480106 KO Colloquium on Regional and Cultural Studies: Bulgarian (2022W)

Recognising one's own identity through the images of others: who are the Bulgarians and is their identity (specific physiognomy) conceivable outside of these parallels? The parallelism that could emerge is quite productive: ) the Bulgarians and the Slavs; 2) the Bulgarians and the Turkic peoples; 3) the Bulgarians and the Byzantines/Greeks; 4) the Bulgarians and the Ottomans; 5) the Bulgarians and the other Balkan people; 6) the Bulgarians and the Russians; 7) the Bulgarians and the Europeans. Admittedly, the series of oppositions could always be extended.
The Other as a foreigner (as an enemy and threatening power) was the foundation in the discourse of the Revival period: consistently postulated in "Istoriya slavyanobalgarskaya" by Paìsiy Hilendаrski, in the poetry of Georgi S. Rakovski, Dobri Chintulov, Hristo Botev, and also relentlessly created in the prose and journalism of Lyuben Karavelov and Hristo Botev. But the Other could also be thought of as a saviour (as a protective power and a Bigger Brother) – the work of Ivan Vazov with his Russophilia would be a striking example here. The Other could, of course, be postulated as a model of unattainable, desirable identity, established as a political pattern (the Bulgarian Constitution of 1879; the lineage of Bulgarian rulers after liberation). Alterity – Ottoman or Oriental in the broad sense of the word was not infrequently used as a cultural mask; in the work of Stoyan Mihaylovski, Pencho Slaveykov it functioned as a kind of customary mystification. But the Oriental as appropriated Other could also be discovered in the mentality of the Bulgarians: What is the infamous hero Bai Ganio by Aleko Konstantinov if not the unmasking of the Other in us, i.e. the shameful, retarded, primitive entity?
Namely, the modern authors of the "Missal" and later "Strelec" circles, the avant-gardists around Geo Milev, strive for the advanced, the highly spiritual. Among the modernists from the various stages of Bulgarian literature, the opposition with the desirable other is abolished, and the specific-own is elevated as a universal cultural norm.
Therefore, it becomes more than necessary to subject the fundamental categories of Other and proper to intensive discussion, that is, to constantly verify them: Only in this way could one trace the Other as appropriated over time, and vice versa - reveal the proper as an imitated Other.
The KO will be held on site if possible.