“ACTIVIST” IS MY FAVORITE CULTURAL MAGAZINE, OR WHAT DO THE YOUNG HUMANISTS READ?
It happens so that cultural magazines are rarely spoken about. They do exist in a considerable number – their titles are counted in hundreds (and the titles are usually published also in hundreds – not such a considerable number though). But the very fact that those magazines do exist does not close the subject. It would be beautiful if crowds (I don't want to write 'people' or 'masses') knew about their existence. Sometimes I get the feeling, that if I asked average people what a cultural magazine was, I would get a picture of a magazine without any vulgar or inelegant language and without any mention of politics which, fortunately, the Poles do not regard as culture-connected.
High circulation magazines seldom comment on new issues of cultural magazines. 'Cultural press reviews' are even less popular in press and television. No wonder one doesn't see people talking about the outstanding generosity of “Rita Baum” of Wrocław. The last issue was accompanied by so many free gadgets that one might consider it a cultural Kinder Surprise. No wonder if even Polish philology and philosophy students read this kind of press only in the case of their workshops or exams on criticism, when the lecturer makes his students read e. g. “Czas Kultury” (“Time of Culture”). The lecturer wouldn't ask for reading “Wakat” (“Vacancy”) or “LiteRacje” (the Polish title is a wordplay between the words Literatura-literature and Racje-a reason, argument or being right – translator’s note). Even the editors of the above mentioned do not know their distribution channels.
The 100th issue of “Zeszyty Literackie” (“Literary Notebooks”) and the 50th anniversary of “Więź” (“Bond”) gained media extraordinary attention as for Polish standards. The press published occasional articles, memoirs and interviews with editors (of both sexes) and even accounts of the anniversary celebration events. What pleases us is the thought that several thousand of people got to know about the existence of those magazines. Maybe several hundred novices decided to reach for such weirdos.
There was no remembrance material about the 100th issue of “artPAPIER” in “Wiadomości” or “Fakty” (the names of Polish news programmes – “News” and “Facts” – translator’s note). The editorial staff of the TVP Kultura (Polish TV cultural channel) did not celebrate the occasion with any debate with the media people, neither artists and critics. TOK FM Radio did not invite Violetta Sajkiewicz, the editor-in-chief, to the studio. The feminist “Zadra” (“Splinter”) magazine did not proclaim the 100th issue of the magazine as a success of a woman. It didn't wish them further hundreds. Other cultural magazines also demonstrated no will to write about the anniversary neither wished luck to their competitors. The lecturer surely doesn’t instruct the students to visit the www.artpapier.pl because he doesn't even know about the existence of the Internet. Even if he knows what the Internet is, the lecturer probably doesn't know about the existence of that website. Even if the lecturer has heard about “artPAPIER”, he instructed the students to reach for “Zeszyty Literackie” rather (because he was successful enough to publish a postcard from Naples and a haiku about rime on the windowsill in the “Zeszyty Literackie” few years ago). Also people in the streets keep discussing other matters. Nothing about the “artPAPIER”. Not that I want to raise my moods by this enumeration (you should know that you're a pioneer!) I just really think that this 100th issue of the “artPAPIER” is something I want to drop a line about. Because others haven’t. Because it's the 100th issue. Because the other issues are also quite good. Because the subjects raised by the editorial staff (cultural magazines and criticism on the Internet or the web 2.0 culture i.a.) draw the interest of the visitors of “Witryna” (“Showcase”). The lecturer should know that humans can't live solely on “Zeszyty Literackie”.
The 100th issue of the “artPAPIER” (15th February 2008) consists of materials from the newly established section of Ideas. The main course this time is a debate 'Writing (of/in the) Internet' with the editorial staff (Piotr Bogalecki, Wojciech Rusinek and Violetta Sajkiewicz) and a guest from outside, Konrad C. Kęder. At the very beginning, the editor-in-cheif of the “artPAPIER” divides the Internet art criticism into two groups. The first group consists of professional critics who may well publish in professional, printed trade magazines (the examples are the “artPAPIER” itself, as well as “Tin” and “Latarnik”). The other group is composed of amateurs, difficult to classify (Sajkiewicz points out the blogosphere, the websites devoted to art criticism and portals dealing with such subject-matters).
Also Konrad Cezary Kęder shares his concerns with the readers at once. He claims that the expression 'criticism' is a little unfortunate nowadays: “The expression 'voicing opinion' seems to be more coherent with our present. The latter doesn't impose the presumption of a gesture full of pathos...”. He draws a definite line between 'opinion voicing' and 'giving information'. Another subject-matter of this discussion is the importance of the medium and the antagonism between paper and the Internet which seems especially important to Kęder. In his opinion, the impact force follows “the expressed opinion. If it's strong enough, its form is of secondary meaning”. Bogalecki agrees to belittle this antagonism as far as the content is considered. However, he disagrees when it comes to the reception manner: “The differences in this regard are bigger and more visible, I suppose, though they don't have to be as meaningful as the followers of the technological determinism would like to see them. Nevertheless, whenever I read a traditionally published book I get the impression of doing it somehow differently than in the case of materials published in the Internet”.
Sajkiewicz suggests that the fundamental difference between the paper and Internet circulation is “when a scribbler copies poetic sheets at his own expense and distributes them among friends we deal with a local phenomenon. If the same scribbler publishes at one of the Internet poetic fora, he can reach thousands. Kęder argues with this opinion. Again, he calls the global character of the Internet a 'beautiful illusion' and questions the bigger popularity of an unknown website in opposition to a poetic sheet. The editor-in-chief of the “FA-art” aptly remarks that the web 2.0 idea does not find application in Polish art magazines. “Had the young editors been truly fascinated with the Web 2.0, they would aim at engaging as many people as possible in creating new websites, they would pass the initiative on to the audience and let things go”.
Kęder also points out that nowadays the longer the curriculum vitae, the less important the author because “if he needs an expanded description, it's obvious that nobody knows him from anywhere”. I don't find this deduction true. We are facing a complete decentralization on the paper and Internet magazine market, and there is no reader who would be able to read all the new issues of all those magazines. A developed bibliographical note often becomes a sign post. It tells where to go in order to find the writings of a favourite author, and which archival issues of sometimes already non-existent magazines I should reach for if I want to find an older texts by a particular author. Because of the large number and inaccessibility of many literary magazines, a bibliographical note is a kind of a 'bibliographic hint'. Thanks to the bibliographical note only can Kęder or Wysocki find out that a certain author publishes on a regular basis in different magazines. Thanks to the bibliographical note, since we may not necessarily read those particular magazines where that author usually publishes. Another private use: thanks to complete and updated bibliographical notes I was able to create a rich and – I believe – a comprehensive bibliography of Cezary Michalski (interestingly: as the years passed, the titles of less important or less prestigious magazines fell out, and more popular or respected titles popped into their place – following older and older bibliographical notes; thus, one could find articles and essays from his youth which the author himself would probably prefer to forget).
In the debate on 'Writing (of/in the) Internet' (debate) many other interesting subjects were tackled. Some of them were: the unimportance of the medium, the copy-paste 'mentality', bloggers as opinion makers, a dual (paper and Internet) life of a magazine, the 'author's signature' problem, and the cause of the “artPAPIER” being a magazine, that probably will never appear on paper. We could spend a longer while on the threads of this discussion, but since the 100th issue of the “artPAPIE” includes a bunch of interesting texts I'd like to write about another one – Keeping to the genre. Cultural magazines and the Internet by Anna Hebda. The material is a kind of a crib, the conclusions of a cultural magazine readership survey conducted among the students of humanistic faculties. The survey was prepared and carried out by the members of the Warsaw University Journalism Institute Scientific Group and the “Otwarty Kod Kultury Foundation” (The Open Source Culture Foundation). The report is due in June 2008, and I'm looking forward to it. However, even today, after reading the text by Hebda, it seems that the intuitive pondering from the beginning of the 100th “artPAPIER” review is not only a fabricated grumble by Grzegorz Wysocki. It seems to be the true sorrowful depiction of the 'popularity' the cultural magazines enjoy among the future intellectual elite of our country.
Hebda emphasizes the fact, that the outcome of this survey is no basis for any generalization. It is however an expressive diagnosis. According to the survey participants, a cultural magazine does not have to be a separate press genre. It can be a socio-political magazine or a daily newspaper supplement. Among the 15 most popular cultural magazines, we can find such publications as: “Activist”, “WiK”, “Wysokie Obcasy” or “Polityka”. We seem to lack only “Playboy”, “Zwierciadło” and “Cogito” where we surely can find some culture. In the case of the studies as the one by Hebda, I am particularly interested in the real picture of the readership among students – do they really read the magazines listed by themselves, do they remember the texts and appreciate the authors, or do they just quote some titles that they've remembered form some lectures? Hebda arises several interesting questions in her text: “Can a cultural magazine implement any exceptional tasks and satisfy needs that other media can't? Can a young reader find in cultural magazines anything that does not exist in other places of the media world? Maybe, paradoxically, the great number of cultural magazines on the market weakens (surely not strengthens) their accessibility?”. Hebda also ascertains that (nowadays) not many people nowadays can afford (to) reaching at least 10% out of the hundreds of cultural magazines that exist on the market (thus extended biographical notes become more important).
I was shocked by the further outcomes of the survey. It shows that 66% of the polled look for information in cultural magazines. 61% search for curiosities. “Aesthetic experiences and theoretical knowledge came at the end of the list”. It seems that young humanists are satisfied with the daily press and maybe a supplement of opinion making magazines, or a permanent Internet access. Since they search cultural magazines for curiosities, maybe they should rather try tabloids, gossip portals, or information from a loose-leaf calendar instead of getting tired while looking for them in cultural magazines? On the other hand, if young humanists consider “Activist” a cultural magazine, they probably won't be interested in an essay by Andrzej Niewiadomski on Iwaszkiewicz's poetry from the March issue of “Twórczość” (“Writings”). (And now I feel uneasy because yesterday I read this essay to entertain myself on a train. Maybe I should change for the modest review section or a Shuty’s column in the “Activist”, as befits a young humanist?).
The students of humanistic faculties are interested mostly in information. Therefore, the information 'what, where and when' are especially important – in order to have fun and show off. And since these activities are rather time consuming, there's no more time nor will to thoroughly study cultural publications. If I understand the results of the study correctly, the 'Co jest grane' ('What's On?') – a supplement to the Friday's “Gazeta Wyborcza” (one of the most popular dailies in Poland – translator’s note) is mostly desired reading by students of Polish studies and young philosophers – rather than “Czas Kultury” or “Lampa” (“Lamp”). I wouldn't rampage here if this was a study carried out among vocational schools students (though seeing them arguing – who's a better writer, Pilch or Baczewski!? – would be beautiful) instead of students of humanistic faculties who are supposed to create the intellectual elite of our country (right now I'm not sure if they will). I'm not writing because I've read an essay on Iwaszkiewicz and want to boas of how cool and cultural I am. I'm writing this because I'm afraid of being classified as an idiot because of my predilections for literature. And I'd really like to see the days when other young humanists would laugh at me because I keep reading so light texts as the one by Niewiadomski while they read only “Teksty Drugie” (“Second Texts”) and “Pamiętnik Literacki” (“Literary Memoir”), and just to relax.
More details and open questions can be found in Hebda's text, though reading it is really depressing. I'm afraid that reading the whole report might make me suffer from a serious depression. Therefore I'm not so sure if longing for June is reasonable. But surely longing for the next web issues of the “artPAPIER” is (every 1st and 15th of each month). The 100th issue of the “artPAPIER” proves it is a very interesting magazine. While you read the above mentioned articles, and not only them – I've mentioned only some articles from the anniversary issue – but also an essay by Inga Iwasiów on lesbian prose, an interview with Taras Prochaśko, reviews by Przemysław Czapliński and Tomasz Mizerkiewicz, texts on technohorrors, on YouTube, on hypertext novels, digital poetry and movies with journalists in leading parts – you cannot disagree with the participants of the editorial debate and their opinion, that an Internet magazine may well be of the same quality as a paper magazine (and sometimes even better). If only young humanists left the “Activist” for “artPAPIER”, then it would be something...
Grzegorz Wysocki
Translated by Agnieszka Wąsowska
Discussed journals: artPAPIER