Ohara Donovetsky: Is it possible to live in the sacred, covered by the profane?

Vladimir Mitev

Intro

On October 17, 2025, a meeting with Romanian writer Ohara Donovetsky took place at the regional library in Ruse.

She presented her novel Casting for Fairies, translated into Bulgarian by Vanina Bozhikova. Vanina Bozhikova translated during the event, moderated by journalist Vladimir Mitev. The event took place as part of the “Written Treasures of the Lower Danube” festival.

The text below is a transcript of the discussion with Ohara Donovetsky.

Opening remarks

Teodora Dyankova-Peycheva, librarian-in-chief: Good evening! A new event is starting as part of the “Written Treasures of the Lower Danube” festival. We are here, together with the Municipality of Ruse, in the “Culture” program that funds the festival. This year, the program is very serious, very interesting. At the beginning of the week, we discovered an exhibition dedicated to the places where Constantin Brâncuși stayed.

And today, we are meeting a lady whose book has been translated into Bulgarian for the first time, and it is very unusual that you are all here. Because I don’t think many of you have read the book. Of course, we can only envy those who have had the opportunity to read the work in its original language…

Dear friends, I am pleased to introduce Ohara Donovetsky. We have the privilege, all of us gathered here, to learn not only about the writing of the novel.

And I have a privilege, in the sense that this book has enjoyed the translation of one of the translators of the book, Vanina Bozhikova, and the support of one of our friends, Vladimir Mitev. Then, I would like to ask Vladimir Mitev, who will moderate this meeting, to fill in for me. So, dear friends, I invite you to enjoy this evening.

Ohara Donovetsky: Welcome! Good evening!

Moderator’s intro

Vladimir Mitev: Good evening! Welcome!

Tonight we will talk about a book that has three protagonists. The three heroines have a sensitivity for exotic, mystical, curious things. Each of them has a preoccupation with words. One writes plays for children. The other is a professional linguist. The third studied Arabic and Hindi.

These protagonists make discoveries throughout the novel, discoveries they share with each other, enriching each other. At one point, one of them inherits a house in Poland. We know today that Poles are the dominant ethnic group in Poland. But Poland has some areas that were ruled by Germans more than a century ago. And it is interesting that the protagonist in the novel inherits a house in the former German area of Poland – in Wrocław.

Here we must open a parenthesis, because the book also refers to a Bulgarian city – namely Stara Zagora. And what will surprise one of the heroines, while she is there in Stara Zagora, is the Bulgarian culture of writing obituaries.

The three hypostases of feminity

I told you that each of these heroines is unconventional. One of them has Armenian origins. Another heroine has a Jewish friend. One of them has a fascination with things that are not logically related at first glance, but go together, a fascination with mysticism, fortune telling, the zodiac, and so on.

If I may draw a conclusion, in the novel we have three heroines, who resemble a trinity – a trinity that, as a whole, probably becomes the author’s alter ego.

So, what is the connection between the author and these three heroines? What does the author want to tell us through this presentation of herself in three guises?

Ohara Donovetsky: First, I would like to thank you for being here with us today. I will save this sequence for later, so that I can answer the question. It’s a question that, I won’t hide, was among the first ones I was asked and among those I was asked most frequently. Especially by those who know me very well and know that I am a fiction writer. And so, the natural answer is yes, you guessed correctly. There is something from my personal biography in each character.

In fact, I believe this to be true, with or without the support I received from Camil Petrescu, the author who believed in the authenticity of the creative act, the lived act. Petrescu’s thesis is that in order for experiences, ideas, and images to reach the reader as well and as deeply as possible, they must pass through the reality felt by the author. However, beyond this response, which pertains to the creative workshop, there is another moment when I thought about the characteristics and profiles of each character. In another debate, I was interested in there being different types within female sensitivity, even if they had the same subject.

Under the umbrella of friendship, the three women represent three types. The first element I wanted to highlight, thinking about their different ways of perceiving the world, was what we call coincidence. Not only that, but let’s test this example. And as you noticed, one of them goes so far as to consider all coincidences significant. She is guided by them, learns from them, considers them signs, even though she is an intellectual.

The second person swings between believing and not believing, playing the ambiguity card. And the third, as we of course imply and can be read, is at the opposite pole. I said that all of these represent ways that come from feminine sensitivity, and when I say feminine sensitivity, that means we are not interested in the gender on the ID card.

This feminine sensibility is attentive to synesthetic reality, that is, we women know, or all of us with feminine sensibility. And against the same backdrop, we relate to what is happening around us. Three of them are here.

Non-hegemonic communication

Vladimir Mitev: Okay, thank you. That was your explanation. What I have to add is that in this novel, these three types and three ways of encountering the world (or the other) communicate without fighting for supremacy among themselves.

There is no hegemony, no alienation, no rivalry. The three, in fact, help each other, they are united by common ground. Is there another message you are conveying here?

Yes, of course. It seems curious that these women do not fight for hegemony, they are not in competition. Is there such a thing, I think that is the question. And, along with that, if I wanted to convey a message here as well. I am relieved by our previous discussions (before the start of the event), when we just recognized someone, we recognize each other. And earlier, a wonderful lady told me that we could be in the same blood family.

One of the themes of the book is friendship, friendship between women, friendship in the sense that, beyond their elective affinities and their need for affection, because their family was not enough for them. There is the miracle of this type of relationship, of compatibility, of intertwining. In other words, a family, I would not call it adoptive, nor circumstantial, I would call it spiritual, without being too afraid of this word, although it may have many connotations.

The exotic spaces for Romanians – the Slavic and the Muslim world

Vladimir Mitev: There is something valid for many Romanians. Romania, by definition, considers itself a country that speaks a language of Latin origin, close to similar countries in Europe. But it is somehow distant from Slavic or Muslim countries, because they are somehow considered different from the Romanian identity, as Romanians consider it to exist. It seems that Romanians do not know much about Slavic countries or those in the Middle East. There are some ideas that there is a danger there or that there is simply nothing attractive about them. But for the protagonists in the novel, these countries are interesting, attractive, and exotic. They learn something from them.

How can Romanians develop curiosity about peoples beyond their familiar borders, and what happens when this curiosity is put into action?

Ohara Donovetsky: Yes, perhaps Romanians who feel the need to create, to write, and so on, obviously feel closer to Romance-speaking areas. The question would be why there is this distance and how Romanians can open up to Slavic-speaking areas, to Germanic-speaking areas, to Slavic-speaking areas, even to Middle Eastern areas. If that means that we have all opened up, what benefit would that have for us?

First of all, I will say that these are important spaces for me as an author. Perhaps because they are related to the history of a member of my family. When it comes to my mother’s family, I have Armenian roots. When it comes to my father’s family, there may also be Greek roots.

And then my parents’ stories branch out. So I drew on those that were important to me and that I knew about. I am, for example, the bearer of the story of the hidden Armenians.

These are the things I know existed, and here the answer you give is very important, because it was also the discretion of the Armenians. We had rosaries, we were Christians, we didn’t understand. During Ceaușescu’s time, some of us didn’t talk about religion.

It was very unusual for me when I went to the Armenians’ home during communism, when religion was not discussed. We were Christians, my grandfather had a rosary and used to say Allah, Allah, Allah, which we translated into Romanian as a prayer. I didn’t understand what he was saying.

I was very ashamed because my grandfather was different. I wanted to have a grandfather in the countryside, I wanted him not to get manicures and to speak Romanian correctly. After many years, I put everything together and assumed that my grandfather was a Christian and was one of those Armenians who had to hide for a long time because they were Christians. It is a history that Armenians know, among themselves, to accept, at least out of courtesy, that they are Muslims, and then to leave when they are forced to authorize this by law. That is why my grandfather’s entire family left and ended up in Bulgaria.

And we came to settle in Romania, and then I liked the confession and it came inside me. As for the other places, in Poland, Jordan, Dubai, and the other places you think of as exotic, they are places that have been very important in my travels, which, yes, for a traveler with weapons and luggage, for a nomadic spirit, mean a lot. There can be many opportunities for development in travel, where we learn more about everything.

The three main characters are not fighting for social change. They make discoveries and enjoy life instead

Vladimir Mitev: Another observation about the protagonists – correct me if I’m wrong, but they are not really activists for a social, political, or other cause. Maybe they develop in life, they make discoveries. They enjoy what life has to offer. But they don’t seem to be active in the socio-political sphere. Why aren’t they activists?

Ohara Donovetsky: The question refers to the way in which these characters, although they have all the necessary qualities, do not practice militant feminism. They are not feminist voices, but retreat into the shadows. That’s right.

I don’t believe in militant feminism. Although I believe in sisterhood, I believe that women can move mountains. One of my favorite questions at gatherings with my friends is what it would be like in a counterfactual history if the world were ruled by women. We can’t know what it would be like, because all of history from the Amazons to the present would be different. We like to think there would have been no wars, but there would probably have been something else. And we like to think that our victory is precisely this, knowing how to be in the shadows, victorious and leading as we do.

On the other hand, I believe that we must not turn our backs on each other and fight based on gender, but rather embrace causes that inspire us. I believe that the true way to understand our role, position, and so on, is precisely this: to convey the feminine way of caring.

This includes generously caring for those weaker than us, whether they are elderly, sick, or those who need to grow up with our help. As there are several characters in the subtext who have done and continue to do many things, such as donating money to homes for the elderly, children, and so on. I also believe that the strength of feminism, which is not very pronounced or militant, comes from solidarity, from closing ranks and helping, as we know best, regardless of borders and problems. Let’s respond to problems together.

It seems very strange to me that a woman from, let’s say, Romania, just as an example, which is kind of like a neighbor of ours, would fight for the cause and equality between women and men, while atrocities are happening in the Muslim world. I’m not saying that it’s not important to fight for what she believes in, I think it’s a just cause, but I think it’s much more appropriate to focus on and prioritize the problems we have in a community or to move to that community that has exactly that very difficult problem. It seems to me to be an exercise in civic duty, as happens in Germany, for example, when one day a week or a month, between certain hours, everyone goes out to demonstrate. From here to here is one section, from here to here I am against something else. It is an exercise in civic spirit. There is nothing wrong with it, I don’t know if it is effective.

Ohara Donovetsky’s novel and feminism

Vladimir Mitev: It may be interesting for Ohara Donovetsky, as well as for the audience, that in the first novel written by a woman in Iran—Simin Daneshvar’s novel Suvashun—there is a heroine who communicates the same question. What would the world look like if it were ruled by women? The action in the novel takes place during World War II, in southern Iran, occupied by Great Britain. And this lady, in the same book, at the same time, asks the question of what the world would look like if it were ruled by women who know how to value life. She also helps sick people in the nursing home and fights to save lives in the turmoil of war.

I wrote a literary review of this novel in which I stated that Simin Daneshvar is influenced by the second wave of feminism. And I want to ask you—don’t you also have ideas from the second wave of feminism in your novel, the one based on middle-class women?

Ohara Donovetsky: It’s interesting that you bring up the discussion about the waves of feminism. I know we are in the fourth wave of feminism, and now, half-jokingly, half-seriously, if we take the transgenerational layers in my novel, we could find a match here for so many types of feminism.

And, of course, if we have a metaphor in the novel, we can perhaps find a little bit of each of these waves. It was not my intention to create a metaphor of waves. But I think there is reason to ask ourselves why I was interested in these groups of three women who find themselves on different temporal spirals.

What interested me, in fact, was to find these groups of three women on the temporal spiral. There were two ideas. The possibility of living in a sacred covered by the profane. In other words, each of us has a role and a purpose that we must ultimately discover. And the second idea I wanted to emphasize with these groups of three women who find themselves in different eras was the extent to which this transgenerational pedagogy, as I call it, is valid.

Women learn from each other, not only mothers from sons, but also grandmothers and so on. So, in the fact that this transgenerational pedagogy, which is passed on across different generations, is very valid, and here we are not only talking about what men, mothers’ children, learn, but also through stories that they convey in meetings they have across different generations.

I call it family pedagogy or transgenerational pedagogy, because I have no other term for it, and I think that’s what it is. And secondarily, there is the idea of typologies that can be found in typical situations, and then history repeats itself and it becomes easier for them to understand and for others to understand them. And here, of course, we are talking about typologies that are valid, that occur, that help them to meet each other and be understood in their lives.

Vladimir Mitev: Now I will give the floor to the audience. I know that there are some people in our audience who have read the novel. I would like to give the floor to Mrs. Lili Ganceva.

Vanina Bojicova: Ms. Ganceva, who is a true symbol of friendship, a possible link between Romania and Bulgaria, and now speaks as one of the first readers of the novel.

Lili Gancheva’s comments

Lili Gancheva: I don’t know how to comment, because Mr. Mitev has put into words everything that I felt and observed in the novel. Sometimes people need to read a book. They need space and they have a vision in what they write and they are in an atmosphere, let’s say, that, apart from giving you the opportunity to find your fantasy, is, in fact, to find what you need.

In fact, that’s what happened and it’s good and I’m very happy to have met someone like you. I gained from a certain point of view, and I think that in the book, in perspective, you will discover everything that is different, regardless of whether you are male or female. I really liked the three characters.

I speak what I feel. The three characters are very important to everyone. I wanted to identify with one of the heroines, but I couldn’t help identifying with all of them, because I found something of myself in each of them.

When reading a book, I was looking for something I needed in a moment of despair, whether it was comfort or joy or some other feeling. And I liked it very much. I also liked the reference to Stara Zagora and the obituaries.

Ohara Donovetsky: It’s a great honor. So how I address you in this book, I’m speaking in all the books.

Lili Ganceva: For me, it’s a feminist book—in the subtext. And it has a very subtle sense of humor, which I felt, which, in places, is also a lot of sadness. This sense of humor helps a lot. I’ll stop here, I wholeheartedly recommend them, and I’m very happy to have met Ohara.

Ohara Donovetsky: Thank you, and I’m glad if the book has this effect, that the reader can identify with each of the stories, with each of the heroines… ‌ And I am very happy that in your text they felt that the message is a call for peace and that men may be interested, even if the book can also be interpreted in a feminist key, they may be interested in the way these women look at men.

Vladimir Mitev: Thank you for your comment! One more question from the audience…

Bohos Garzharyan’s words

Bohos Garzharyan (an Armenian from Ruse): Good evening! I see that you honor my Armenian people, whom I cherish. I also have Armenian roots. But my ancestors did not come with the persecution from the Ottoman Empire, but earlier – in 1620. The original Armenian church in Ruse was built in the 17th century, and my great-grandfather was a donor for its construction.

I appreciate that tonight we have with us a distinguished Romanian writer from Bucharest, as well as the Romanian translator Vanina Bozhikova, who translated Varujan Vosganian into Bulgarian. Thank you for this evening, and I hope you will buy my book, read it soon, and share it with your friends.

Ohara Donovetsky: Thank you very much. My Armenian roots, to which I refer, make me feel a completely different connection, although it is a very small percentage that I have been able to understand. But I also thank you for the fact that it is a space that resembles the space where I was born. I was also born on one side of the Danube, on the other side, near the Bulgarian city of Silistra.

So we, the people born around the Danube, have an extra opportunity to communicate and get closer to other Bulgarians – from Bucharest, the Danube – I call them fellow citizens because of our unity, our spirit, our news, our myths. In linguistics and dialectology, it is said that the Danube is not a border, which means that Romania north and south of the Danube, historically speaking, as we well know, the Slavs were assimilated by the Romanians in the north, while in the south of the Danube the opposite process took place. However, the community shares the same values, and this can still be felt today.

I feel very comfortable among Bulgarians, even though I don’t know the language, but I have a feeling that when I learned Bulgarian, I got used to it. I love Silistra, Balchik, Sozopol, Stara Zagora, Ruse. When I was here, I felt familiar with the unfamiliar. And I realized that we share a lot of things. That’s why I don’t understand why Romanians don’t talk more about the Slavic space.

Having traveled to so many places and for so many years, I am happy to know that when I find someone in the world who knows about cozonac, who cracks eggs at Easter, who has the same reverence for Saint George, Saint Paraskevi, and Saint Nicholas. We have common traditions. Romanian caroling, German holiday rituals, paparuda (which calls on ploua – translator’s note). Even the fact that we have the same fears, regarding goblins, dragons, and samca. And in our contemporary world, the same lack of trust in the classes that rule us.

So, perhaps these things are not yet known, or perhaps authors are not yet interested in this way of approaching things by working with the world, but they are extremely important for us to know our past in order to understand our present. So thank you once again, I was allowed to confess what I feel, as well as to give you space. Thank you very much!

Teodora Evtimova’s words

Teodora Evtimova, director of the regional library in Ruse: Thank you for accepting our invitation to participate in this first arts festival, which has a single goal: to present the word as a unifier of the inhabitants on both sides of the Danube. I hope we will continue to cooperate and that you will come again.

Ohara Donovetsky: Thank you once again. While preparing to come to your meeting, I realized that I am from the same family as Elias Canetti, because my latest book, “Vedere cu Solzi” (View with Scales), refers to the Călărași area, in the same way that Canetti, long ago, spoke about this terrible community, in the sense of great.

It is exactly as in “The Tongue Set Free,” Canetti spoke about how well the Bulgarians from Ruse got along with the Romanians from Giurgiu, so I speak in “Vedere cu Solzi” about the amalgam of Bulgarians, Tatars, Turks, Romanians, and Gypsies in Călărași. We were very close to Silistra. I have a preference for Canetti, for Ruse, and for “The Tongue Set Free”… Canetti appreciated it, and I am trying to learn.

At the moment, I know a few Romanian words that come from you, they come from the Slavic background, and they are enough. That doesn’t mean that Romanian isn’t Slavic. We talk with friends and they ask me, “What do you mean?” I want to say something important, I can’t help but refer to it. And if they are: to love, to receive, friend and dear, that is, all these are words of love that we use: we love, we receive, friend.

And yes, I think these words speak for themselves about the way we should communicate. Otherwise, I don’t think we’ll starve, because we also know how to sing.

Vanina Bojicova: And I hope that words of love speak for themselves about the way we should communicate. I’m glad I translated this book and that you’re with us.

Thank you to our friends in Giurgiu for being with us.

Thanks for watching, and see you at the next meeting!

Paula Erizanu in Ruse: You can be Moldovan, Romanian, Londoner and European at the same time. Moldovans are by nature polyglots and cosmopolitans

Paula Erizanu: I want to tell the story of the Republic of Moldova

Kapka Kassabova: My mission as a writer is healing 

“You arrive as nobody”: Kapka Kassabova’s Ode to the Balkans

Photo: The cover of the book Casting for Fairies by Ohara Donovetsky (source: Publishing House Paradox)

Subscribe to the channel of the blog “The Bridge of Friendship” in YouTube, where a number of video and audio interviews are published! The blog can also be followed in Facebook and Twitter. Its Telegram channel is here. And here is its Substack account.

About Author