The collection presents the findings of a research project on the theme “Subcultures as agents of change in the Transition” that was conducted between April and December 2020 by a research team from the State University of Library Studies and Information Technology (SULSIT) in Sofia. The term “Transition” refers to the social, political and economic processes in Bulgaria that began in the 1980s and ended in the first decade of the 21st century, and encompassed the transformation of Bulgarian society from totalitarianism to democracy and market economy.
The project team was led by Assoc. Prof. Alexander Karakachanov, PhD, and comprised of Prof. Georgeta Nazarska, PhD, and Assoc. Prof. Nina Debruyne, PhD.
The aim of the study was to test the hypothesis, defined in the preliminary phase, that at the end of the so-called “Real Socialism” and the beginning of the Transition, several main subcultures were formed in the political, economic and cultural scene in Bulgaria and that these had varying but significant degrees of influence over the development of the processes in the country. One of the mechanisms of influence, which present subcultures as agents of change in the historical process, are culturemes. One of the research objectives was to identify, by the use of various techniques including sociological survey, such subcultures and validate specific culturemes as their key identifiers.
The structure of the proposed collection consists of three parts. Following the study logic, the first part, “Mechanisms of Transition in Bulgaria”, presents the theoretical formulations underlying the research approach. The latter is based on two theoretical concepts presented in the paper “The mechanisms of social transformation and the Bulgarian transition from totalitarianism to democracy”. One examines the overall development of society through the prism of the so-called Monopoly model. It seeks to provide a different model of societal change that is also potentially more adequate than both the formation or stages approach (Karl Marx, Daniel Bell, Walt Rostow, Alvin Toffler) and the civilization approach (Pitirim Sorokin, Arnold Toynbee). The proposed model is based on the view that from the dawn of the first civilizations until now the structure of human communities and the society as a whole remains virtually unchanged and that any and all variations are occurring only within certain parameters. These reflect the degree of concentration and monopolization of resources in the main social dimensions or spheres – the cultural, the political and the economic.
The other theoretical concept (the subcultural approach), which is presented in the same article, defines subcultures as active agents of social change. Their role is logically embedded in the Monopoly model, where the main driver of social change are changes in the cultural sphere. Therefore, priority objectives in the further course of the research were set to be the identification and analysis of the subcultures of the Transition and culturemes as the main mechanism of inducing social action within the respective (especially political) subcultures.
The first part also includes a high-level analysis of the survey conducted in order to bring out the respondents' view of the weight and role of the proposed main subcultures in the Transition processes (see “Analysis of the results of the survey on the mechanisms of the Transition in Bulgaria”).
The second part, “Subcultures as agents of change in the Transition”, offers a detailed analysis of the seven identified as main subcultural groups of the Transition. It begins with the two political subcultures, namely Real socialism and Anti-communism, which play a decisive role in the course of the political and economic processes during this dramatic period for the Bulgarian society. The analysis presents their systems of ideologemes (culturemes), highlighting their mutual opposition, but also the interconnectedness that underpins the so-called bipolar political model established for most of the Transition. This model, a product of these two political subcultures, was the main reason for the Transition turning as it did – corrupt and at an unjustifiably high social cost.
Following the chronological order of historical events, the next two subcultures considered in the collection are Wrestlers/Mutri and Chalga/Popfolk. Despite their different origins, the two subcultures formed a symbiosis immediately after 1989 that not only quickly established them on the public stage, but also largely synchronized their development curves. Highly distinctive and clearly recognizable, both became objects of extremely negative perceptions, almost uniformly reviled as emblematic and somewhat cartoonish counterpoint to all “normal”, “legal”, “moral”, “cultured”. At certain points in time both groups presented characteristics of countercultures. Both groups experienced two main stages of development, which is embedded in the ‘double-barrelled’ names: the first elements (Wrestlers and Chalga) dominated the first half of the study period, but gradually waned, went out of public view and became supplanted by the second elements (Mutri and Popfolk), which became the recognizable carriers and representatives of the subcultural characteristics. At the end of the study, two main areas of research interest presented themselves: the one is related to the apparent merging of the Wrestlers/Mutri (now only Mutri) subculture with that of the Honest entrepreneur (the new capitalist), and the other to the popfolk’s potential exit from the subcultural scene and its acceptance as part of the diversity of the dominant culture (mainstream).
The collection also examines the subcultures of the Honest entrepreneur (the new capitalist), the Environmentalist, and the Populist patriot. The subculture of the Honest entrepreneur (the new capitalist, was formed in the 1990s and became a protagonist in the Transition, exploiting social processes to its own benefit. It was formed following foreign models and displayed economic characteristics but was closely connected to the political subcultures of Real socialism and Anti-communism while actively interacting with the emerging subcultures of Chalga/Popfolk and Populist patriots.
The Environmentalist subculture was formed only at the beginning of the 21st century, and although it did not play a significant role in the Transition, it played an important role as a ‘bridge’ between the dissident political countercultures prior to 1989 and the subcultures of the Transition. Initially closely connected with the subculture of Anti-communism, it later became the antagonist of almost all other subcultures and particularly of the Honest entrepreneur (the new capitalist).
The Populist patriot subculture was formed at the beginning of the 21st century and at this point it is inconclusive to what extent it was an agent of change in the Transition, as it gradually grew to encompass main actors from the political, economic and cultural spheres. This subculture is in constant dialogue and strong collision with other subcultures and especially with Chalga/Popfolk.
The third part of the collection, “Public Lectures on the Bulgarian Transition”, offers additional perspectives on the processes of Transition from totalitarianism to democracy and market economy in Bulgaria by renown Bulgarian intellectuals who actively participated in the historical events. These are Assoc. Prof. Krasen Stanchev, PhD, Prof. Mihail Nedelchev, and Prof. Yanaki Stoilov, PhD. In accordance with the project scope, the three were invited to share their views and thoughts on the historical processes and events. The project team expresses sincerest gratitude to Assoc. Prof. Stanchev, Prof. Nedelchev and Prof. Stoilov for their strong and meaningful contributions to the collection.
The collection ends with several appendices, which present additional data and some statistical results of the survey.