Cyfrowa Etnografia

4c31e6bebd0058bf3b28d06c3647dba8.pdf

Media

Part of The Anthropology of Culture in Poland / LUD 1995 t.79

extracted text

Lud,

CZESŁAW

Institute
Jagiellonian

vol. 79, 1995

ROBOTYCKI

of Ethnology
University

Cracow

THE ANTHROPOLOGY
OF CULTURE
A FINISHED PROJECT

TN POLAND.

In 1980 a group of ethnographers published a collection of their postulates
in "Polska Sztuka Ludowa" ["Polish Folk Art"]. They proposed a different
approach to ethnography. The reaction of the community of ethnographers
was one of disbelief. However, Aleksander Jackowski "Jacek", editor-in-chief of
"Polska Sztuka Ludowa", continued to publish this group's articles and
supported its "manifesto" (Benedyktowicz, Robotycki, Stomma, Tomicki,
Wasilewsk i, 1980 - 1981).
The main point of the manifesto is that there is no science of culture when
the scope of research is restricted or anachronistic methods are employed
which, in the opinion of the group, was the case with Polish ethnography.
Consequently, ethnography must attempt to evaluate its own research potential, and use a new methodology. Furthermore, those who want to address the
problems of complex modern culture must additionally face the task of defining
new research problems, methods and ways qf interpretation. The explanatory
power of the paradigm of traditional folk culture has been exhausted and the
prospects of anthropology as reinterpretation
have appeared.
The manifesto of the group (known in the community as "them") was
supported by a few articles in which they substantiated their postulates
(Benedyktowicz, 1980; Robotycki, 1980; Stomma, 1976; 1978-1979; 1979;
Tomieki, 1975; 1976; Wasilewski, 1979a; 1979b). The manifesto was like
a working dictionary of concepts and authors to which its signatories referred
most often.
The group organized many field investigations, meetings, discussions and
conferences. Organized and conducted without any set patterns and pomp,
often entertaining, the meetings attracted new participants, ambitious students
and interested people from outside the community of ethnographers. This
pattern itself became a target of criticism but the real value of such meetings
and there were many of them were hardly noticed.
After 1980 new texts appeared, first in "Polska Sztuka Ludowa", then
books, which addressed three types of problems: the analysis and evaluation

70
of ethnographic discourse to date, the evaluation of broadly understood
ethnographic practice and interpretations
which expounded cultural sense,
meanings and mythical constructions of collective ideas (see: bibliography).
The anthropological option in Polish ethnography has been developing for
at least fifteen years. Today, it is an accepted mode of interpretation. It is not
a methodological phenomenon which is likely to soon disappear.
Anthropological proposals to change the models of interpretation relate to
many important issues: the scope of research, proper methods, the ontological
status of culture, the scholar's place, the levels of explanation, competence,
languages and the modes of expression. Adoption of one solution with respect
to any of the above issues requires consistent transformation of other elements
of the interpretive system. Therefore, in the subsequent discussion of the
achievements and further options of anthropology in Poland, a logicalorder
has been adopted.
Anthropological
interpretation developed in Polish ethnography as independent research options. This was possible because different theoretical
ideas appeared at the same time, which made it possible to look at culture from
different points of view. The question about the essence of culture and methods
of its investigations undermined the realistic model of science. In the realistic
model the essence of culture was often looked for outside of culture, for
example in economic or social sciences.
Anthropology used different methods to interpret culture. It recognized the
semiotic, polysemic and communicative character of culture. It imposed
a methodological postulate of a systematic approach to culture. It became
necessary to look for the internal rules of culture and more general patterns at
a different level to be able to interpret culture (Buchowski, 1986; Robotycki,
1992a; Stomma, 1979; 1981; 1986; Węglarz, 1991).
Other aspects and other possibilities were offered by hermeneutic approaches which stressed the research of symbols and world-views emphasizing
the mythical-ritual character of culture (Benedyktowicz, 1980; 1988a; Czaja,
1993; Michera, 1991; 1994a). Other aspects that were interpreted by the
researchers included the entanglement of norms and attitudes connected with
one's outlook on life (Tornicki, 1977; Robotycki, 1980) and the cosmological-ritual vision of the world (Tornicki, 1975; 1976; 1979). Often the same
problem was analyzed from different points of view. For example, the
categories of homeliness and strangeness were analyzed from the phenomenological (Benedyktowicz, 1987) and structural (Stomma, 1986; Węglarz, 1994)
points of view.
The works, mentioned here as examples of permanent tendencies in
research procedures, finally overcame the old paradigms. The actual use of new
methods helped make the Polish science of culture more dynamic. Good
knowledge of original works by authors of new trends in world ethnology

71

and ethnography is the basis for positive research alternatives and criticism of
Polish achievements (Piątkowski, 1985; Stomma, 1989).
Polish anthropologists, following the directions of change and tendencies in
contemporary science, realized that their interests and disputes were only one
version of disputes arising on a wider scale (Robotycki, Węglarz, 1983). They
were familiar with discussions about the new scope and possibilities of
anthropology (Burszta, 1992b; Kaniowska, 1985; 1991; Tokarska- Bakir, 1990).
They were interested in problems bordering ethnology and linguistics (Burszta,
1986), ethnology and semiotics (Piątkowski, 1993) and ethnology and art
(Piątkowska, 1994; Robotycki, 1992). They studied more general ontological
and epistemological problems pertaining to culture (Barański, 1992a; Buchowski, 1990; Burszta, 1992a; Kaniowska, 1994).
On the other hand, the criticism of Polish achievements helped give shape
to independent interpretive ideas, helped recall Polish authors with a precursory thinking and in this way differentiated Polish anthropology. This proved
to be very significant as Polish problems have different contexts. It deals with
a different culture; even today it claims to deal with national culture. It must
also take a stand towards basic methodological problem: the usefulness of the
so-called peasant model of traditional culture to interpretation. All these facts
undoubtedly define the Polish character of a Polish anthropology of culture.
How then is Polish ethnography evaluated by authors belonging to the
anthropological trend? First of all, they say that practically all scholars dealing
with folk culture and the culture of the folk type (the concept proposed by L.
Stomma) were "brought up" in the ethnographic tradition and they continue to
research culture in this tradition. For those scholars the concept of "traditional
peasant culture" by definition belongs to ethnography, performing there
a paradigmatic role. The model and modelling character of this notion,
belonging to the metadescription of culture, generates other texts which belong
to the same canon. And this does not pertain to "academic ethnography" alone.
Ethnography also comprises amateur texts, museums and folkloric reconstructions. It easily settles into an apocryphallayer
of culture and is perceived as
such by society. This perception is facilitated by culture itself because it speaks
many languages. This perception is also facilitated by the way in which folk
culture is popularized in Poland.
Examples of apocryphal texts include many old and modern descriptions of
regional culture written by various scholars. Their texts are the result of the
authors fascination with distinct local characters. They were and are written
spontaneously, without any theoretical background except for fragments of
explanatory systems, which often originated at different times and in different
branches of science. Among modern works the traditional model of folk culture
is the theoretical foundation that is used most often; practically these works are
based on the "folklorized" versions of the model.

72

An ethnographic museum is also, like science, a metatext of culture. Its
exhibitions belong to its canon and a historical look at the essence of the
museum and the analysis of its functions tell us that we once as creators of
museums, today as experts in museum management, are consciously or
subconsciously guided by and use, a collection of theoretical judgements. These
judgements concern both the scope and nature of cultural reality and how we
evaluate the choices and customs of "the other".
The way a museum is perceived by the society and scholars is not
indifferent to visual representations
of ethnography. The exhibitions help
popularize knowledge about culture. When popularized, the knowledge undergoes hypostasis. A statement about reality is taken as reality. Hence, the cliche
question about the role of cultural context ceases to be a cliche question when
it comes to museum reconstruction and presentation of cultural phenomena.
What becomes important is the scale of the context, its relation to the main
exhibit, as well as its legibility and intelligibility.
From the point of view which differentiates between high and low culture, it
is art museums which collect masterpieces that fit the canon and which reject
works that do not fit the canon (daub, trash). Should, then, ethnographic
museums which deal in the apocryphal layer of culture, collecting objects
which are often a replica, a cultural reject, a daub, trash, adopt a different point
of view? This is what is happening. By adopting the autnomy of folk and
community cultures, a canon of folk culture can be established. A museum, the
metatext sphere, creates such a canon. The traditional peasant culture remains
such a canon in Polish museums.
Museum exhibitions rarely take account of the fact that subcultures are in
continuous dialogue. This metaphor should reflect the essence of the internal,
communicational mechanism of culture. This dialogue is a permanent relation
of exchange, transformation, circulation of ideas, meanings, symbols, objects,
etc. The same meanings can occur in different forms, simplifications, transpositions, variants, and options.
The scope and possibilities of dialogue are determined by the competence of
its participants - the users of culture. They use a complete code (which means
complete knowledge of rules and linguistic and cultural meanings) or a limited
code (in which the linguistic scope and semantic knowledge are fragmentary
and perception of reality is stereotypical). This nature of cultural communication poses new questions: what reality are we dealing with?, with whom
is the museum holding the dialogue and what dialogue is it?, who is the
recipient of this dialogue?, what kind of response of the recipient is expected?
These are important questions because modern culture is returning to forms of
pictorial communication, described by G. Vico, in which a picture is first,
followed by articulation and interpretation.
The above problems are issues which resulted from the anthropological

73
look at culture. Their solution belongs to anthropology. They answer questions
pertaining to, firstly, the ontology of culture (how does culture exist), secondly,
epistemology which analyzes processes of transfer, consciousness and competence, and thirdly, axiology when criteria are determined, choices made and
evaluated (see: "Warsztaty Etnograficzne" ["Ethnographic workshops"], 1991).
Similar issues pertain to folklore as one element of national culture.
Folklore based on the old folk culture is an element that has disappeared from
the universe of Polish culture. Under the influence of social processes helping
to balance differences and create new, different layers of culture, folklore has
undergone many changes and transformations.
Attempts at delaying this
process are made by ethnographers and regionalists, convinced about the
educational and aesthetic values of the old cultural sequences. They do this by
reaching amateur, spontaneously formed groups or by acting as instructors
working at the commission of institutions and patrons.
Instructors of folkloric groups (ethnographers, ethnomusicologists, choreographers) want the folklore to remain in harmony with tradition. However,
what does this mean? How can tradition be defined and criteria of correspondence be determined? Instructors believe that the traditional folklore is that of
the turn of the 19th century. The model of traditional peasant culture remains
to be the theoretical base for practical work.
Attempts are made to reconstruct or replicate folklore, although in many
cases this is ineffective as accounts and reports about the "old times" were
blurred, idealized and given a mythical dimension, which is a feature of the
internal change occurring in any culture.
We come across the same ethnographers and instructors when they act as
members of the jury of many folkloric festiva'ls and contests. They observe and
evaluate groups once worked with as their instructors or as teachers of their
present instructors. A viscous circle is thus formed, a closed set of ideas circulating between instructors, activists, groups and specific competition audience, who together form the movement of folklore lovers. Thus, ethnographers help
create a form of folklore which is the sum of their knowledge, beliefs from
around the turn of the century, attitudes to tradition and projection of their own
values. At the time of postmodernist chaos this folklore has gained another value as a particularly attractive cultural alternative. Its enthusiasts did not notice
its false dimensions, naivety and ethnographic illusion of the phenomenon.
What is needed is awareness that when one participates in maintaining the
world of values one creates a cultural fiction, which belongs to critical ironists
who find it easier to point to the insoluble paradoxes of such a socially useful
character of ethnographic work.
When one attempts to project folk culture, one must remember that she is
subjected to the power of positive myth. But the myth is also the source of
another paradox bordering folk culture, its investigators and users.

74
Since the first publications by Jan Maciej Karol Wścieklica, many critical
observers, writers and scholars agreed that what intellectuals thought about
peasants and what peasants thought about intellectuals did not become eiiher
of the class. These opinions did not pertain to external differences but to the
understanding of the very core of culture. The traditionally "ethnographic"
picture of the Polish village and its empirical reality often passed each other.
This antinomy is detected both in scholarly and popular texts.
The dichotomy between, for example, the aesthetic awareness of the
so-called "folk" and folk culture, between moralityand
special values of
peasant culture, the adoption of which folk lovers tried to persuade us for
a hundred years, became an eyesore every naw and then. Often we deal with
a quasi reality which, like any other, can be object of analysis. This is another
reason for proposing a kind of critical self-evaluation of ethnography, its
anthropology. A set of assumptions has to be adopted before we start to
practise this anthropology.
The progress of scientific reflection leads to modifications or change of the
paradigm. Consequently, texts are eliminated from its canon. Such a process
can take a different course. When it is evolutionary, new elements are
introduced to the paradigm in force, which, in the case of the modeł of
traditional peasant culture, only leads to eclecticism, which I strongly oppose.
When sentences from outside the system of the theoretical language are
included into it, nothing is solved as, according to Thomas Kuhn, knowledge is
not universal and cumulative. What is important are changes of entire systems
made by criticism and reinterpretation. This opens new research possibilities,
changes the perception of entire research areas and the same facts can be put in
a new, different light.
Advocates of the paradigmatic concept of the "traditional peasant culture"
would agree with their critics that the empirical counterpart of the model, i.e.
the autonomous peasant culture, undergoing continuous changes, is today
a historical reality. If this thesis is combined with the considerations discussed
above, the whole can be summed up as follows.
There is no longer any equivalent of the model of the "traditional peasant
culture". In many texts by Polish anthropologists criticism of the disciplinary
matrix connected with this model is made. Consequently, canon texts are being
replaced at the level of the metadescription of culiure in the categories of
SCIence.
Anthropological
reinterpretation,
defining itself by the negation of the
ethnographic version of the description of culture, demythologizes these formes
views. Its work consists in analyzing the theoretical systems, owing to which it
is possible to find there figures of thinking, axiological beliefs, judgements
inappropriately
subordinated to reality, etc. This would not be possible if
anthropologists
did not pass the stage of methodological analyses, which

75
enhanced their efficiency and taught them to logically and self-critically analyse
their own texts. The work they had to do helped them realize that the tension
between reality and possibilities of its description would not disappear, that
they also had to look for forms of its description which are different than the
ones used so far.
The demythologization of the text of Polish ethnography is done differently.
Its authors make us aware that in science there is a place for axiological
opinions and the old positivist rationalism (Robotycki, Węglarz, 1983), lack of
correspondence between theoretical and empirical levels in explication (Burszta, 1987; Buchawski, 1990). They reject historical fiction and myths of the
culture of a Polish village from the 19th century (Stomma, 1986). They point
out the differences between the ethnographic picture of folk culture and its real,
modern state (Robotycki, 1992; Piątkowska, l 994b).
These ideas, undermined by anthropologists, are persistent among ethnographers who are immune to the radical anthropological propositions. There
are authOl·s fighting with the fiction of the so-called genuine folklore and folk
art. These are concepts popular among festivaljurors (Burszta, 1989; Piątkowska, 1994a; Robotycki, 1990a).
Schematism, figurativeness and stereotypes existing in the old and more
recent academic knowledge about folk culture have mythical foundations. This
is noticed by critical anthropologists, who, by proper analyses of ethnographic
texts, create the anthropology of ethnography, hardly accepted by those who
are not capable of an autoironic attitude (Burszta, 1992b; Robotycki, 1993;
Piątkowski, 1994; Stomma, 1989).
On the other hand, the "positive" proposal of anthropology penetrating the
areas of common awareness, shaped by literature, press, school books and
mass media, has been adopted without major problems. Here, the figures of
thinking, cliches, and stereotypes seem to be something natural. Forms of
analysis using a dictionary and anthropological methods are applied to very
different analyses (see: Mitologie popularne [Popular mythologies], 1994).
There are many anthropological works of this type; I will quote only a few,
selected to reveal the spectrum of possibilities that anthropology in Poland has
managed to work out.
Thus, there are anthropological analyses of film art (Benedyktowicz, 1992b;
1994; Michera, 1992a; Sznajderman, 1992b; Czaja, 1992a; 1992d), as well as
analyses of trivial films about explorers, Batmen and vampires (Sznajderman,
1992a; Szpilka, 1988; l 992a; Robotycki, 1992b). Advertising in an equally
popular topic, referring to various mythologies or using mythical structures to
persuade (Mitologie popularne [Popular mythologies], 1994; Czaja, 1994b;
Barański, 1995; Szpilka, 1994). Anthropologists also analyzed rock music
(Burszta, 1994a; Ciarka, 1988a) and popular music (Burszta, Piątkowski,
1994b), visual arts (Ciarka, 1988b; Piątkowska, 1994b; Robotycki, 1992a;

76
Sikora, 1994). Hidden meanings were sought in architecture and urbanization
(Benedyktowicz, 1991; Czyżewski, 1994) Ol' space (Czyżewski, 1992; Michera,
1994b). There were also works aimed at discovering stereotypes in school
books and literature for children (Stoczkowski, 1989), tricks used by journalists
in texts addressed to mass readership (Czaja, Robotycki, 1986). There are more
and more texts on the popular reception of history (Stomma, 1991a).
This extensive range of problems discussed by scholars is undoubtedly
a success of the new look at culture. It is of less importance what path was
taken by the development of problems (this should be discussed by future
historians). What is important is the very fact that new problems have been
advanced and discussed.
Reinterpretation, the re-reading of source texts or texts once written by
ethnographers and today considered the canon of ethnography, is an important postulate of the anthropology of culture. Reinterpretation was possible
owing to the changes in methodological orientations. The results of this were
very interesting - they helped discover what seemed to be exhausted topics, in
which the game of symbolic meanings, archetypes and mythical transformations were found. Examples are works on the symbolic dimensions of the
house (Benedyktowicz, 1992a), reconstructions of the anthropogenic myth
(Tomicki, 1979), mythology of the plague (Sznajderman,
1994a; l 994c),
mythical dimensions of the blacksmith (Barański, 1992a) and saints (Benedyktowicz, 1987; Wasilewski, 1987b; Węglarz, 1983a; 1983b).
Anthropology is equally interesting when its starts dealing with its own
texts, when it decomposes its own propositions and research results. It is
presently the consensus among anthropologists that different structuralisms
have been exhausted. However, the importance of structuralism as inspiration
and taxonomically effective method is still emphasized (Węglarz, Burszta et al.,
1987). Polemics with the great paradigm of ethnology with respect to beliefs,
rituals and magic have been carried on by J. S. Wasilewski (1989). A closer look
at history is found in L. Stoma (199Ia; 1992; 1994) and C. Robotycki (l992a;
1992c).
When anthropology attempts discussion of problems related to the essence
and dialogue of culture, it finds itself in dilemmas and questions to which final
answers are not provided. But it must address such issues because they make it
a science. It is another plane on which anthropology
has to face itself
(Tokarska-Bakir,
1990). The awareness of the consequences of one's own
epistemological attitudes, suspension of values and cultural relativism and,
consequently, application of the measure of astonishment to one's own culture,
are problems typically addressed by anthropological reflection. There is no
scale of correctness here, as some scholars say (Stomma, 1992; 1994; Burszta,
Piątkowski, 1994; Robotycki, 1992a). But others (Czaja, 1988) once asked:
where do the ironic attitude, skeptic nihilism, the attitude of jester lead to?

77
Answers to these questions are choices which reach the deepest senses, which in
extremes lead either to selfdestruction of one's own science or adoption of
values (Tokarska-Bakir, 1992; 1995).
The interests of anthropological interpretation are not restricted; anthropology addresses different topics pertaining to various areas of culture, yet
gives preference to modern topics. If it addresses the past, it usually refers to its
analogy, historical framework or a sequence of transformations. The ethnographic tradition of anthropology and its bias towards modern times help it
address various phenomena from two points of view. "Primitive" and "contemporary" are structure and not a temporal sequences. When analyzing cultural
phenomena bctwccn these two extremes, one can ask: how does the former
exist in the latter?, where is the essence of permanence and transformation?
Anthropological interpretation is an answer to these questions (Benedyktowicz,
1992a). Hence, wc are not surprised by the scope of problems and boldness of
associations that anthropologists presented in their first works (Szkice i próby
etnologiczne
[Ethnological essays], 1985). The ideas presented there were
further elaborated in their more mature works.
Polish anthropology postulates further analyses. It draws attention to
forgotten fragments of culture. For years it advocated addressing the dark sides
of culture. The entire culture of the so-called "People's Poland" in its
schizophrenic functioning requires reinterpretation
and a richer and truer
documentation.
The imperialism of scope to which the anthropology I have described
becomes prey can seem suspicious. Its unrestricted scope can, however, be
defended. It results from a few reasons.
Firstly, anthropology understood in this way is a science bordering other
humanistic sciences.
Sccondly, anthropological
theses are more and more often quoted in
humanism.
Thirdly, the departure point which emphasizes that it is culture which
determines the acquisition of common and scientific knowledge is widely
recognized.
Fourthly, and most importantly, anthropology has entangled itself in
ontological, epistemological and axiological disputes, in this way starting
a dialogue with other branches of sciences. In these dialogues anthropology
significantly influences the outcome by providing different arguments although
it does not define its scope. Hence, the concept of anthropological interpretation as is understood equivalent to contemporary
anthropology. The
question, what is anthropology - a science or art of understanding, appears
every naw and then. Let us add that Clifford Geertz's arguments in favour of its
interpretative character are universally recognized.
In the general characterization of Polish anthropology presented above I

78

pointed to four aspects which decided that this approach is different compared
with other ways of researching culture.
I explained how folk culture is defined as an object of research, l showed
that anthropological
procedures lead to the demythologization
of cultural
facts, and help read source and metacultural texts, including anthropological
ones, according to the new fashion. This has resulted in a shift of the research
field and emergence of new problems. In sum, it appeared necessary to look for
way of interpretation
beyond traditionally understood ethnography from
which Polish anthropology as a kind of critical reflection originated.
The range of possibilities drawn from other humanistic discipline is very
wide. However, the examples quoted help define a more general trend.
Interpretations
draw a lot from postmodernism and deconstruction, which
consist in repeating the same in a different manner, in intertextual dialogue, in
ironically quoting oneself. This is the character of, for example, the analysis
that looks for cultural senses when poetry, which should be interpreted, is used
as the key to the interpretation of the phenomenon (Szpilka, 199 I; Benedyktowicz, 1992a).
The situation with deconstruction, an interpretative practice consisting in
undermining the philosophy which is being voiced or the oppositions on which
it is based, is similar. A deconstructionist points to rhetorical procedures lying
at the base of his reasoning, key concept or tenet (Burszta, 1993). In other
words, deconstruction
is a game of returns, repetition of the same from
a different perspective. And anthropology is like that - it interprets culture
and itself in this way.
One approaches anthropology from different theoretical positions and by
different paths but always independently. Tn this essay I did not try to find
methodological relationships. Among the authors mentioned are those who are
the disciples of the Poznań school of Jerzy Kmita. Most of them, however, were
connected with the group which published the 1980 manifesto.
Finally, there is a group of autonomous scholars. Among them are Jacek
Olędzki and others - Krzysztof Kubiak, Zbigniew Libera, Małgorzata Maj, in
whose research achievements anthropological
preferences can be detected.
Their followers have already published in the only Polish anthropological
periodical "Polska Sztuka Ludowa. Konteksty" ["Polish Folk Art. Contexts"].
Tn conclusion, let me point out that:
Firstly, I have presented a certain research proposal, continually discussed,
which only shows that it is always topical;
Secondly, I have used the term of the anthropology of culture and I often
used the notion of ethnography. In the text I used interchangeably the notions
of anthropology and anthropological interpretation. I have done so because
I think that ethnography, in its old sense, from which anthropology originated,
would not be able to bear the burden of interpretation of the phenomena of

79
modern culture, which is structurally complex, speaks many languages, and is
metatextual. Today, there is no doubt that ethnographic texts also belong to
this culture and therefore they also can be the object of analysis. Thus, a wider
anthropological interpretation of such culture is necessary;
Thirdly, it is obvious that not every investigator of culture must take
a stand similar to that presented above. There are examples of other
approaches to ethnography
and anthropology.
Not everybody must be
interested in the programme presented here and in the pragmatics of its
accomplishment;
Fourthly, one should not avoid reflection upon the branch of knowledge
one practises;
Fifthly, I would once again like to support the claim expressed in the title
that the anthropology of culture in Poland is a finished project.
Post Scriptum

The bibliography is incomplete, in fact it is only fragment ary and should be
treated as a point of reference to the problems and possibilities of anthropology.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Barański Janusz
1992a
Kowal - mit w akcji [The blacksmith - a myth in action], "Zeszyty Naukowe
Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego. Prace Etnograficzne" folio 30.
1992b
O heurystycznej
wykładni dwóch teorii etnologicznych.
Dekonstrukcja
sprawy słonia
[On the heuristic interpretation of two ethnological theories. Deconstruction of the
elephant issue], "Polska Sztuka Ludowa" 46, No 1.
Czy metafora może bye' bajką [Can a metaphor be a fairy tale], "Polska Sztuka
1995
Ludowa. Konteksty" 49, No I.
Benedyktowicz Zbigniew
1980
O niektórych
zastosowaniach
metody fenomenologicznej
w studiach
nad religią,
symbolem i kulturą [On some applications of the phenomenological method to the
study of religion, symbol and culture], "Etnografia Polska" vol. 24, folio 2.
1981
Odpowiedź
na ankietę: etnografia, etnologia czym są ... [Response to the questionnaire: what arc ethnography, ethnology ... ], "Polska Sztuka Ludowa" 35, No 2.
1983
Symboliczne
i kulturowe
aspekty
monastycyzmu
wschodniego.
Sacrum i profanum
w kulturze ... [Symbolic and cultural aspects of Oriental monasticism. Sacrum and
profanum in culture ... ], "Polska Sztuka Ludowa" 37, No 3 - 4.
"Go,V(' w dom. Bóg w dom" i obcy jako bogowie ["A guest at home is God at home"
1987
and strangers as gods], "Polska Sztuka Ludowa" 41, No 1-4.
Symbol w etnografii [Symbol in ethnography], "Polska Sztuka Ludowa" 42, No 3.
1988a
1988b
Stereotyp
- obraz - symbol. O możliwościach
nowego spojrzenia
na stereotyp
[Stereotype - image - symbol. On possibilities of a new look on the stereotype],
"Zeszyty Naukowe Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego. Prace Etnograficzne" folio 24.
1991
Widmo ,vrodka ,vwiata. Przyczynek
do antropologii
współczesności
[The phantom of
the centre of the world. Contribution to the anthropology of modern times], "Polska
Sztuka Ludowa" 45, No 1.

80
1992a
1992b

(with D. Benedyktowicz) Dam w tradycji
"Wiedza a kulturze", Wrocław.

ludowej

[Home

in the folk tradition].

Bahf'ue" [Marta and Maria. Remarks on "Babette's
Sztuka Ludowa" 46, No 3 - 4.
1994
"Tango" taniec uniwersalnej
aliena<.ji [Tango - a dance of universal alienation].
"Polska Sztuka Ludowa" 48, No 1 - 2.
Benedyktowiez Z., Robotycki C, Stomma L., Tomicki R., Wasilewski J. S.
1980- 1981 Antropologia
kultury
w Polsce - dziedzictwo.
poj('cia. inspiracjf'.
Materialy
do
slownika
[Anthropology of culture in Poland - legacy, concepts, inspirations.
Materials for a dictionary], "Polska Sztuka Ludowa" 34, No I - 2; 35, No I.
Buchowski Michal
1986
Magia. Jej junkcje i struktura [Magic. Its functions and structure], UAM, Poznari.
1987
Kilka uwag o pewnej hrytyjskiej
recepcji dziela Levi-Straussa
[A few remarks on
a certain British reception of LCvi-Strauss' work], "Lud" vol. 71.
1990
Racjonalność.
Translacja.
Interpretacja
[Rationality. Translation. Interpretation],
UAM, Poznań.
1991
Obrz((d, rytual. ceremonia [Custom, ritual, ceremony], "Rocznik Muzealny" vol. 4.
Wlocławek.
1993
Przeciw skrajnemu relatywizmowi
[Against extreme relativism], in: Inspiracjf' pOS1modernistyczne
w humanistyce
[Postmodernist
inspirations in humanism]. PWN.
Warszawa- Poznań.
Burszta Wojciech
1986
J((zyk a kultura w my.v/i etnologicznej
[Language and culture in the ethnological
thoughtJ, PTL, Wrocław.
1987
Natura
- I/lyśl symboliczna
- kulwra [Nature -- symbolic thought - culture].
"Lud" vol. 71.
1989
Odfolkloryzmu
lokalnego du "pustfolkloryzmu"
narodoweyo [From local folklorism to
national "postfolklorism"], "Polska Sztuka Ludowa" 43. No 3.
Wymiary antropoloqicznf'go
poznania ku/tury [Dimensions of the anthropological
1992a
cognition of culture], UAM, Poznań.
1992b
Etnologia
dzisiaj alho silo peryferii [Ethnology today or the power of periphery].
"Polska Sztuka Ludowa" 46, No 2.
1993
Utracona
newinność?
Rozterki
antropoloqii
postmodf'l'nislycznej
[Innocence lost')
Irresolutions of postmodernist anthropology],
in: Inspiracjf' POs(l/lor!f'rnis(vczne
w humanistyce
[Postmodernist
inspirations in humanism]. op. cil.
Yes. Nos(alqiczne
strefy pamięci [Yes. Nostalgic spheres of memory], "Polska Sztuka
1994
Ludowa" 48, No 1-2.
Burszta Wojciech, Pi,!tkowski Krzysztof
1992
Antropoloyia
wspólczesna.
antropologia
wspólczesno.vci
czy antropologia
lIeqatywlla
[Contemporary
anthropology, anthropology of modern times or negative anthropology], in: Socjologia a antropoloyia. SLanowiska i kmurmversjl' [Sociology versus
anthropology. Opinions and controversies], cd. E. Tarkowska, "Wiedza o kulturze",
Wrocław.
[994
O czym opowiada
antropologiczna
opowie.v,' [What is an anthropological
talc
about?], Instytut Kultury, Warszawa.
Ciarka Ryszard
1988a
Punk-Rock,
"Polska Sztuka Ludowa" 42, No 1-2.
1988b
Sacrum. mit. książka ... [Sacrum, myth. book], "Polska Sztuka Ludowa" 42,
o 3.
1990a
Napisy na mlJrach i etnografia wspólczesnego
miasta [GrafilIi and the ethnography of
a modern townJ, "Polska Sztuka Ludowa" 44, No 2.
Marta

i Maria.

feast"], "Polska

Uwagi o "Uczcie

81
1990b
1992
1994

Świrty obraz w szarym bloku [A holy picture in a grey block offlats], "Polska Sztuka
Ludowa" 44, No 3.
Film i prawdziwy obraz rzeczy [Film and the true picture of things], "Polska Sztuka
Ludowa" 46, No 3-4.
O sposobach zabijania zwierząt [On methods of killing animals], "Polska Sztuka
Ludowa" 48, No 3 - 4.

Czaja Dariusz
1988
Dylematy h/aZ/la [The dillemas of a jester], "Polska Sztuka Ludowa" 42, No 4.
1990
Spór o model etnologicznej interpretacji [Controversy over the model of ethnological
interpretation], "Zeszyty Naukowe Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego. Prace Etnograficznc" folio 27.
1991
Krajobraz z Tobiaszem [A landscape with Tobiash], "Polska Sztuka Ludowa" 45,
No 3-4.
1992a
Menwlno.vć i mit rewolucyjny [Mentality versus revolutionary myth], "Zeszyty
Naukowe Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego. Prace Etnograficzne" folio 29.
ł992b
Moment wieczny. O "Uczcie Babette" [An eternal moment. About "Babette's feast"],
"Polska Sztuka Ludowa" 46, No 3 - 4.
1992c
Symbol ifllm. Uwagi metodologiczne [Symbol versus film. Methodological remarks],
"Polska Sztuka Ludowa" 46, No 3 -4.
1992d
Wenecja i śmierć. Konteksty symboliczne [Venice and death. Symbolic contexts],
"Polska Sztuka Ludowa" 46, No 3 - 4.
1993
Symbol w antropoloyii kultury [Symbol in the anthropology of culture], "Zeszyty
Naukowe Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego. Prace Etnograficzne" folio 32.
1994a
O sztuce zdziwienia i glupstwach popkultury [On the art of suprise and stupidities of
pop culture], in: Mitoloyie popularne [Popular mythologies], ed. D. Czają, Universitas, Kraków.
ł994b
Reklamowy smak raiu: między archetypem a historią [The taste of Eden in
advertising: between the archetype and history], "Polska Sztuka Ludowa" 48, No
1-2.
Czaja Dariusz, Robotycki Czesław
1986
Rodzina wiejska na Podlasiu wedlug tygodnika "Przyjaciólka" [A rural family in
Podlasie according to the "Przyjaciółka" weekly], "Polska Sztuka Ludowa" 40, No
3-4.
Czyżewski Adam
1992
Pejzaż z pamięci czyli w sprawie niedokończonego przypisu [A landscape from
memory or on an unfinished footnote], "Polska Sztuka Ludowa" 36, No 1- 4.
1994
Ochrona ptaków i budowniczowie [Protection of birds versus construction workers],
"Polska Sztuka Ludowa. Konteksty" 48, No 3 - 4.
Kaniowska Katarzyna
1985
Dychotomia natura - kultura jako szczególny problem etnologii [The dichotomy
nature-culture as a special problem of ethnology], "Etnografia Polska" vol. 29,
folio I.
1989
SOljologiczna wizja ewolucji kultury ludzkiej [Sociological vision of the evolution of
human culture], in: Problemy metodologiczne etnografii [Methodological problems
of ethnography], PAN-Ossolineum,
Kraków.
1991
Surrealizm i etnografia [Surrealism and ethnography], "Polska Sztuka Ludowa" 45,
No I.
1994
Problem opisu w etnologii [The problem of description in ethnology], in: Pożegnanie
paradygmatu? Etnologia wobec wspólczesności [A farewell to the paradigm? Ethnology versus modern times], ed. W. J. Burszta and J. Damrosz, Instytut Kultury,
Warszawa.
6 -

Lud t. LXXIX

82
Krupa

Maciej

1989

Skrzypek

"Polska
Michera Wojciech
1984

na dachu, czyli Żyd

Sztuka Ludowa"

uniwersalny

[Fiddler on the roof or a universal Jew],

43, No I.

O kategoriach
widzenia harwnego [Why a cow is red.
of seeing colours], "Polska Sztuka Ludowa" 38, o 4.
O wieloznaczności
symbolu [On many meanings of symbol], "Rocznik Muzealny"
vol. 4, Wlocławek.
Dlaczego

krowa jest czerwona.

On categories
1991
1992a

Wyohraźnia

alchemiczna

Wernera

Herzoga.

Egzegeza

symholiczna

filmu

"Szklane

[Werner Herzog's alchemic imagination. Symbolic exegesis of "Glass heart"],
"Polska Sztuka Ludowa" 46, No 3 - 4.
AntyDiiniken
[AntiOiiniken], GO, Warszawa.
Śmierć Jasia i Malgosi [The death of Jaś and Małgosia], "Polska Sztuka Ludowa.
Konteksty" 48, No 3 - 4.
serce"

1992b
1994
Mitologie

1994
Piątkowska
1994a

popularne
Mitologie

popularne

[Popular

mythologies],

ed. O. Czaja, Universitas,

Kraków.

Krystyna
Kulturowe

reguly

sztuki

-

spojrzenie

na podstawie

hadań

w .\:rodowisku

wiejskim

[Cultural

1994b

Piątkowska
1982

1987
1991
Piątkowski
1985

1989

1993
1994
Pożegnanie
1994

Robotycki
1980

1981

rules of art - a look based on investigations in a rural community], in:
Pożegnanie
paradygmatu?
[A farewell to the paradigm'!], op. cil.
Kultura a ikonos:fera. Etnologiczne
studium przykladów
ze wsi współczesnej [Culture
versus iconosphere. Ethnological study of examples from a modern village],
"Łódzkie Studia Etnograficzne" vol. 36.
Krystyna, Piątkowski Krzysztof
Antropologiczne
pojęcie stylu a sztuka ludowa [Anthropological
concept of style
versus folk art], "Łódzkie Studia Etnograficznc" vol. 24.
Sztukmistrz
z Wersalu czyli o SZluce i kulturze [A magician from Versailles or about
art and culture], "Lud" vol. 71.
Kategorie kultury a ikonosfera [Categories of culture versus iconosphere], "Rocznik
Muzealny" vol. 4, Wlocławek.
Krzysztof
Problematyka
teoretyczna
w powojennej etnografii polskiej [Theoretical problems in
Polish ethnography after J 945], "Lud" vol. 69.
Wybrane problemy metodologiczne
stosowania
semiotyki
w etnologii
[Selcctcd mcthodological problems of the use of semiotics in ethnology], in: Prohlemy metodologiczne etnografii
[Methodological
problems of ethnography], op. cit.
Semiotyczne
badania nad kulturą w etnologii [Semiotic investigations of culture in
ethnology], UMK, Toruń.
Badacz wohec tradycji [A scholar's view of tradition], in: Pożegnanie paradygmaw:!
[A farewell to the paradigm?], op. cil.
paradygmatu?

..

[A farewell to the paraEtnologia wohec wspólczesności
digm? Etnology versus modern times], ed. W. J. Burszta and J. Oamrosz, Instytut
Kultury, Warszawa.
Czesław
Tradycja
i obyczaj
w środowisku
wiejskim
[Tradition and customs in a rural
community], PAN - Ossolineum, Kraków.
.
Łańcuch szczę.Vcia w pól wieku później [A luck chain half a century later], "Polska
Sztuka Ludowa" 35, No I.
Pożegnanie

paradygmatu?

83
Biografia twórcy ludowego jako prawda artystyczna
[Biography of a folk artist as
artistic truth], "Zeszyty Naukowe Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego. Prace Etnograficzne" folio 27.
Sztllka li vista. Folklor strajkowy
[A vista art. A strike folklore], "Polska Sztuka
1990b
Ludowa" 44, No 2.
Wspomnienia
z dawnych podróży na "Jug słowiański".
Uwagi etnologa do tekstu
1991
z początku wieku [Travel recollections of "Slavonic Yug". Ethnologist's remarks on
a text from the beginning of the century], "Rocznik Muzealny" vol. 4, Włocławek.
Etnografia wobec kultury współczesnej
[Ethnography versus modern culture], Uni1992a
wersytet Jagielloński, Kraków, Post-doctoral dissertations 232.
Wampiry. Od wierzeń ludowych do film~wychfantomów
[Vampires. From folk beliefs
1992b
to film phantoms], "Polska Sztuka Ludowa" 46, No 3 - 4.
H istoria i tradycja, dwie kategorie
opisu przeszłości
[Historyand
tradition, two
1992c
categories of the description of the past], "Zeszyty Naukowe Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego. Prace Etnograficzne" folio 29.
Etnografia
wobec samej siebie [Etnography
versus itself], "Zeszyty Naukowe
1993
Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego. Prace Etnograficzne" folio 32.
Reklama z zapomnianym
kodem [Advertising with a forgotten code], in: Mitologie
1994a
popularne [Popular mythologies], op. cit.
Moralny i strukturalny
aspekt dobra i zła w bajce magicznej [Maral and structural
1994b
aspects of the good and bad in a magic fairy tale], in: Pożegnanie paradygmatu?
[A
farewell to the paradigm?], op. cit.
l994c
"Piwnica pod Baranami" - antropologiczna
interpretacjaformuły
kabaretu ["Piwnica
pod Baranami" - an anthropological interpretation of the cabaret], "Polska Sztuka
Ludowa. Konteksty" 48, No 1- 2.
Robotycki Czeslaw, Węglarz Stanislaw
1983
Chłop potęgą jest i basta. O mityzacji kultury ludowej w nauce [A pesant is a power
and that's that. On mythologization of folk culture in science], "Polska Sztuka
Ludowa" 37, No 1 - 2.
Sikora Slawomir
1986
Cmentarze
- antropologia
pamięci [Cemeteries - the anthropology
of memory],
"Polska Sztuka Ludowa" 40, No 1- 2.
Fotografia,
pamięc,
wyobraźnia
[Photography,
memory, imagination],
"Polska
1992
Sztuka Ludowa" 46, No 3 - 4.
Fotografia schyłku wieku. Fotografia i mit [Photography
at the end of the century.
1994
Photography versus myth], "Polska Sztuka Ludowa" 48, No 1 - 2.
Stoczkowski Wiktor
1989
Prehistoria IV szkolnych podręcznikach
czyli współczesny mit początków
[Prehistory in
school books or a modern myth of the beginnings], "Polska Sztuka Ludowa" 43, No
4.
Stomma Ludwik
1975a
Rytuał pokladzin w Polsce. Analiza strukturalna
[The pokładziny ritual [escorting the
newly weds to their bedroom] in Poland. A structural analysis], "Etnografia Polska"
vol. 19, folio I.
1975b
Stan badań nad obrzędowością
polską od połowy XVI II w. [Research of Polish ritual
from the middle of the 18th century], "Etnografia Polska" vol. 19, folio l.
Mit Alkmeny
[The myth of Alcmene], "Etnografia Polska" vol. 20, folio l.
1976
1978 - 1979 M agia dzisiaj [Magie today], "Polska Sztuka Ludowa" 32, No 3 - 4; 33, No 4.
Determinanty
polskiej kultury ludowej XIX
wieku [Determinants
of Polish folk
1979
culture in the 19th century], "Polska Sztuka Ludowa" 33, No 3.

1990a

84
Wstęp [Introduction], in: J. St. Bystroń, Tematy, które mi odradzano [Topics I was
discouraged to address], Selected and prepared by L. Stomma, PIW, Warszawa.
Słońce rodzi się 13 grudnia [Sun is bom on 13 December], LSW, Warszawa,
1981a
Odpowiedź na ankietę: etnografia, etnologia czym są... [Response to the question1981b
naire: what are ethnography, ethnology ... ], "Polska Sztuka Ludowa" 35, No 2.
Antropologia kultury wsi polskiej X I X wieku [Anthropology of the culture of a Polish
1986
village in the 19th century], PAX, Warszawa.
Czy w etnografii występują białe plamy [Are there white spots in ethnography?],
1989
"Polska Sztuka Ludowa" 43, No 4.
Wzloty i upadki królów Francji [The rise and fali of French kings], Wydawnictwo
1991a
Łódzkie, Łódź.
Uroda ludzkiej pomyłki [The beauty of a human mistake], "Polska Sztuka Ludowa"
1991b
45, No 1.
Antropologia kultury. historia i Kubuś Puchatek [The anthropology of culture,
1992
historyand
Whinney the Pooh], "Polska Sztuka Ludowa" 46, No 3 -4.
Historia współczesności [History of modern times], "Polska Sztuka Ludowa" 48, No
1994
1- 2.
Szkice i próby etnologiczne
1985
Szkice i próby etnologiczne [Ethnological essays], ed. Z. Benedyktowicz and C.
Robotycki, "Studenckie Zeszyty Naukowe Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego" folio 4,
Kraków.
Sznajderrnan Monika
1991
O etnograficznym surrealizmie [On ethnographic surrealism], "Polska Sztuka Ludowa" 44, No l.
Co się kryje pod tą maską: wokół motywu Człowieka Śmiechu. Parę uwag o Barmanie
1992a
[What is hidden behind this mask: a few remarks on Batman], "Polska Sztuka
Ludowa" 46, No 3 - 4.
"Stary Gringo". Motyw Don Kichota w filmie i literaturze ["An Old Gringo". The
1992b
motif of Don Quixote in film and literature], "Polska Sztuka Ludowa" 46, No 3 - 4.
AIDS. kształt mitu [AIDS, the shape of the myth], "Polska Sztuka Ludowa" 48, No
1994a
1 - 2.
"The Jardin des Plantes. Postcards" czyli roślinna metaforyka James ClijJorda ["The
1994b
Jardin des Plantes. Postcards" or the floral metaphors of James ClilTord], "Polska
Sztuka Ludowa" 48, No 3 - 4.
Zaraza. Mitologia dżumy, cholery i AIDS [The plague. Mythodology of bubonic
I994c
plague, cholera and AIDS], Semper, Warszawa.
Szpilka Wiesław
1988
Poszukiwanie zaginionej Arki [In search for the lost Ark], "Polska Sztuka Ludowa"
42, No 4.
Kultura masowa a etnografia [Mass culture versus ethnography], "Rocznik Muzeal1991
ny" vol. 4, Włocławek.
"Batman" opowieść o stworzeniu ["Batman" - a story of creation], "Polska Sztuka
1992a
Ludowa" 46, No 3 - 4.
Zobaczyć .~wiat: Ethnografia wobec filmu i kultury masowej [To see the world:
1992b
Ethnography and the film and mass culture], "Polska Sztuka Ludowa" 46, No 3 - 4.
1994
Raj utracony [Paradise lost], "Polska Sztuka Ludowa" 48, No 1-2.
Tokarska-Bakir Joanna
1990
Interpretacja czyli o sztuce antropologii [Interpretation
ar on the art of anthropology], "Polska Sztuka Ludowa" 44, No I.
1980

85
1992

Hermeneutyka Gadamerowska w etnograficznym badaniu obcości [Gadamer's hermeneutics in ethnographic investigations of strangeness], "Polska Sztuka Ludowa"
46, No 2.
Opuszczone ołtarze zamieszkują demony [Deserted altars are inhabited by demons],
1993
"Polska Sztuka Ludowa" 47, No 3 - 4.
Dalsze losy syna marnotrawnego. Projekt etnografii nieprzeźroczystej [A further fate
1955
of the prodigal son. A project of opaque ethnography], "Polska Sztuka Ludowa.
Konteksty" 49, No 1.
Tomicki Ryszard
1973
Tradycja i jej znaczenie w kulturze chłopskiej [Tradition and its significance in
peasant culture], "Etnografia Polska" vol. 17, folio 2.
1975
(with 1. Tomicka) Drzewo życia. Ludowa wizja świata i człowieka [The tree of life. The
folk vision of the world and man], LSW, Warszawa.
Slowiański mit kosmogoniczny [Slavonic cosmogonie myth], "Etnografia Polska" vol.
1976
20, folio I.
1977
Norma, wzór i warto.fć w życiu seksualnym tradycyjnych społeczności wiejskich
w Polsce [Norm, paltem and value in the sexuallife of traditional rural communities
in Poland], "Etnografia Polska" vol. 21, folio 1.
Anthropogenesis in Slavonic folk beliefs, "Ethnologia Polona" vol. 5.
1979
1981a
Kultura, dziedzictwo, tradycja [Culture, heritage, tradition], in: Etnografia Polski.
Przemiany kultury ludowej [Ethnography
of Poland. Transformations
of folk
culture], vol. 2, ed. M. Biernacka et al., Ossolineum, Wrocław.
1981b
Religijno.fć ludowa [Folk religiousness], in: Etnografia Polski. Przemiany kultury
ludowej [Ethnography of Poland. Transformations of folk culture], vol. 2, op. cit.
Drogi w za.\'wiaty. Materiały do eschatologii Azteków [The road to the other world.
1986
Materials for the eschatology of the Aztecs], "Polska Sztuka Ludowa" 40, No 1 - 2.
Poza spoleczeństwem - w pobliżu boskości. Przyczynek do rozważań nad symboliką
1987
wlosów [Beyond the society - near godliness. Contribution to the discussion of the
symbolism of hair], "Polska Sztuka Ludowa" 41, No 1- 4.
"Warsztaty Ewograficzne"
1991
Ogólnopolska sesja "Warsztaty Etnograficzne" [National session "Warsztaty Etnograficzne" (Ethnographic workshops)], "Rocznik Muzealny" vol. 4, Włocławek, pp.
145-310.
Wasilewski Jerzy Sławomir
1975
Kaceyoria przestrzeni w kulturze koczowniczej. Analiza przestrzeni jurty mongolskiej
[The category of space in nomadic culture. Analysis of the space of the Mongolian
yurt], "Etnografia Polska" vol. 19, folio 1.
Symbolika ruchu obrotowego i rytualnej inwersji [The symbolism of rotational
1978
movement and ritual inversion], "Etnografia Polska" vol. 22, folio 1.
Po .fmierci wędrować. Szkic z zakresu etnologii świata znaczeń [To wander after death.
1979a
An essey on the ethnology of the world of meanings], "Teksty" No 3, 4.
Podróże do piekieł. Rzecz o szamańskich misteriach [Travels to the heli. On shamanic
1979b
mysteries], LSW, Warszawa.
Podarowa(' - znaleźć - zgubić - zblądzić. Niektóre kategorie języka symbolicznego
1980
związaneyo z opozycją życie - śmierć [To give - to find - to lose - to get lost.
Some categories of the symbolic language connected with the opposition life
- death], "Etnografia Polska" vol. 24, folio 1.
Tabu, zakaz magiczny, nieczystość [Taboo, magic prohibition, unchastity], "Etno1987a
grafia Polska" vol. 31, folio 1.

86
1987b

Św. Pawel - nawrócenie, odwrócenie i niepewność est. Paul - conversion,
abandoning and uncertainty], "Polska Sztuka Ludowa" 41, No 1-4.
1989
Tabu a paradygmaty etnologii [Taboo versus paradigms of ethnology], Uniwersytet
Warszawski, Warszawa.
1991
Antropologia paradygmatem stoi... [Anthropology
is a paradigm ... ], "Rocznik
Muzealny" vol. 4, Włoclawek.
Węglarz Stanisław
1983a
Ojcowie pustyni [Fathers of the desert], "Polska Sztuka Ludowa" 37, No 3 - 4.
1983b
Pustelnicy - ludowi święci [Hermits - folk saints], "Polska Sztuka Ludowa" 37, No
3 -4.
1987a
Dzielo Levi-Straussa - dzisiaj [The work ad Lćvi-Strauss today], "Lud" vol. 71.
1987b
Claude Levi-Strauss: demon Laplace'a czy uprawiający muzykę Sokrates [Claude
U:vi-Strauss: Laplace's demon or Socrates practising music], "Lud" vol. 71.
1991
Kategorie kultury ludowej jako kategorie etnograficzne [Categories of folk culture as
ethnographic categories], "Rocznik Muzealny" vol. 4, Włoclawek.
1992
Koncepcja etnograficznego zróżnicowania kultury ludowej dzisiaj [The concept of the
ethnographic differentiation of folk culture today], "Polska Sztuka Ludowa" 46, No

2.
1994

Chlopi jako "obcy" [Peasants as "strangers"], in: Pożegnanie paradygmatu? [A
farewell to the paradigm?], op. cit.
Węglarz S., Burszta W., Studziński J. A., Piątkowska K., Buchawski M., Augustynowicz G.
1987
Claude Levi-Strauss - po latach [Claude Lćvi-Strauss after years], "Lud" vol. 71,
pp. 3 -126.

Translated

by Zbigniew

N adstoga