The Romanian revolution had a really strong impact on Hungarian society, it was very emotional, because there is a Hungarian minority in Romania, and they were repressed in many ways during the long Ceaușescu dictatorship, it was a very sensitive issue in our country. And this Romanian revolution had a very strange presence on television because the revolutionaries from Bucharest went to the Tv, occupied the studio, but they couldn’t be sure that it’s really going to be broadcasted. You can stop Tv broadcasting easily, just by turning off some switches, or blowing up a transmitter station. In this situation the Hungarian state decided to rebroadcast the revolutionary Tv program, and this could be received in Romania, especially in the ethnic Hungarian territories, and you could watch it on the Hungarian Tv program too. It was the most bizzare Tv broadcast ever.
Can we start in the late 80’s when you were in a connection with people with whom you started one of the first intermedia departments at the Budapest Art Academy?1. You worked with Miklós Peternák for some time. There was a kind of a demand from the students of the Art Academy to depart the tradition of the school and to introduce new things. About that same time there was also a conference organized around the role of television in revolution in Romania. Can you say something about the situation around that time and what led to the foundation of the intermedia department at school?
With Miklós Peternák, and not just with him, we share a common basis. This reaches back to Miklós Erdély. When speaking about progressive or avant-garde or unofficial art of the late 20th century in Hungary, we have to mention him. Miklós Erdély (1928-1986) was a very important artist working in many fields. He inspired many, but for ten years, from the early 70's, he was banned. Probably because he had such an influential position. Originally he wanted to become a film director, but he was kicked out from the Film and Theatre Academy - but actually I don’t want to tell his biography here. In the early 70’s there was a sort of hardening in the so-called "cultural policy" in Hungary. A couple of years before, in the late 60’s the Party prepared a cautious reform which was called New economic mechanism2 and it was widely advertised in many different ways, actually quite smart. There was even a cartoon series on state TV where a little professor explained what the New Economic Mechanism should mean. It wasn’t about ideology or culture, just about the economy, and how socialist economy could be working a bit better.
After the Russia invaded Czechoslovakia on 21th of August 1968, and after suppressing of Prague Spring, a conservative turn happened in Hungarian inner politics, and they stopped the processes of reforms. The system became a bit more rigid, not just in the economic sense but in the everyday sense, including the field of culture. This led in the early 70's towards a wave of emigration among promising progressive artists, who were active in the unofficial scene. There were some cases of forced emigration too, one morning the police came and gave you a one way passport just to leave the country. Anyway, central figures of the unofficial art scene disappeared, friends and people around Miklós Erdély, he worked with, emigrated. He made a chart3 about this period which was rather difficult for him.
Miklós Erdély was, let’s say, a conceptual artist, but he was a good writer, poet, visual artist, and he also made experimental films in the Béla Balázs Studio. In 1959 established Béla Balázs Studio (BBS)4 was originally for the young university degree filmmakers, a self-governing body with a six years of membership. Money came from the state, the budget of an average Hungarian feature film, and - which was very important - the BBS did not have a "presentation duty", which practically ment that if a BBS film was censored it did not influence the next year's budget. It was a unique institution, and the BBS became internationally known. Young filmmakers could make their debut - short film or a documentary. The BBS had a board of five persons elected from and by the members every three years. This functioned quite well, and because the board has been changing all the time, new people were coming with new ideas. Gábor Bódy was also a board member for a certain period in the early 70ies, and invited outsiders like musicians or visual artists to make a small budget, experimental films. Miklós Erdély had also the opportunity to shoot four films there between 1974 and 1985. For me it was very inspirative his concept of "cognitive film".
Around 1976 he started a course in creativity, at the Culture House, which belonged to one of the biggest factories in Budapest. There were also other courses. It started in 1976 and throughout the years people who visited this course stayed somehow together. Around the end of 70’s the group became a bit smaller and focusing on visual arts and this became the Indigo group – Interdisciplinary Thinking.
I became a member of the group in 1979 the same time when I started my studies at the Art Academy in Budapest. The Indigo group was the place where I met Miklós Peternák in the early 80’s. Miklós Erdély was the head of the group and always advised us to go to the Béla Balázs Studio, to watch films, to make proposals and work there with film. Most of the people in the group were students from different universities, some of us were art students in their first years of study. Later some of us were kicked out from the Art Academy at different times, and for different reasons. For me it wasn’t really bad because when I already left the Academy and started immediately to do things, films, exhibitions in the unofficial scene.
In those years I organized a regular event with two close friends of mine, I called it Fast Culture5 and somehow we were abusing the form of the official "free university" lectures of that time. In Budapest there was so-called “free university” with a very boring set of mainstream courses, basically about everything: popular science, household, foreign languages. The funniest courses were when someone, like a popular writer or someone who was allowed to travel, made some slides and then he or she gave a lecture about Italy, Rome, Cairo, Egypt etc. During the Fast Culture Lecture, (the first was in 1984), we sat on a small stage and we started to talk. We weren’t prepared at all, but we were three very close friends, we saw each other practically every day, so we were in a continuous conversation, like young activists. Many times I have had the experience that we have good conversations, and I just wanted to try to change the context-backdrop, how interesting could it be if it wasn’t just us but let's say a radio broadcast, or a public lecture. We always gave very exciting titles, and we went there and started to talk to each other, but as I told you we were in very steady conversation, so even if we wouldn’t be there we would probably sit somewhere and have a conversation. So this was the idea and this was the Fast Culture.
Did you also refer to the people in the audience?
If they wanted they could ask questions and make remarks. I always made some stage-design, an installation behind us. But anyway it’s a different story, I just mentioned it because a few years later I met Miklós Peternák on the street and when I asked him where he was going to, he said that he had a lecture series on film exactly at the Free University we did every year the Fast Culture. Miklós Peternák had children and family so he had to make some money and he did these lecture series. He asked me on the street if I would like to join him because otherwise it would be so boring. And I said "ok, I have time".
We started to do this together, after the screenings we had a lecture-conversation. If you were doing a lecture series there, you could ask the Hungarian Film Archive for whatever film you wanted. So if you wanted to see a certain film you could just ask for it. We enjoyed this very much. Later we called this the Alternative Film School. It was about 1987. The Alternative Film School followed the university semesters and every second week we had a gig there. We were usually showing one film with some talk after, but we always tried something unusual, like we showed the movie but changed the order of reels. A feature film consists of at least four or five reels. We mixed the order, once we would show just the soundtrack of a movie, this was also an interesting experience, in a screening situation to give just a sound, and the image to everyone's own imagination. We had a very small group of sympathizers, it wasn’t incredibly popular. For most of the people it was like a custom to go there, some people sleeping - ladies were knitting. But there was a small group of younger people who really followed us. Working with moving image was the most exciting way of expression of that time, that’s why we gave this name - Alternative Film School - because we really wanted to give an opportunity to treat/discuss film making in a different way. During that period we did another series called Film Utopias. It was in a different place, it was much more arty situation – in the Kunsthalle Műcsarnok. They had a lecture hall and once a month we did a sort of well prepared, very special event which was more kind of a media performance than a lecture.
Once there were “told films“ when people were telling the plot of a film. I did some interviews where I asked friends to retell one of their favorite movies. Then we did another gig, a lecture on closed circuit, and we were sitting outside the building, the audience was inside, and through the closed circuit video we saw the audience and the audience saw us during the lecture.
Every Tuesday was a regular meeting in the Béla Balázs Studio with screenings and discussions. The discussions were pretty serious because it was about money, to let this or that person do a certain film, or at a later production phase to allow a certain film to have a final print. Final print in celluloid film means that the sound and the image are on the same filmstrip. I became a member of the BBS in 1985, and when I did these Fast Culture performances I made my first 16mm film, Persian Walk. The BBS didn’t allow me to make the final print, I mean they hated my film and that’s why I couldn’t make any further films for a few years. But this is another story.
It was the late 80’s when we did these lecture series. Absolutely unexpectedly in 1990 I was voted into the board of the BBS, which was a total surprise, because I was a visual artist, plus interested in experimental films - which was not general in the BBS. I did it for five years, two terms which was also unusual before. I made some more films and videos there. And being a board member meant that I had a certain influence on spending, not that much, I couldn’t decide all by myself, but some influence.
From the mid 80’s on a slow process of liberalization went on in Hungary, you could really feel the spirit of freedom. The whole society was activated in many ways, in a very good sense, and around the end of the 80’s it was obvious for everybody that the one party state will be over. At this time the students at the Art Academy broke out a revolt, because they didn’t want to accept that the whole country is in a reform movement and the Art Academy is not changing, and remains the same conservative place. There were at that time two university level art educational institutions in Hungary - the Academy of Applied Arts and the Academy of Fine Arts. There was a very strict admission exam and most of the students including me tried to get into the Academy at least two or three times. It was a closed off institution in every sense, its structure was very traditional – sculpture, painting, graphic art, restoration, nothing else. At the end of 1989 the students made a revolt, and at the end they succeeded, the old rector resigned, and the school invited about twelve new teachers.
Is it a lot?
It’s a lot, because it was a relatively small institution, with, I guess, hundred students. Those invited artists were part of the unofficial art scene, the creme – mainly the generation which started late 60’s and was censored in the later period. And somehow Miklós Peternák’s and my name appeared at the end of this list, because we were the only ones who could bring in the so-called new media, like photography, film, computer, and media theory. We decided not to join any existing faculty, we started to act as a new faculty, Intermedia. It wasn’t easy, but somehow the Art Academy accepted this idea, and in the following three years we did all the necessary paperwork for the official establishment of a new university faculty. Anyway we made it, and the Intermedia officially exists since 1993, from the year we have had our own admission exams and first regular students.
The Romanian revolution had a really strong impact on Hungarian society, it was very emotional, because there is a Hungarian minority in Romania, and they were repressed in many ways during the long Ceaușescu dictatorship, it was a very sensitive issue in our country. And this Romanian revolution had a very strange presence on television because the revolutionaries from Bucharest went to the Tv, occupied the studio, but they couldn’t be sure that it’s really going to be broadcasted. You can stop Tv broadcasting easily, just by turning off some switches, or blowing up a transmitter station. In this situation the Hungarian state decided to rebroadcast the revolutionary Tv program, and this could be received in Romania, especially in the ethnic Hungarian territories, and you could watch it on the Hungarian Tv program too. It was the most bizzare Tv broadcast ever. On one hand it was a real historical moment with no doubts, it was not a soap-opera or a reality show, it was totally real. and it was completely absurd, it was a continuous improvisation, and the main message - toppling ther regime - was articulated in many different ways. It was like a creativity course in front of running Tv cameras. It was really fantastic. I watched it, and recorded, I used all of my VHS tapes, and since in Romania there was the SECAM system, in Hungary there was the PAL system, in some moments you could see totally strange colors. The other thing was that since Hungarian Tv re-broadcasted this, they had to invite translators, and other people into the studio in a hurry to explain and translate certain things. In one part of the screen you could see the broadcast of the revolution (moving, waving people, shouting their messages, flags and so on), and the Hungarian commentators sitting in a improvised studio corner trying to understand and translate everything. So it was a very intensive experience.
That’s why we thought it’s really worthwhile to do an investigation into an absolutely current historical event from the point of using the medium of television. It was also a novelty in Hungary to organize a conference from below. The organizers were Keiko Sei, Suzanne Meszoly, Miklós Peternák and myself.The conference on this media-historical event called The Media Were With Us, and it was held in April of 1990. It was supported partly by Soros Foundation, some private people, and by the Béla Balázs Studio, because as a board member I considered it as an important event in which we had to put some money. This was mainly my role, and for my colleagues in the board it was not so obvious that the studio should support such an event. Just in the very middle of democratic transitions in East Europe all the speakers and intellectuals came to this conference with pleasure, and really enjoyed being there together. A lot of international and professional contacts and friendships were established there. This was the time when me, Miklós Peternák and some other people of the Indigo group established the Media Research Foundation.6
Couldn’t you represent the Art Academy?
The Art Academy wasn’t an option, because we were just some unwelcome newcomers there, and the other question was also “should I represent a state institution?”. Not to mention, that time everybody enjoyed the freedom to establish some legal body, mainly a foundation, or association. So this was the birth of the Media Research Foundation.
In 1993 Geert Lovink invited me to Amsterdam to attend the first Doors of Perception conference. There were many interesting presentations and lectures. It was a fantastic experience. This was the time when the Wired started, there was a stock of I suppose Wired’s third issue. During the conference with Geert Lovink we decided to do something in Budapest, and in the years 1994, 1995, 1996 we organized MetaForum conferences with him and Diana McCarty.
Can you speak about the situation in Budapest like what kind of people you were in contact with, what were discussions like, what kind of books were read in the mid 90’s? What was the atmosphere like? Did you feel like a pioneer?
Somewhere between 1987 and 1995 was the best atmosphere ever, because there was euphoria and enthusiasm in the air. Everyone was enjoying the freedom, intellectuals started to translate and publish books. It was a fantastic workaholic time with parties. Every week some new pub was opened. It was a really exciting time. Lots of foreigners were coming there. In a certain sense it lasted till the mid 90’s.
Let me mention something which is less known. The decisive role of Dutch activists played in the democratic transition of East Europe, from pirate radio to IT technologies, Geert was one of them, but I met a few of them during the organizing MetaForum. In one of your emails you asked about Swap philosophical samizdat. It was made by Talán Sebeö, who graduated in philosophy, esthetics and biology. The name is in Hungarian Csere, which is Swap in English, Austausch in German. It had eleven issues between 1983 and 88, A/4 xerox copies, texts and drawings, always 40 pages (the number of characters in the Hungarian alphabet), with a special cover, I made two of them. As I told you, we did the Fast Culture series in three, with two close friends of mine, and he was one of them. It was this very close intellectual - activist friendship, in those years we three spent practically all of our free time together.
From the mid 80’s Talán Sebeö organized certain events which he called swap-series. They were very intellectual and sometimes very absurd lectures but in a very open-minded way - like the texts in Csere. He had an enormous ability to speed up people, and inspiring young people toward intellectual directions. Most of the participants were just average young people, so probably it was their first time to hear about philosophical concepts and things like this. For him it was a very important reference point for the famous Hungarian punk group, Vágtázó halottkémek / Galopping Coroners7 - that’s why he called himself a punk philosopher. In the 90's Talán Sebeö started the group 32ers, which was a section in a (classified) ad-newspaper, the so-called "Forum of Readers' '. Before 1989 even the classified ads were censored, you cannot advertise certain things, but in the late 80’s this censorship was canceled, and a guy from Berlin came to Budapest and established the first newspaper just for advertisements. It was coming out four times a week and became very popular. The section 32 was the section for personal messages, and my dear friend took it over, and under different pseudonyms he started to publish absolutely nonsensical messages. After a while a big community, the 32ers grew out, they published in every issue an enormous amount of short cryptic messages, reactions, jokes on pseudonyms, they communicate just on these pages. It was really like a model of the internet where people communicate but eventually don’t know or see each other in person at all.
In the late 80’s you were organizing these lectures with Miklós Peternák, then you stopped. Meantime, in the early 90’s beside being active at the Academy and organizing this Romanian Tv conference and Metaforum were you publicly active? And in what way? Were you also doing installations or something?
I was active in the Béla Balázs Studio as a “no budget” producer because this was the task of the board members. We moved our studios and offices to a cinema in the center of the city and we were the first art institution which moved into the cinema. We splitted the screening room to make two of them, a small one and a bigger one, and we also installed a café and a bookstore there. We opened it in 1993 with the first gay and lesbian film festival, which we organized with Adele Eisenstein. She’s American but has lived in Budapest for years and worked in the Béla Balázs Studio as an foreign correspondent.
I was teaching in the Intermedia of course, and ran Media Research, organized the Metaforum, but in meantime I was also active as an artist. In 1992 I was invited to Documenta IX, and I was exhibiting in Hungary and abroad, and I made some media-art pieces as well. It’s hard to believe that it was such a busy time and I didn’t feel it that busy at all, it was normal for me. Beside all, here and there I published texts, and believe me, there was still time for parties.
Can we go back to the Metaforum conference?
Yes, there were three of them. It was very hard to organize, because conscious sponsorship didn’t exist in Hungary at that time. Most of the people didn’t really understand what we offer. During the organizational periods we systematically approached all the players in the field. We had lots of contacts from cyber punks, sysops, fans of William Gibson, people translating softwares, but even with state agencies and company leaders. If we learned that someone could be interesting for us we made a phone call and went to visit him or her. Once we even visited the police headquarters because we found out that there was a group producing CD-roms. They were so happy that we visited them that we had a long conversation, and later I invited the guy, who was a head of the group to teach at the Intermedia.
We were doing it for three years, till 1996. Because we were always cooperating with the Budapest Autumn Festival we had to do the conference in October. That’s why we had to work throughout the summer. It was quite serious organizational work to visit everyone, write letters, get sponsorship, speak to hotels, interpreters and so on. The financial part was also a bit problematic. Actually, we didn’t lose any money but there were some moments when we thought we would. At some point I had to put my own money into it just to let it run, but later I was given the money back
In spring 1995 with Geert and with others we even wanted to create a Hungarian public access provider, taking xs4all as a blueprint, and with those contacts I mentioned we could easily invite and collect people who liked the idea and who would work for it. So it was a kind of IT underground, from activists, researchers, sysops, hackers to cyberpunks. We were seriously working on this, but in the meantime the Hungarian Telecom had a very short sighted strategy not to invest in users and in content production, but buying up content and expertise for themselves. This killed the grassroot element of IT culture. The Soros Foundation had an internet or IT office too, with Diana we visited them while we were preparing the first MetaForum conference, bored they were so bored and uninterested, like we wanted to steal their jobs, so they weren’t cooperative at all. A year later Suzanne Meszoly, who was the head of The Soros Foundation Contemporary Art Centre, took it over, when she made a deal with Hungarian Telecom, and she could have Silicon Graphics as a partner and then they created the C3. This was the birth of C3. Since the Silicon Graphics bankrupted, Soros Foundation stopped supporting C3.
Anyway, after three years we wrote a statement with Diana – MetaForum Bueno Bye (Diana is from New Mexico and she said that this is a sort of funny slang instead of goodbye), and we closed off the MetaForum series. I personally thought that if we were doing it for three years and couldn’t have any easier organizational position there is no reason to do it further. Somehow it didn't hit the stimulation threshold of the Hungarian IT sector, there were practically no reactions, we got positive feedback just from the participants. More foreigners were in our audience than Hungarians, although there was simultaneous translation, btw what is rather expensive. Plus, as a visual artist I know that the form is also very important, and this was the form - MetaForum I, II, III and then we closed it. If I look at it from an extremely egoistic point of view, it was the best investment – I did not move, but lots of inspiring people came to Budapest. This experience of synchrony, that for a moment we were running parallel to explore and analyze new things, was fantastic.
We went further with the Media Research Foundation, we had some new ideas. Two books were published as a result of the MetaForum conference series. The first one was the Buldozer in Hungarian, a reader on media theory, based mainly on MetaForum conference texts. The printing was paid by Hungarian Telecom, that's why we could set a low price, it became rather popular, it was on a toplist for a while, plus we gave it for free to the students of intermedia. Then we prepared the second volume, because we had texts, the rights, except translation and printing, but the Hungarian Telecom didn’t support it again.
Was the second part supposed to be about the same time?
The first was published in 1997 and we planned to publish the second volume in 1998. we were in very close connection with Nettime so most of the texts were from there. The other publication we made was a bilingual booklet in 2000, the Digital Identities, edited and partly written by Felix Stalder, supported by the Pro Helvetia Foundation. Then I edited a reader, Hypertext + Multimédia2 for the Artpool, I wrote just the preface and notes. This was the first publications in Hungarian of Vannevar Bush, Ted Nelson, Landow, Xanadu, Engelbart.
I saw a couple of texts written by Hungarians. Can you talk briefly about them? What do they do?
Atilla Kotányi8 (1924 - 2003). He had an interesting career, the family sent him to a military school, but he couldn't be an officer, because of a jewish grandmother, and this saved him later from the front, where most of his classmates died. He studied architecture, and after the war he became involved with that philosophical circle which became from 1949 absolutely banned by the communists, the Budapest Dialogical School.9 In 1956 he followed his master Lajos Szabó, and emigrated. This emigration, with family, kids, was not easy, they went to Belgium, he graduated in urbanism, and in 1960 he got into Paris, where he became friends with Guy Debord, and he became one of the editors of Situationist International. In the early 70’s Guy Debord kicked him out, like many others. Then his life became a little bit more normal, he ended up in Germany, in Düsseldorf and started to teach philosophy at the Art Academy so he was a colleague of Joseph Beuys. One of his closest friends was German philosopher living in Berlin Hannes Böhringer.
Gábor Bora (1957) He is my contemporary. He studied at university in Budapest and then moved to Sweden, since then he has been teaching philosophy at Uppsala University. He’s a very good writer. If he doesn’t write pure theory, he’s used to write somewhere between literature and philosophy.
Alpár Losoncz (1958) He is a Hungarian philosopher, professor, living close to the Hungarian border in Serbia, an expert of the postmodern theory.
Is there any media theory coming from Eastern Europe? Because I had a couple of references to Russian writers, cyber feminists like Ala Mitrofanova, Olga Suslova, then there is one person in ? coming from a cinema or a film theory background. But here it’s interesting that people writing about the media come from philosophical backgrounds. There is Vilém Flusser but he spent most of his life in Germany or Brazil.
I don’t know if a special East European media theory exists, there are of course important authors, but I don’t know if we can speak about it as a separate movement. So the media theory is something which has to have a certain freedom which deals with the present, criticizes, extrapolates, and brings associations, a bit less scientific and a bit more science-fiction. There are fresh developments and people try to critically analyze it. Media theory is a critical position because if we can get a new gear, the critical aspect is absolutely repressed by curiosity - we really forget to be critical. Nowadays we are a bit more critical, because we ask already for example where those rare earth elements (REE) coming from to this screen, etc.
Because of the MetaForum I met the Autonomedia people in New York and we started to talk about publishing some Hungarian media theory in English. With Geert and Diana we put together a proposal and I went to the state cultural agency, which already supported the MetaForum, we needed for the costs 5000 US dollars, but they didn’t see the opportunity in such a publication, which could have been serve as a start, and opening further doors, and this is the sad part of the whole story. So it was a bad experience.
This makes me think of Nettime. There were or probably still are sort of national or language based lists. Is there something similar in Hungary?
No, we were thinking about this but we couldn't really have a group of voluntiers around MetaForum who besides sympathy could provide some work, not for us but for the cause, like writing or publishing.
My last question would be whether you find the term media art useful for any specifical things? Do you work with the term?
The American theorist Benjamin Buchloh wrote 10 that conceptual art existed till 1969 and since then all of its results and attitudes influenced all other genres. My position in media art is similar. Media consciousness is our way of being, or more and more an obligatory way of living. All of the art which is produced nowadays or in the late 20th century can be interpreted, analyzed from the point of medium. That’s why most of the media artworks can be seen as conceptual art works too. It might be a website, a media installation, a sensor, a camera, a screen or a projection, but the way how it communicates with the audience is exactly how conceptual art does.
There is a strong pressure from the corporate side, those companies which are producing new IT tools must have an immediate success in the sense of profit, and they need the popularization of their products. You can remember when broadband and the first mobile devices appeared, there were some projects supported by telekoms, projects like we are traveling and every second day we send a message - artist can perfectly function as early adopters. This is what I call "Media Art 1.0" . I am little bit critical to this. I think tactical media was a kind of response to this situation. In the avant garde art throughout the 20th century the most important artists and movements were known about their unorthodox approach to their chosen medium, from painting to poetry, in the early media art, Nam June Paik and others acted as the bad boys - what would happen if we put a magnet on a top of a Tv set? And the incredible speed of research and development of new tools and features, the commercial production and marketing meets with this inherently subversive approach of avant garde art. The manufacturer’s interest is to have a crash test, and artists are the best crash testers because they don’t have a problem to shit on the boundaries, to shit on the rules, while they can do something new.
From the 19th century with an increasing speed we have fantastic tools, communication devices, which is fantastic, but it made for us the completely false belief, that we can solve all the problems, and this led to several tragedies in the 20th century. The proper function of media theory is to be critical toward the newest, analyzing them from the point of tactical. That’s why media theory is closer to science-fiction.
Recorded in JS's studio in Budapest on September 17th, 2010, Edited in 2024.
1. https://intermedia.c3.hu/
2. https://mke.hu/intermedia_department/index.php
3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Economic_Mechanism
4. The Proportionment of Ideas and Their Realisation (b/w, A/4, ink drawing, 1979)
5. https://www.nga.gov/features/experimental-cinema-in-eastern-europe/balaz...
6. https://casestudiesforeducationalturn.blog.hu/2011/05/25/fast_culture_ko...
8. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galloping_Coroners
9. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attila_Kot%C3%A1nyi
10. https://www.lajosszabo.com/BPDISKANG.html
11. From the Aesthetics of Administration to the Critique of Institutions, 1989