About the Abomination of The Committee for State Security’s Fiction

  by Nina Ivanova



It seems that the PISA methodology for evaluating our ability to understand a read text is quite unreliable. According to recent studies by this organization, more than 80% of Bulgarians aged 12 participating in these tests achieved "average" results.

The tragic-grotesque case "Sabina" showed that no less than 80% of Bulgarians who read the file "Sabina" and who wrote something about it in the Bulgarian media show "weak" results of understanding ..

As incredible as it may seem, the first reader, deprived of the ability to perceive the actual content and meaning of the text says "Julia Kristeva's file" was the Records Commission itself. A commission of the files which can not (and did not bother) to understand the contents of a file ... - what a history strictly speaking Kafkaesque.

Yet, by reading the "Sabina" file, it becomes absolutely clear that:

1) Julia Kristeva has not written or signed any document certifying her intention to collaborate with State Security. On the contrary, each successive new meeting described in the file with the Communist State Security Officers reinforces the impression that she had not the slightest idea that she was stuck as "Sabina";

2) Julia Kristeva did not write any document, any sentence or word intended for use by and for the State Security Services; [The Committee for State Security was the name of the Bulgarian secret service during the Communist rule of Bulgaria]

3) Julia Kristeva met with their Bulgarian employees only in cases where she thought they could help her get visas for her parents' visit (something reprehensible to the officers) or different administrative affairs about his sister;

4) being a very interesting interlocutor, Julia Kristeva gives information to those who questioned her, which was perhaps a curious information for them (the development of semiology, the attitude of French intellectuals from left to right, one or the other world event, philosophical debates, the issues addressed in his doctoral thesis), but for the institution State Security, this information did not matter;

5) Julia Kristeva was an object of desire among certain intelligence circles - apparently it was considered a matter of honor even to meet this star of humanities;

6) it was an (umpteenth) pretext for agents to develop zealous activism.

7) With her growing celebrity Julia Kristeva has served to generate numerous trips to Paris, financial rewards from sixteen employees directly (and clumsily) engaged in efforts to try to recruit her; for them it is the umpteenth "individual" that justifies posts and salaries of many other readers, "writers" and directors of the State Security;

8) with an obvious and delicate diplomatic flair (so as not to close the borders of Bulgaria for her parents from the inside), she forced State Security agents in 1973 to admit their failure and to give up efforts to recruit her to their ranks;

9) Julia Kristeva has never been "Sabina";

10) "Sabina" is a ghost born in the maleficent imagination of State Security. [1]



Nina Ivanova, Kultura

Култура - Брой 14 (2938), 13.04.2018




April 2, 2018


[1] Germinal Chivikov (Surveillance et conditionnement, la prose littéraire de la Sécurité d'État, 2008) and Vesko Branev (L'Homme surveillé, Albin Miichel, 2009) have already shown in their books how much the power of security State is treacherous, ignorant and stupid, and at the same time devastating.