A debate program of the Centre for Study in Cultural Development was organized in memory of its founder and first director, Stevan Majstorović, to deal with current issues of cultural policy, cultural creation and cultural development. Bearing in mind the foreign policy and socio-cultural context of the time in which Majstorovic has lived and worked, this paper shows, through a comparative content analysis of the program cycle of the Institute’s public debates the ways in which his work is made prevalent and current to this day. Incentives for this research are both theoretical and practical, and a special attention is paid to issues such as cultural rights, multiculturalism, cultural development, cultural needs, cultural identity and so on. The final part of the paper highlights the complexity of a new reading of the theme of culture and democracy that was almost four decades ago represented by Stevan Majstorović in his research papers and studies, as a contribution to the cultural memory, and to the ongoing dialogue.


This text starts with a thesis that Yugoslav, Belgrade and Zagreb schools of cultural policies, in the 1960s and 1970s, were among leading world theories and practices of cultural policies, but were sent to oblivion due to the semi-peripheral status of our science and the lack of engagement of academic culture of memory, reinforced with new trends of academic capitalism. The text analyses the ways of operation of the leading world academic journals in the area of culture of scientific memory, case studying the “Cultural policy review of books” that was planned and published in the International Journal of Cultural Policy (Vol. 16, n. 1). Not only that the editor of the review selected mostly Anglo-American theoreticians and academics from Northern Europe, he also insisted that they should present only books available in English. That prevented researchers competent in other languages to present authors from peripheries and semi-peripheries. Thus, Stevan Majstorović, one of the leading Yugoslav academics that influenced cultural policy teaching in South East Europe could not be part of this “Cultural policy review of books”, in spite of my explicit demand. This is how contemporary academic journals have centralized knowledge production and created new semi-peripheries (French, Spanish, Italian researchers have not been invited). However, several French authors (Bourdieu, de Certeau, Dumazedier) have been selected by Anglo-American academics and myself to be presented in this issue. A few of them, coming from Asia and Southern Europe with their degrees obtained in the UK, made “the right choice” to show their competence in this contemporary cultural policy academic research. My contribution (the book of Michel de Certeau Culture in the plural) used “strategy and tactic” of the subaltern to present Stevan Majstorović and the Yugoslav schools of cultural policy as a context in which this book was read. This might not be an important sign of resistance to academic centralization of knowledge but it is a symbolic subversion of semi-periphery against a powerful centre.