What is the relationship between human beings and models of a sustainable future?
Sustainability (from the Latin sustinere – to support, to provide assistance, to endure, to withstand) is the ability to continue over a long period of time. In contemporary usage, the term refers to a state in which the environment, the economy, and society – the three pillars of sustainability – can persist over time. Today, sustainability has become a “password” for the future. Plans and calculations are made, resources are identified, steps toward implementation are outlined, and sooner or later, sustainability is required. If a project lacks sustainability, it has little chance of success. But when they speak about sustainability, the human aspect and input is rarely factored in.
The human factor in sustainability is the ability of a person and/or a community to rebound to their native form or condition after pressure, trauma, or catastrophe. It is the ability to remain happy and successful after hardship and failure. In English, this is called resilience. In Bulgarian, however, it is described through a whole range of words: sustainability, toughness, flexibility, elasticity – in short, stubbornness = ИНАТ, for life, for culture, for the future, and for happiness. Stubbornness/ИНАТ with a constructive charge. An innate INAT (in Turkish) – or, in English, resilience + …
The word inat (инат) in Bulgarian, as in other Slavic languages, originates from the Arabic word ‘inād’ (عناد), transmitted through the Turkish ‘inat’. In its common meaning, it signifies tenacity, stubbornness, persistence, often without rational justification. It exists in all languages and appears in countless idiomatic expressions. For example:
1/ Russian: „На зло маме сяду голой жопой в крапиву“ / English: “To spite mom, I’ll sit with my bare ass in the nettles”;
2/ Serbian: „Он се наљутио на своје село, па је одсекао курац“ / English: “He got mad at his home village, so he cut off his penis”.
But these, of course, are examples of unproductive stubbornness, which we do not need for BUNA 4.0.
We are interested in another sort of stubbornness, ‘инат’, and resilience +. Imagine – had they lived happily ever after, Romeo and Juliet would be an example of optimal, constructive stubbornness. The title of a Bulgarian movie from the late socialist era translates as All for Love (or To Love in Spite of All, 1986). This sounds optimistic, something akin to what we call “constructive stubbornness,” which we translate into English as Native Resolution, as in:
Innate, native, natural, constructive
Resolute, determined, tenacious, stubborn, or ‘инат’ in Cyrillic
Analogies with digital terminology are not inappropriate. Constructive stubbornness is embedded in human beings genetically, an encoded bio-factor, as well as in communities as a rebounding protocol. In other words: native resolution and innate stubbornness (or вроден инат in Cyrillic). Consider, for example, the bouncing back of Native American, First Nation, and other indigenous communities in North and South America against all odds, or the survival/revival of Balkan communities during and after centuries of Ottoman domination. This is resilience +: sustained over centuries of life under externally imposed domination of political, cultural, and social forms of otherness. It manifests, among other things, in Balkan folk Christianity, in the hybrid religious practices of colonized communities, in linguistic borrowings, shared practices, and cultural forms circulating within human societies, including artistic ones. Here, hybridity itself becomes a fact of innate, constructive stubbornness, and of resilience +, that we are interested in.
For BUNA 4.0, we seek ideas that are not known to just a few, and we would appreciate those that go beyond words! Please, do not reserve your emotions, and do not just build flattering propositions either! Say “No!” to complaints and “Yes!” to unstoppable, radiant art! Do not obfuscate issues, nor annoy audiences! Do not be Quixotic, that is, unrealistically idealistic! Aim to compare and contrast in your proposals, which you might wish to formulate in smooth-sounding, insightful, and non-harmful statements! Work to weaken your (understandable) artistic anger, and aim for calmness in relaxed, expansive, and succulent visual stories! It’s OK for them to be loud and unruly while saying “yes,” but should remain quiet and reserved while rejecting a “no”!
Art is everywhere! Be generous and forgiving, but avoid harsh noises and short-lived notions! We are looking for voracious artistic input that is simple, strict, attentive, and yet fluid in its visual speech!
We are looking for visual ИНАТ / visual resilience + !
Luchezar Boyadjiev
