The Role of Cinema-Related Initiatives in Encouraging Diversity and Inclusivity in Post-1989 Bulgaria

Solidarity on the Margins: The Role of Cinema-Related Initiatives in Encouraging Diversity and Inclusivity in Post-1989 Bulgaria

by Antonina Anisimovich (Edge Hill University’s Department of Media)

Abstract In the light of the ongoing refugee crisis in Europe, hate speech directed at refugees and ethnic minorities in mainstream Bulgarian media has increased. As a response, several recent cinema-related grassroots initiatives in the capital city Sofia are challenging such negative representations and establishing a more open and constructive dialogue with the Other. I argue that such events have the potential to create interzones or conflictual dialogic spaces (Halle 2014), where the public sphere is constructed from below, providing an alternative to mainstream media and political discourse. Adopting the theoretical framework proposed by Schober (2013), this paper evaluates the political potential of cinematic events in creating a public space for encountering the Other, both physically (in the same cinema hall) and symbolically (through representations on screen). I focus on one such initiative, a series of film screenings organised by The House of Cinema and The Refugee Project in Sofia, examining the House of Cinema’s potential in promoting diversity by challenging the xenophobic mainstream discourse promoted in media. Keywords: Bulgarian cinema, Bulgarian media, European identity, postcolonial studies, collective memory, national identity, refugee crisis, othering

Introduction The problematic post-1989 transition in Bulgaria identity, which has offered a fruitful arena for (Bell 1998, Deyanova 2014, Baeva and Kabak- reactionary nationalist movements that exploit- chieva 2014) highlights the necessity for new ing existing tensions. diversity and new solidarities studies in the area. In the context of Bulgarian accession into the It is evident that there are numerous challenges EU and the constant struggle to prove that Bul- linked to the division and fragmentation in Bul- garia is inherently a European country, Bulgarian garian society, and the new attempts of nation national identity is often built on the contrast re-building after the fall of the regime in 1989. with the ‘barbarian’ East. This is often done by Similar to some other countries of the former creating a divide that differentiates Bulgaria from Eastern Bloc, the understanding of national iden- the non-European ‘Other’, which, in Bulgaria’s tity in Bulgaria is complicated by the multiplicity case, in most general terms is the Orient (Perry of reference points, or national identifiers (Todd 1995). This, in its turn, resulted in the necessity and Rougier 2008, Couroucli 1997). These mul- to prove that Bulgaria, in fact, belongs to Europe tiple contexts intersect and sometimes comple- historically and culturally, which was manifested ment each other, creating a unique background in the attempts to ‘market themselves as civilised, for a new national identity re-building (Brubacker developed, tolerant, or multicultural enough to 1995). This variety has contributed to the frag- be geographed as European’ (Kovačević 2008: mentation and fluidity of the Bulgarian national 86). This perceived pressure from the ‘true’ West

NEW DIVERSITIES Vol. 21, No. 1, 2019 ISSN-Print 2199-8108 ▪ ISSN-Internet 2199-8116 NEW DIVERSITIES 21 (1), 2019 Antonina Anisimovich

resulted in an accepted discourse of Europeanisa- are not hesitant in using extreme xenophobe tion that evoked a whole number of problematic rhetoric. The very names of these movements collisions within the national identity re-building are very aggressive (Attack, Will) and suggesting process. National identity was constructed by the that the Bulgarian nation needs to be saved from political elites through comparison and contrast- any foreign influence. Another important impli- ing to either larger entities (Europe, East, West) cation of such radicalisation is that these parties or minorities (Other: Roma, Turkish minorities, are non-inclusive, and most of them refer to the and, recently, the refugees). New national ideas traditional Bulgarian values through the prism of are built on ‘distancing both the individual self the Bulgarian Orthodox Church and are, there- and the “national self” from practices and traits fore, openly anti-Islamic. that are considered un-European, while adopt- Miglena Todorova argues that the equation ing such that are considered European’ (Pilbrow between Europeanness and Whiteness is not 1997: 65). One of the mechanisms of this distanc- new, and has been present at least since the ing is the process of marginalizing the minorities early twentieth century (2018). She examines that could be stereotypically considered not, or the discourses of racial purity in National Geo- less, European (Pilbrow 1997: 62). graphic magazines and reflects on the origins of After 1989, the major ideological divide in the new-coming immigrants from South East- the Bulgarian political landscape has devel- ern Europe. As she demonstrates, even though oped around the confrontation between the the Balkan region was described as culturally former communists and the democratic opposi- European, it was still represented as not ‘quite tion. This divide has led to a strong association white’ in terms of race, which put it in the middle of the former nomenklatura with the ‘left’ and position somewhere between the categories of the democratic (and EU-leaning) forces with ‘white’ and ‘non-white’. The character traits, as the ‘right’. Gradually, the divide has been fur- well as the appearance of the Balkan peoples, ther exploited by the dominant parties who are described in these magazines as a hybrid of transitioned from promoting liberal values to Europeanness and Orientalism, in other words what has now become a conservative far right – as ‘not-white-but-getting-there’ (2006: 405). ideology. Reinforcing the East/West divide even On the other hand, the discourses of whiteness further, all pro-European parties, therefore, are as Europeanness that are now dominating the automatically considered anti-communist and national public debates in Bulgaria could be con- right-centrist (EuroZine 2017). Indeed, the par- sidered as a continued legacy of communism as ties represented in the current (2018) Parliament well, not just as a concept blindly inherited from illustrate the recent shifts in the political climate the West. For instance, Todorova (2018) argues in Bulgaria. They include GERB (Citizens for Euro- that in socialist times, nationalities were racial- pean Development of Bulgaria, pro-European ized by the official state discourse, and the cat- but also conservative and right-centrist), Bul- egory of race was replaced or hidden behind garian Socialist Party (centre-left), Movement ethnic nationalism. As Todorova and Tlostanova for Rights and Freedoms (centrist), Will (right- both argue, this racialization in the Soviet and wing populism, right-centrist), and the United satellite states involved some ‘borrowed’ or Patriots (an alliance formed by IMRO – Bulgar- internalised racist knowledge of the West, which ian National Movement (right-wing, Bulgarian Todorova describes as ‘secondary Orientalism’ nationalism), National Front for the Salvation of (Tlostanova 2012; Todorova 2018). Specifically in Bulgaria (right-wing, Bulgarian nationalism), and the Bulgarian case, the national identity was still Attack (far-right, Bulgarian nationalism)). It is cru- built on the ideals of belonging to Europe, espe- cial to add that out of these eight parties, at least cially in contrast with the ‘real’ Orient embodied five are promoting radical nationalist views and by Muslim women ‘as profoundly non-modern

8 Solidarity on the Margins NEW DIVERSITIES 21 (1), 2019

and non-European – and, therefore, non-White’ embeddedness of the Bulgarian local categorisa- (Todorova 2018: 122). tions of race in the world Eurocentric framework Thus, Europeanness was, even within the equalling whiteness and progress. socialist state, considered and equated to However, in some arenas, these dominant cat- supremacy, civilization, and progress. This sug- egorizations are being challenged. Postcolonial gests that both East and West operated within theory might be a useful analytical device when similar oppressive projects of modernity based we talk about the East broadly as a discursive on the hegemony and the ideas of racial purity space of East and West contestation. Veličković and, broadly, whiteness. As Todorova further suggests that the potential of such analysis lies notes, on the surface, the Eastern bloc supported in the historical rethinking of the legacies of com- the anti-colonial movements in Asia, Africa and munism and the role that it plays in the recon- Latin America utilizing the opportunity to chal- structing of history to serve the modern needs lenge the capitalist order in the West. Neverthe- (2012). As she notes, ‘a long overdue critical less, the discursive practices surrounding this engagement with this discourse of “the return support were ironically built on the same cat- to Europe” as well as with the various “self- egories of exclusion, othering, and orientalising. colonizing” practices in eastern Europe is much Both systems were also based on the praising of needed’ (2012: 168). The postcolonial approach the future as progress and blaming the tradition to the post-socialist territories, in particular, lies (the past) for everything reactionary and regres- in the diversity and multiplicity of the possible sive. intersections of race, class, gender, and other Furthermore, the region has been a part hierarchal society systems. Such an approach of a racialized world for much longer than it is could help challenge the binary hierarchical usually suggested (Imre 2005, Baker 2018). For framework demonising the East or the West, and, instance, Todorova (2018) argues that, in Soviet instead, offer an analytical tool that Tlostanova times, nationalities were racialised by the official calls a feminist border thinking – an approach state discourse, and the category of race was where special attention is given to the areas not absent but hidden behind the idea of eth- characterised by ambiguity and in-betweenness. nic nationalism. In the Bulgarian case, the con- For instance, as Deiana argues in her analysis tinuity of socialist race-related discourses can be of the Sarajevo Film Festival and its role in bor- observed in the context of the so-called Revival der crossing practices in the former Yugosla- Process and its consequences. The Revival Pro- via region, hybridity entails border crossing on cess was a highly problematic forced assimilation various levels, ‘from geopolitics and institutions campaign imposed on the Turkish minorities in to everyday life and cultural practices’ (Deiana Bulgaria by the communist party. The campaign 2017: 2). Thus, hybridity as border crossing is a that was launched in 1984 and continued until process and a vernacular act of negotiation that 1989 forbade the use of Turkish (and Muslim) has the potential to challenge the official border names and entailed repressions in the form of politics. The focus on the negotiational aspect of prosecution and imprisonment for those who cinema provides and opens up an opportunity to refused to comply with it (Grosescu 2017). It can view the encounters mediated by cinema as dia- be argued that the Revival Process demonstrates logical, vernacular acts of bordercrossing. View- the contingency of the race-related discourses ing the negotiation of borders as a multidimen- in today’s Bulgaria when the clash of ideologies sional and complex process helps to identify the after 1989 introduced even new dimensions to opportunities where ‘dominant border conflict the already existing orientalising view of the non- narratives might be challenged and re-imagined’ titular ethnicities (Kalinova 2014). The continuity (Deiana 2017: 5). Therefore, it is argued that the of the discourses of race, in its turn, proves the role of cinema is not in resisting boundaries or

9 NEW DIVERSITIES 21 (1), 2019 Antonina Anisimovich

destroying them, but in crossing them in various as the previous section shows, the actual situa- contexts, potentially bridging the gap between tion is far from ideal. The notion of the ‘Bulgar- ‘us’ and ‘them’, ‘here’ and ‘there’, the official ian ethnic model’ first became prominent in the and the vernacular. Halle’s concept of interzones early 2000s, when the MRF party led by Ahmed as ‘conflictual dialogic spaces’ (2014: 14) works Dogan noted that ‘Bulgaria has achieved a model well to describe the process of border crossing, for the solution of minority problems unique suggesting that a significant dialogic potential is for the Balkans’ (cited in DeDominicis 2011). manifested in the borderline, hybrid, conflictual Particularly, comparing and distancing Bulgaria negotiations present in the cinema. from the Balkan region and the conflicts in the In order to understand the ways that these Former Yugoslavian republic was crucial for the boundaries are contested, negotiated, and Bulgarian international politics prior to its acces- crossed, we need to look closely at the discourses sion to the European Union. The notion ‘Bulgar- of othering present in the public space. To do so, ian Ethnic Model’ was used widely to stress the in this paper I will outline the media coverage of peaceful coexistence of multiple ethnic and reli- the refugee crisis and the role of ethnic minori- gious minorities in Bulgaria, particularly - point ties as the Other in the Bulgarian context. This ing out to the fact that there was no racism section of the paper will include an overview of and discrimination in the country (Rechel 2008). the hegemonic/mainstream discourse surround- However, this is far from the truth, as numerous ing the image of the Other in the media and polit- instances of racism and xenophobia have been ical speeches. Secondly, I will provide an outline documented by international organisations and of the methodological approach of interzones national NGOs, in particular over the last five proposed by Halle and show its application to years (Rechel 2008). At the same time, it seems the Bulgarian case as an example of an interzone. that the popular idea of the peacefully coexistent This section will be focused on the development nations within the ‘Bulgarian Ethnic Model’ is of small-scale initiatives, urban centres, the role used by the political elites to avoid acknowledg- of audiovisiual content in inducing dialogue, and ing and dealing with issues of discrimination and the role of alternative spaces in challenging the hate speech, thus aggravating the already diffi- discursive hegemony, which will be followed by a cult situation the refugees and ethnic minorities discussion of the dialogic importance of counter- find themselves in modern Bulgaria. hegemonic space and diversity. I will rely on a It is difficult to underestimate the crucial role case study of a series of film screenings organ- that mainstream media plays in constructing ised by The House of Cinema and The Refugee the negative image of the refugees and ethnic Project to help understand how several urban minorities in Bulgaria. The recent report by the spaces in Sofia enable this dialogue. I analyse the Institute of Social Integration states that since House of Cinema as an example of an interzone a very little percentage of Bulgarian citizens in the Bulgarian context, and will evaluate its have direct contact with foreigners, their pri- potential in promoting diversity by challenging mary source of information and opinion-shaping the xenophobic mainstream discourse promoted comes from the media, and main speakers such in media. as active politicians, public figures, and party leaders. As the Institute of Social Integration Hegemonic discourses around migration and notes, ‘Hate speech is the main problem of the ethnic minorities in Bulgaria: representations refugees in Bulgaria’ (2017). Monitoring of 355 in media and political discourse national and regional Bulgarian media outlets in Although on the surface, Bulgaria has been the spring of 2017 shows that the refugees are famous for its liberal attitudes towards diver- usually depicted as passive ‘objects’ in the news: sity, and most of all, toward ethnic minorities, they are not allowed to voice their own opinions.

10 Solidarity on the Margins NEW DIVERSITIES 21 (1), 2019

The topic of the refugee crisis becomes particu- asylum seekers’ completely replaced any talks larly employed during election campaigns, when on the topics of human rights or consolidation the threatening image of the Other is repeat- (2016). Thus, in the public discourse, the asylum edly used to consolidate the electorate to vote seekers remained ‘passive objects’ that, never- for far-right populist policies: ‘This topic is used theless, pose a threat to national security, thus to instil fear, threat, mistrust’. An analysis of the reinforcing ‘a very visible exclusion of asylum transcripts of political speeches of the members seekers from participation in the political com- of the parliament also shows that the refugees munity of the state’ (Nancheva 2016: 550). Talk- are presented as a threat to national security. ing about the extreme Othering techniques in Tsvetan Tsvetanov, a Bulgarian politician, recently Bulgaria, Kamenova rightfully notes, in the Bul- pointed out the necessity to integrate the arriv- garian case ‘the construction of stereotypes has ing refugees, simultaneously using a similar entered into its full phase, the Othering discourse discourse of threat: ‘There is a decrease in the has attained monstrous dimensions, and the refugee flow towards Bulgaria, but this should Other is perceived only as a danger’ (Kamenova not calm us’. He specified that ‘this should in no 2014: 181). case lead Bulgaria to feel relaxed because there Bulgaria, therefore, can be viewed as an is still an influx of refugees on the Turkish border’ example of a public space where an extreme dis- (DNES BG 2017). course of Othering dominates the mainstream In an attempt to regulate the amount of hate media and politics. In this context, it is crucial to speech in mainstream media, the Association of seek official channels to challenge this discourse, European Journalists provided criticism of the acknowledge this as a problem on the govern- coverage of the most popular online media out- mental level and control the illegal examples of lets. Their study demonstrated that the cover- hate speech. In the meantime, there is also a age of Roma minorities and the refugees is very need for non-mainstream grassroots alternatives rarely positive, and becomes even more radi- of public spaces that can challenge the main- cally negative during active election campaigns. stream discourse through a dialogue based on Pointing out the extreme dehumanization of the intercultural encounter and dialogue. The follow- image of the Roma in the Bulgarian media, the ing section will examine the role of alternative study shows that hate speech still dominates non-official initiatives in constructing a counter- in the coverage of any news regarding ethnic hegemonic discourse about the minorities. minorities or refugees: Grassroots initiatives as counter-hegemonic The speculative and almost always incompetent talk on the topic of the refugees, the abuse of hu- alternatives: interzones and the political man stereotypes and prejudices […] and the lack potential of cinema of a clear demarcation between the concepts of Since the official discourse both in the politi- “refugee” and “immigrant” gradually equalled the cal sphere and in the mainstream media is image of the refugee with that of the traditionally dominated by a hegemonic depiction of ethnic hostile image in the Bulgarian media, namely that of the Roma (AEJ 2017). minorities as the Other, the few possibilities of counter-force or counter-hegemonic discourses Furthermore, the negative depiction of the- ref are limited to grassroots initiatives, particularly ugees and Roma has led to a total exclusion of active in urban spaces. Such initiatives, commu- these groups from the public sphere. As a study nities and art projects, to name a few, include by Nancheva shows, such discourse has led to the Red Dot art gallery, the Sofia Film Festival the fact that the discussions about hate speech for Students, the art group Destructive Creation, and xenophobia focused on ‘protection from the creative space Æther, workspace and commu- asylum seekers’ rather than ‘protection of the nity centre SOHO Sofia, The Red House Centre for

11 NEW DIVERSITIES 21 (1), 2019 Antonina Anisimovich

Culture and Debate, and KineDok – an alterna- the EU, meaning the rise of nationalist and far- tive platform for documentary films distribution. right movements and a rise of the xenophobic The main case study of the paper, however, will discourse (Ghodsee 2008). Given such circum- be the series of screenings and events organised stances, it is crucial that alternative platforms by the cinema theatre Doma na Kinoto (House of exist that not only offer different representations, Cinema) with the help of the NGO The Refugee but also enable an encounter and dialogue, of Project in 2017 in Sofia. Being aware of the limi- the Other. tations of focusing on just one case study, I would Several studies in the European context have suggest that this particular example still provides examined how social interaction between peo- a fruitful base for an effective discussion. This ple can influence their perception of growing overview is mainly illustrative, and the analysis is ethnic diversity. The question most often asked by no means exhaustive. However, I intended to is whether a dialogue is possible and whether focus on initiatives linked particularly to cinema it helps establish tolerance and cooperation. and the cinema-going experience for the reasons Piekut and Valentine (2017), for instance, use outlined below. social psychological methods to study different Visual arts and cinema, in particular, have types of social encounter spaces. They argue that been an essential part of the public space in Bul- the particular type of space has a profound effect garia since the early 1940s, when the process of on the way that ethnic diversity is perceived kinefication1 led to a complete transformation and the way that the dialogue with the Other is of the cinema industry and made it one of the established. Further on in this paper, I analyse most powerful instruments of state ideology. At the specific features of the space cinema used to the same time, the film creators’ privileged role build a bridge between ethnically diverse groups as intelligentsia in the dissident movement was in contexts where these groups rarely interact on also crucial as a counter-force to the regime, as a day-to-day basis. some counter-hegemonic representations were In his analysis of the process of Europeaniza- conveyed through these films that were banned tion of cinema, Halle argues that cinema both by the communist regime. Thus, films were an produces and reflects imaginative communities, extremely important part of the public sphere, which are (as opposed to the original ‘imagined and their role was always politicized, regard- communities’ by Anderson) dynamic, fluid and less of their place on the mainstream/dissident transactional (Cooke 2015). Imaginative com- spectrum. It can be argued that this is still the munities are, therefore, constructed through case in Bulgaria, even though the political and production and consumption of cinema, through social climate has changed drastically in the past a network of cultural interzones. Halle defines 25 years. interzones as ‘a conflictual dialogic space […] that As the outline of the mainstream discourses develops through bordercrossing in the broadest in Bulgarian media shows, there is still a lack sense’, adding that an interzone is characterized of counter-hegemonic depictions of the ethnic by constant transformation and contestation of minorities and refugees. At the same time, the diversity (2014: 23). Halle suggests that cinema Bulgarian political and social movement scene plays a key role in generating the interzones, as follows the patterns similar to other countries of it is described as ‘a privileged vehicle for the rep- resentation of imaginative communities’ (2014: 1 The process of promoting cinema as an ideologi- 23). Talking about a specific case of the European cal tool of the regime, initially conducted through coproductions as interzones, Halle notes that establishing movie theatres in rural areas of Bulgaria, equipping schools and community centres with mov- the public sphere in the European context is con- ie screens or even introducing ‘travelling cinemas’ to structed from ‘below’: cover the most ‘backward’ areas (Bojilov 1946, Bra- toeva-Darakchieva 2013).

12 Solidarity on the Margins NEW DIVERSITIES 21 (1), 2019

European solidarity does not develop upward and It is crucial to study the specific ways that con- outward but across, through, from below, sideways, stitute this encounter with the Other, in order crisscrossing terrains, potentially via urban centers, and equally likely via regional resistance to metro- to evaluate its potential in negotiating diversity. politan control. Imaginative communities develop On the one hand, there is the understanding of now more frequently not as metacommunities but the socializing power of cinema as a place that as subcultures, micropolitical associations, ethnic brings people together in a limited space for an migrant identities, midlevel economic partnering, experience of uninterrupted film consumption. sexual communities, and other “lower order” dis- This premise is, however, challenged by uncon- tinctive societies. (2014: 184-85) ventional cinematic spaces, that are not only Rather than imposed from above, interzones subverting the usual function within the urban strive through grassroots initiatives, art manifes- context, but are also creating more possibilities tations, and intercultural dialogue. The dialogic for discussion and interaction. Schober notes essence of the interzones seems suitable for the that we need to examine the public space as a analysis of the Bulgarian case, not only when we platform for negotiation of contested identities talk on a broader level about the sense of Euro- and ideologies, always remembering that such pean solidarity. Rather, I argue that the concept processes are political: of interzones applies to even smaller local spaces, […] the cinema has the potential to provoke its including interactions between different cul- viewers into responding to the other, to something tures within one particular urban space, such as or somebody interrupting the smooth viewing pro- Sofia. cess. In doing so, it re-exposes the viewer to the Schober, similarly, highlights the importance sense, that is, it challenges well-known certainties and allocations, but can also redirect our- judge of cinema as a public space, seeing it as ‘an urban ments and even our actions. (Schober 2013: 27) space where it is possible to meet the other’ (Schober 2013: 3). Comparing cinema-related It is clear then that the public sphere is under- initiatives in several cities of central and south- stood as a dynamic entity, that is constantly con- eastern Europe, Schober examines ‘the potential structed by its agents. Therefore, in order to chal- the cinema has as such a space for encounter- lenge the hegemonic discourse of hate speech ing the other […] and the effects this has on the and xenophobia, new public spaces are stepping level of urban civil society’ (Schober 2013: 4). up as alternative opportunities to promote dia- The originality and novelty of her approach lie logue and negotiation. In the following, conclud- in the statement that films should be seen as a ing section of this article, I look at a case study of space-creating activity. Providing an example of a series of events in Sofia and evaluate the key the art installation by Rirkit Tiravanija in Glasgow characteristics that enable a dialogue within a (1999), Schober introduces the particular ways given cinematic event, in which the audience, the that help to establish community connectivity NGO, and the film text interact with one another, and encounter with strangers in the urban public creating a politicized viewing public space. space. Tiravanija created a pop-up outdoor cinema on a traffic intersection in Glasgow, subvert- Cinema initiatives as interzones and public ing the urban place and transforming its utilitar- space-creating activities: inducing a dialogue ian use into a space of a direct encounter with and encountering the Other the Other. Schober, thus, argues that cinema This section looks at a case study of an initia- seems to have a specific potential for creating tive The Refugee Project in Sofia, Bulgaria, and a public sphere by challenging the processes of its co-project with the Sofia cinema theatre The ‘the further ‘privatization’ and ‘fragmentation’ of House of Cinema. This initiative includes multiple the political that goes along with [these] new events promoting diversity and intercultural dia- media’ (Schober 2013: 16). logue, including screenings of films on the sub-

13 NEW DIVERSITIES 21 (1), 2019 Antonina Anisimovich ject of the refugee crisis. The analysis focuses on film’s dialogues proves that their understanding a screening of the film The Good Postman (Hris- of the refugee problem is unclear: ‘Not only Syr- tov 2016) and is based on a textual analysis of the ians come. Afghans and Taliban come through film, an interview with the programming director here as well, and who knows who else…’ <…> of the House of Cinema, and a description of the ‘Ivan wants to welcome Syrians here! I disagree. event and the cinema hall as an interzone. Here? Syrians? Why? Is it not enough for him that we already have gypsies?’. The Good Postman While Ivan visits one household after another The film follows the campaign of the local post- trying to convince the villagers to vote for him, man Ivan in the remote Bulgarian village of Great their nostalgia for the communist past is gradu- Dervent where he is running for mayor. Ivan pro- ally revealed. An example of this is the interac- poses a scheme which includes integrating refu- tion between the protagonist Ivan and his main gees into the village, providing them with land opponents – pro-communist Putin sympathiser and homes in order to bring the aging and dying and the current mayor Veska, who could not care village back to life. The director, Tonislav Hristov, less about the refugees sitting in her office and uses a semi-fictionalised script, that combines listening to chalga2. In his address to the poten- documentary and fiction style, whilst leaving the tial voters, the pro-Russian mayor candidate camera to observe the unfolding of the events. says: ‘Comrades! I want internet for everyone! This technique allows for highlighting the numer- Like in Putin’s Russia! We need communism’. ous contrasts surrounding the problem of the Viewing the life of the village through the bina- refugees, including the private versus the public, ries mentioned above provides an interesting the national versus the local, us versus the oth- insight into the context of the xenophobic sen- ers and, last but not the least, the west versus timents in modern Bulgaria: even though most the east (exploring it through some manifes- of the inhabitants of the village can agree that tations of communist nostalgia in the village). the refugees are ‘just people’, their judgement is These contrasting and somewhat contradicting very much affected by the media coverage of the values become evident after a brief examina- refugee crisis. tion of the beliefs and motivations of the village A very significant scene and a turning point in inhabitants. the film shows the villagers gathered around the The villagers are represented as an ordi- TV watching the news together and having dis- nary group of people, who turn out to be eas- putes about their interpretations of the events. ily manipulated and bribed (the pro-communist The report they are watching is the shocking character attracts voters by providing them with story of 71 refugees suffocating to death in a free food). Their views are by no means radical truck while being smuggled through the EU bor- or set in stone, as far as we can tell from the der by a Bulgarian driver. This scene in The Good documentary – instead, they are represented to Postman indicates the first time that we see a the viewer as bystanders, as ordinary working change of heart in the villagers, as they begin to people, more bothered by the difficulties of their realise the stakes and the risks that the refugees day-to-day life than some potential threat of a take to escape their home countries: despite the ‘refugee invasion’. Nevertheless, we can follow differences in their attitudes towards the refu- how dangerously easy it is to manipulate these gees, the villagers’ reaction to the news story is people when someone with even a bit of author- the same – that of a shock. The awareness that ity engages them in political discussion. This there are kids among those people who choose manipulation is strengthened by the only media deliberately to risk everything they have for to which they have access: the mainstream tele- vision and newspapers. An example of one of the 2 Bulgarian music genre, also known as ‘pop-folk’, or ethno, became popular in the 1990s.

14 Solidarity on the Margins NEW DIVERSITIES 21 (1), 2019

the opportunity to escape the warzone brings of cinema as a storytelling tool lies in its abil- the villagers together. Another related memo- ity to create relatable stories that unite people, rable scene in the documentary shows a conflict despite their differences. In this case, the organ- between a mother and a teenage daughter who isers invited the refugees from Voenna Rampa, tries to persuade her parents that the depiction the refugee centre located in the North parts of the refugees as ‘monsters’ on TV is not accu- of Sofia. Importantly, as a cinema located in the rate, because they are ‘also human, they are just city centre, The House of Cinema emerges as a like us’. meeting point for encountering the Other that is Interestingly enough, The Good Postman not more accessible for a wider variety of audiences. only offers a critique of the state of the villages Another example of such initiatives, related to in Bulgaria now but also comments on the role the Building Bridges Between Communities was of media in shaping and framing the public opin- the screening by the Sofia Film Fest for Students, ion about the refugees. With this somewhat which was conducted in September 2017 in metaphoric language, the film shows how easily the Roma community in Philipovtsi, Sofia. Their balance can be destroyed and how conflict can description of the event also touches upon the emerge through the cracks of the impoverished unifying and motivational role of cinema as a and troubled postcommunist society, where the tool for creating a creative space of interaction, main goal remains the same – to find someone essentially establishing an interzone. to blame for the failures of the system. Unfortu- Both events highlight the importance of the nately, as the film demonstrates, it seems that location of the event. It is important to note that the refugees have already been ‘nominated’ as an interzone often appears not only broadly in Bulgarian’s Other in the mainstream media dis- an urban space, but also on the border of two course. or more different cultural zones, where they can interact both metaphorically (as a symbolic The Arab Quarter and the House of Cinema as exchange), but also physically (as bordering an interzone quarters). I argue that The House of Cinema in In 2017, The House of Cinema organized a series Sofia can be viewed as an interzone on the urban of events that included screenings of films landscape of Sofia. about the refugees and events where refugees The House of Cinema works as an example of and whole families of refugees were invited to an interzone situated on the border of two dif- the cinema. The series of events called Build- ferent ‘worlds’: the most politically, economically ing Bridges Between Communities was aimed at and culturally significant area of the city centre establishing a link between various diverse com- and the so-called Arab Quarter. The area of the munities of Sofia, including that of the most vul- Vitosha Boulevard and the central Serdika metro nerable groups, such as the refugees and Roma. I station is the main shopping and tourist ‘vein’ of will briefly take a look at an event that took place the city, while this part of the capital is also an in October 2017. The Facebook announcement important area politically, with the Parliament after the event stated: “Last week our friends building and the former House of the Party just from Voenna Rampa have been invited by The around the corner. In terms of religion, the square House of Cinema to see the “The good post- above the Serdika station is informally known as man”! We believe that cinema is a powerful tool The Square of Tolerance, an area where four tem- to bring people on a journey to each other, over- ples of different religions are situated in a very coming hardships in life.” close proximity, including the Catholic Cathedral Thus, as we can see, the organisers highlight of St Joseph, the Eastern Orthodox St. Nedelya the importance of cinema in ‘building bridges’ Church, the Sofia Synagogue and the main Banya and establishing connections. The powerful role Bashi Mosque.

15 NEW DIVERSITIES 21 (1), 2019 Antonina Anisimovich

The Arab Quarter was traditionally an area common viewing practice. By sharing a peaceful inhabited by Muslim immigrants, and, beginning and entertaining activity, the audience becomes in 2012, these streets have seen a new influx of united both by the physical structure of the cin- refugees and migrants. While there have been ema and the symbolic space of the film and its numerous rumours that the quarter is not a narrative. This last aspect is also reflected in the safe place, in 2016 a Nova TV (a commercial TV program selection that aims at showing more channel) journalist explored the stereotypes and films telling the stories of the refugees, including beliefs that people have about the Arab Quarter, but not limited to The Good Postman. and came to the conclusion, that ‘Probably, the The Good Postman is a prime example of an Arab Quarter is now the safest place in the capi- imaginative space of negotiation, while the tal’, mainly due to the large numbers of police engagement of the audience through public forces sent to guard these streets against any dialogue can potentially occur when physical potential ‘threat’ (NOVA TV 2016). interzones are constructed. As Kovačević sug- In an interview, Hristo Hristisov, the program gests, ‘the need for solidarity and compassion manager of the House of Cinema points out is invoked through narrative perspectives that that in the context of the rising amount of hate subject cultural prejudice and economic exploi- speech in the media and political discourse, most tation to critique while proposing various ave- Bulgarians still do not have any direct contact nues of subaltern transnationalism’ (Kovačević with the refugees. As Hristosov pointed out, the 2013: 197). At the same time, in order to argue Bulgarian families are often ‘educated by the TV and assume that this is indeed the result of view- and lacking critical thinking’. The only knowledge ing such films, more direct engagement with the they receive comes from media, while the Arab audiences is required to evaluate to what extent Quarter remains isolated from the rest of the city. it impels its audiences to rethink hegemonic cul- Hristosov says that the screenings in the House of tural and political imaginaries in the region. Cinema are aimed at bridging this gap by organis- ing events that would promote integration of the Conclusions refugees and their families. Refugees and whole The negotiation of national identity cannot be families of refugees are invited to these events: seen in isolation from the political frameworks “by inviting families, we show that there are more within which it is embedded. In the Bulgarian similarities than differences between ‘us’ and case, the building of national identity is con- ‘them’, there is a sense of acceptance, challeng- structed through the discourse of comparison ing the overall feeling of fear”. In particular, Hris- and contrast, and this discourse is built on the tosov points out the importance of the location processes of exclusion and inclusion. It is in these of the cinema and its role in the local commu- gaps and inconsistencies where we can most nity is highlighted: ‘it is on the verge of the Arab evidently witness the points of negotiation. Cin- Quarter where the refugees live now. So, the role ema has the capacity to expose such gaps and of cinema is also that of creating a safe space for facilitate a symbolic conversation between the interaction’. imagined core (the abstract idea of Europe and Therefore, the audiences are not only invited the West) and the periphery (Bulgaria), but also to visit the premises of the Arab Quarter to between the semi-periphery (Bulgaria) and the make sure that the place is as safe as any other periphery including its multiple Others (Roma, quarter in Sofia, but they are also sharing a com- refugees, migrants). mon viewing space with the Other in the movie In terms of evaluating the effectiveness of theatre. The audience is thus encountering the cinema-related initiatives, it is of course, very dif- Other on a broader scale on ‘their’ territory, but ficult to single out certain factors that contribute is also sharing the more intimate experience of a to the challenging of the discourse more than

16 Solidarity on the Margins NEW DIVERSITIES 21 (1), 2019

others. As Hristosov pointed out, the expected most attention by the media. result of such events is not a ‘drastic transforma- Further, it should also be noted that the active tion’, since the people who come to these events and critical engagement of the audience with the are oftentimes already progressive. Rather, the representations of diversity should not be simply goal shifts towards mobilisation of these people assumed. In the future, in order to evaluate the who are already more knowledgeable and sym- more specific mechanisms of engagement trig- pathetic about the lives of the refugees and eth- gered by cinematic experiences, more attention nic minorities. Thus, the aim here is not to turn should be directed at studying the audiences, the worldview of the audience around, but to and their reactions to the screenings. For exam- influence those who are undecided to see the ple, screenings accompanied by facilitated group Other in a comfortable safe space unified by a discussions could provide more opportunities for common activity and to inspire these people, intercultural exchange and negotiation. At the energise them to influence their environment, same time, the active engagement of the audi- inspire to change. ence is not limited by the duration and the scope However, several challenges to the effective- of the cinema-related initiatives. Activism is ness of such initiatives arise. First, as Deiana encouraged by introducing and cross-promoting notes, we need to acknowledge that the cinema a whole range of other solidarity networks during audiences and festival goers might already be these events, including the recent campaigns Toy privileged and ‘inclined to engage in dialogue Drive for Children in Need and Together, Tomor- and cultural exchange’ (Deiana 2017: 14). Never- row Will Be Better co-organised by The House of theless, even though these encounters with the Cinema and the Refugee Project network. audiences might be temporary and privileged, Nevertheless, as noted in the first section of they remain an important ‘site where to expe- this paper, cinema spaces have the potential to rience and sense everyday border negotiations become public spaces and create opportuni- through cinema’s aesthetic and creative energy, ties for dialogues that challenge the hegemonic and where filmlovers come together and make xenophobic discourses prominent in media and sense of these experiences’ (Deiana 2017: 15). mainstream politics. The interview revealed Secondly, from the point of view of the Other, an that the role of cinema as a common view- interzone is supposed to be a movement ‘from ing activity in itself could act as a unifying fac- below’, or a grassroots movement, the role of tor. The dark intimate space of the cinema hall the Other should be equal to that of the other makes the encounter with the Other possible in audiences. The refugees who are attending such a ‘safe space’, where ‘they’ have the potential events should also be given an opportunity to to become ‘us’. Defying the lack of information participate in the organisation process, perhaps around the refugees and the lack of actual con- through discussions after the screenings, or by tact with the Other, such initiatives act as a coun- influencing the programming. Third, the effec- ter-hegemonic strategy, which seems particularly tiveness of such interzonal initiatives is limited effective due to its location (in the Arab Quarter by the strictly urban localisation of such events. of the city centre) and setting (a small community Unfortunately, in most cases, such events are cinema rather than a large multiplex). The choice limited to the capital, and there is a lack of such of film, of course, has its own important role in initiatives in other cities and more rural areas. the framing of a discussion about the refugees. This challenge is particularly illustrated in areas The depiction of a polarised society modelled outside Sofia, which experience the most con- in a small abandoned village shows once again flicts and less tolerance. This includes Harmanli, the role of media in inducing hate and fear. At for example, a town in Haskovo province, where the same time, the film shows a more optimistic the struggle with the refugee crisis received the route, including the attempt for political activism

17 NEW DIVERSITIES 21 (1), 2019 Antonina Anisimovich

even on such a small scale. The role of the post- form ‘designed to connect asylum seekers and man as an ambassador of human rights in the vil- refugees with the local community’) took place lage shows an inspiring though, at times, discour- in December 2017 in Sofia as well as in Harmanli, aging path of social activists in Bulgaria. Looking showing that some action is aimed at linking the at the rural regions of Bulgaria, this film creates discourse of diversities and the specific localities a much-needed connection between the capital where these discussions are most needed. Sofia and the remote rural areas, where cinema theatres were non-existent after the post-1989 privatisation of the cinema industry. Thus, the paper demonstrates both the criti- References cal potential of cinematic initiatives in creating Association of the European Journalists (AEJ). 2017. spaces for public discussions challenging the Roma and the refugees’ representations in the hegemonic xenophobic discourse in Bulgaria, most popular online media during the pre-election campaign in 2017. http://www.aej-bulgar- as well as the challenges and potential paths ia.org/bul/p.php?post=8112&c=328 (Accessed: forward. While such interzone spaces exist and 11th June 2018). provide a much-needed alternative to the main- BAEVA, I., and P. KABAKCHIEVA. 2014. “How Is stream media, there is still much to be done, Communism Remembered in Bulgaria? Research, especially regarding access and outreach. In Literature, Projects”. In: Todorova, M., ed., Re- addition to a serious lack of funding, the- inter membering Communism: Private and Public Rec- view and the analysis of these events pointed out ollections of Lived Experience in Southeast Eu- that although these events reach their respec- rope, 71-95. Central European University Press. tive audiences, the outreach is somewhat lim- BAKER, C. 2018. “Postcoloniality Without Race? ited to the people who are already aware of the Racial Exceptionalism and Southeast European Cultural Studies”. Interventions. problem and are already open for a discussion. BELL, J. 1998. Bulgaria in transition: politics, eco- Not diminishing the mobilising role of cinema nomics, society, and culture after communism. events, there is a need to address this issue in Boulder, CO: Westview Press. terms of providing access to such events to the BOJILOV, L. 1946. “Kulturen Turnir na Fondatia wider audience, including audiences outside the Bulgarsko Delo is Selata na Nikopolska Okolia capital, such as in smaller cities and more rural (Cultural Competition of the Bulgarian Deed in areas. Therefore, some areas of future improve- the Villages of the Nikopol Region)”. Den (Day). ment include giving more voice to the refugees, February, 2, 1946. making these events more widely publicised to BRATOEVA-DARAKCHIEVA, I. 2013. Bulgarian Cin- ema from ‘Kalin the Eagle’ to ‘Mission London’. encourage a more inclusive space, outside of the Sofia: ‘Scientific Research’ Fund. activists’ usual circle. In the vein of the inspira- BRUBAKER, R. 1995. “National Minorities, Nation- tional role of such events, perhaps a more direct alizing States, and External National Homelands link should be established with the activism and in the New Europe”. Daedalus 124 (2): 107-132. volunteering opportunities for the audiences of COOKE, P. 2015. The Europeanization of Cinema: these films. Furthermore, diverse location or fes- Interzones and Imaginative Communities by tivals-on-the-move would be useful in promoting Randall Halle (review). Monatshefte 107 (1): diversity and challenging the hegemony of main- 175-177. stream media in the regions where an alternative COUROUCLI, M. 1997. The Balkans, ethnic and cultural crossroads: educational and cultural as- is much less accessible (smaller cities and rural pects. Sofia: Council of Europe Publishings, 87p. areas). DEDOMINICIS, B. 2011. “The Bulgarian ethnic While I was conducting my research, a new model: post-1989 Bulgarian ethnic conflict reso- initiative – the Global Migration Film Festival lution”. Nationalities Papers.39(3): 441-460. organized by the Refugee Ocean (online plat- DEIANA, M. 2017. “Re-Thinking Border Politics at

18 Solidarity on the Margins NEW DIVERSITIES 21 (1), 2019

the Sarajevo Film Festival: Alternative Imaginar- NANCHEVA, N. 2016. “Bulgaria’s Response to Ref- ies of Conflict Transformation and Cross-Border ugee Migration: Institutionalizing the Boundary Encounters”. Geopolitics. of Exclusion”. Journal of Refugee Studies 29 (4): DEYANOVA, L. 2014. “From Memory to Canon: 549-567. How Do Bulgarian Historians Remember Com- European Commission/Joint Research Centre. munism?” In: Todorova, M., ed., 439-458: Re- (2008). Handbook on constructing composite membering Communism: Private and Public indicators: Methodology and user guide. Paris: Recollections of Lived Experience in Southeast OECD. Europe. Central European University Press. PERRY, D. 1995. “Bulgarian Nationalism: Permu- DNES bg. 2017. Tsvetanov: There is a decrease in tations of the Past”. In: Latawski, P., ed., 41-67: the refugee influx. http://dnes.dir.bg/temite/ Contemporary Nationalism in East Central Eu- news/tzvetan-tzvetanov-bezhantzi-namal- rope. London: MacMillan Press LTD. javane-bezhanskiat-natisk-bezhanski-potok- PIEKUT, A., Valentine, G. 2017. “Spaces of encoun- 26504809?tag_id=132368 (Accessed: 17th June ter and attitudes towards difference: A compara- 2018). tive study of two European cities”. Social Science European Commission. 2005. EU Research On Research. 62 (2017): 175-188. Social Sciences and Humanities: Values Sys- PILBROW, T. 1997. “The Nation and its Margins: tems of the Citizens and Socio-Economic Con- Negotiating a National Identity in Post-1989 Bul- ditions – Challenges from Democratisation garia”. The Anthropology of East Europe Review for the EU-Enlargement. [Online] Available 15(2): 62-74. from: http://cordis.europa.eu/docs/publica- RECHEL, B. 2008. “Ethnic Diversity in Bulgaria: tions/1001/100124301-6_en.pdf. (Accessed 4 Institutional Arrangements and Domestic Dis- August 2016). course”. Nationalities Papers 36 (2): 331-350. GHODSEE, K. 2008. “Left-Wing, Right-wing, - Ev SCHOBER, A. 2013. The Cinema Makers: Public Life erything: Xenophobia, Neo-Totalitarianism, and and the Exhibition of Difference in South-Eastern Populist Politics in Bulgaria”. Problems of Post- and Central Europe since the 1960s. Chicago: Communism 55 (3): 26-39. Chicago University Press. GROSESCU, R. 2017. “Criminal justice and histori- TLOSTANOVA, M. 2012. “Postsocialist ≠ postco- cal master narratives in post-1989 Bulgaria and lonial? On post-Soviet imaginary and global co- Germany”. European Politics and Society 18(1): loniality”. Journal of Postcolonial Writing 48(2): 66-80. 130-142. HALLE, R. 2014. The Europeanization of Cinema: TODD, J., ROUGIER, N. 2008. Political Transforma- Interzones and Imaginative Communities. Uni- tion and National Identity Change: Comparative versity of Illinois Press. Perspectives. London: Routledge. IMRE, A. 2005. “Whiteness in Post-Socialist East- TODOROVA, M. 1995. “The Course and Discourses ern Europe: The Time of the Gypsies, the End of of Bulgarian Nationalism”. In: Sugar, P., ed., 55- Race”. In: López, J. A., ed., 79-102: Postcolonial 102: Eastern European Nationalism in the 20th Whiteness: A Critical Reader on Race and Empire. Century. Washington, DC: American University Albany: SUNY Press. Press.

Institute of Social Integration. 2017. “Hate Speech –––. 2006. “Imagining “In-between” Peoples across – Problem N1 for the refugees in Bulgaria”. So- the Atlantic”. Journal of Historical Sociology fia. Mapping Out the National Context of Online 19(4): 397-418.

Hate Speech in Bulgaria (Report). –––. 2018. “Race and Women of Color in Socialist/ KAMENOVA, D. 2014. “Media and Othering: How Postsocialist Transnational Feminisms in Cen- Media Discourse on Migrants Reflects and - Af tral and Southeastern Europe”. Meridians 16(1): fects Society´s Tolerance”. Politické vedy 17 (2): 114-141. 150-169. VELICKOVIC, V. 2012. “Belated alliances? Tracing KOVACEVIC, N. 2013. “Re-worlding the Balkans: the intersections between postcolonialism and Films of voyage to the European Union”. Euro- postcommunism”. Journal of Postcolonial Writ- pean Journal of English Studies. 17(2): 188-200. ing. 48(2): 164-175.

19 NEW DIVERSITIES 21 (1), 2019 Antonina Anisimovich

Events cited: https://www.facebook.com/events/1980872135457807/ https://www.facebook.com/SFFStudents/posts/1694360600577000 https://www.refugeeocean.com/ad/global-migration-film-festival/

Note on the Author

Antonina Anisimovich is a PhD researcher in Edge Hill University’s Department of Media. Her main research focus is Bulgarian cinema concerning the transition after the events of 1989. Her broader scope of research interests includes collective memory studies, media memory, postcommunist nostalgia, historical representations on screen, as well as new Bulgarian cinema and post-1989 transition in the countries of the former Eastern Bloc. Email: [email protected]