examples of KRAK's commitment to engaging the wider community, and encouraging residents to actively participate in shaping the future of their city.

Locally-specific practices include the inaugural exhibition and workshop Hatinac. Behind the Structures, the goal of which was to, as stated in the program text, “research ethnographic penetration into the social fabric behind the structures, facades and scenes (behind the visible and obvious), of the Bihać neighborhood Hatinac and the creation of research and detection tools through the cooperation of various actors”.

As a continuation of those activities, it is worth mentioning the art intervention Svi žele pogled [Everybody Wants a View] by Kosovar artist Alban Muja, as part of the Creative Ecology project. Muja's work required close cooperation with the building management and the tenants of the skyscraper located right across the street from KRAK, a building erected during the socialist period to meet the housing needs of Kombiteks workers. The permanent sculpture, which was placed on the roof of a skyscraper, has already become a recognizable part of the Bihać skyline, and an object of peculiar intrigue for curious passersby.

Reflecting on its location, KRAK delved deeper into considerations of industrial heritage with the publication and exhibition Kombiteks: Space and Time, curated by Jasna Pašić. By presenting documentation that included photographs, video and other artifacts, the exhibition offered a rare insight into the cultural and social life of the workers of the former textile factory Kombiteks. A series of encounters and public discussions with the direct participants in Kombiteks’ life underlined the importance of the factory in the economic and cultural history of the city. At the same time, the exhibition sought continuities as related to the transformation of a former club into the current Center for Contemporary Culture.

Equally important are the exhibitions at KRAK, which testify to its commitment to contemporary art. With works by artists such as Šejla Kamerić and Aida Šehović, these exhibitions often touch on deep, inescapable themes of Bosnia and Herzegovina such as war, memory and migration, while simultaneously resonating with the complex history and cultural identity of Bihać today. Aside from highlighting artistic talent, they also serve as platforms for dialogue and reflection on pressing social issues. On that note, it is worth noting the presence and active participation of the migrant population in the events related to exhibition Returning Home by Aida Šehović. Documentation of this event testifies to a special moment of togetherness and solidarity through music, dance and food. Such inclusive practices are not rare for KRAK; the center makes sincere efforts to ensure that its programs are accessible to a wider audience, including marginalized groups.

Perhaps one of the most interesting and attractive activities of the center is the Cooking and Connecting program series. Understanding food as a universal language of recognition, exchange and connection, KRAK, through a curated approach, opened its space for the social practice of selecting chefs, menus, ingredients and joint tasting of dishes prepared for the occasion. This series began with the Pakistani-Afghan menu as prepared by Faisal Khan, Fawal Khan, Nisar Khan and Ajmal Arain in September 2021, a part of the opening of the aforementioned Aida Šehović exhibition. To date, ten culinary sessions have been held with dishes from Iran, Cuba, Lebanon, Morocco, Portugal and many other cuisines.

Among recent activities is also the project Unfolding Elsewheres by Velibor Božović, presented at KRAK in the summer of 2023. This extraordinary undertaking expanded the cultural influence of the Center – during a period of three weeks, Božović, in cooperation with the artist Steve Bates, programmed, edited and ran a radio station directly from the premises of KRAK. This initiative presented an extremely rich and diverse program, from music to documentary and artistic features, demonstrating the potential of combining art with accessible media. The project not only highlighted Božović's artistic vision, but also demonstrated the value of radio as a social and cultural good in local contexts.

When it comes to sound media, it is important to note that music plays a key role in designing the program. So far, the Center has hosted a number of different names from the world of music and sound design, offering a unique mix of cultural and musical experiences. Bosnian pioneers of electronic music Basheskia & Edward EQ, Italian group Clamp, Slovenian electro duo II/III, French experimental soloist Terrine, and Belgrade club DJ Žarko Ajdinović (SAUD), are just some of the names that performed at KRAK. In the summer of 2023, the audience also had the opportunity to see the renowned Bosnian-American writer Aleksandar Hemon, under the pseudonym Cielo Hemon, as a DJ. His performance took place as part of a literary event that included a conversation with the writer, moderated by KRAK project coordinator Majda Piralić. The Center frequently offers programs that appeal to connoisseurs of the written word, as, also evident in the recent promotion of the novel Vidimo se u X by Nihad Hasanović, a Sarajevo-based writer from Bihać.

In addition to various local initiatives, KRAK is engaged in interdisciplinary projects which connect Bihać with other European cities. Thus far, the Center has cooperated, received direct support and achieved partnerships with a number of international institutions. European Endowment for Democracy, British Council, Danish Arts Foundation, Robert Bosch Stiftung, Residency Unlimited, Trust for Mutual Understanding and The Headley Trust are just some of the names on the ever-growing list of partners and sponsors of program activities. There is no doubt that such projects, among other things, improve cultural exchanges and promote greater understanding of different perspectives, which further strengthens the role of KRAK in the international cultural landscape.

Reading this partial overview of the Center’s activities, one quickly gets the impression that KRAK is a place for anything and everything. It is an art gallery, a concert hall, a radio station, a night club, a culinary pop-up workshop, a conference space, etc. Wouldn't it be easier to simply call it an art gallery? The short answer is no! There are specific reasons for why KRAK was established and presented as a multifunctional space. As stated on the center's official website, “The launch of an alternative and independent space in the field of culture – the Center for Contemporary Culture KRAK – is a necessity and a need for the City of Bihać and its urban life.” Its multifunctionality stems from the great need for all those aforementioned spaces. Some of them the city had, then lost irretrievably, while others exist in a half-dead state. Many will remember how Bihać missed the opportunity to save not one, but both of its film theaters (sorry, it is impossible to think of today's multiplex on the outskirts of the city as a temple for true lovers of the seventh art). Or the fact that the main City Gallery has no money to pay for internet and heating, which makes going to exhibition openings in the winter time reminiscent of an expedition to the North Pole.

The arrival of KRAK is not just an addition to the cultural landscape of Bihać; it is a necessity, filling the vacuum created by years of failures in cultural policy at the state level. Many locals will tell you that KRAK is a place where “things are happening”. Indeed, the Center’s rise suggests there is a serious need for spaces that engage in socially responsible practices and promote diverse cultural and artistic expressions. At the same time, its multifunctionality – a little bit of everything – can and should be understood as a reasonable move not to monopolize any of the domains of cultural activity, leaving enough space for other initiatives to focus exclusively on one area or dedicated form of activity.

Returning to the broader context and the problems mentioned at the beginning of this text, once can only hope for an intensification of local struggles for spaces for culture. KRAK's dynamic and inclusive approach to cultural programming makes the Center a vital contributor and a model for similar initiatives. Through its diverse and numerous activities, KRAK has, in a relatively short period of time, climbed to the very top of contemporary culture in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and perhaps beyond. Setting aside excessive optimism, it can be stated that these developments mark new beginnings in paving the way towards a healthier cultural policy. With congratulations, we eagerly anticipate many others to join KRAK on this journey.