Academic literature on the topic 'Criticism and interpretationjay-z , 1969-'

Zdziechowski Jerzy (1880–1975) was a politician, economist and economic activist. In the years 1917–1918 he was a member of the Polish Council of the Inter-Party Union in Russia and a co-organizer of the Polish Corps in Russia. In 1919, he was one of the main participants in the failed coup d’etat attempting to overthrow the government of Jędrzej Moraczewski. In the years 1922–1927, he was a member of the Sejm from the Popular National Union. In the years 1925–1926, he was the Minister of the Treasury in the government of A. Skrzyński. He developed the economic and financial program for stabilizing the Polish zloty, which caused such side effects as, i.a.: reduced employment, lowered wages, and reduced exports of agricultural products, as well as significant increases in taxes and prices. However, the program allowed for achieving a balanced budget. The program’s implementation resulted in the withdrawal of the Polish Socialist Party from the ruling coalition and led to the fall of the government. In the years 1926–1933, he was a member of the Council of the Camp of Great Poland, which was founded and led by Roman Dmowski. Until 1939, he was an activist of economic organizations. From September 1939, Jerzy Zdziechowski resided abroad. After World War II, he was the chairman of the Executive Department of the Political Council in London on behalf of the National Party. Jerzy Zdziechowski was characterized by theoretical eradication and the ability to achieve macroeconomic goals within the framework of economic policy, which he proved by managing financial matters in the years 1925-26 as well as by his creative criticism of the politics in 1926-39.

Televisions Play with PirandelloAbstractIn the beginning of 1960s, the Polish press witnessed a discussion on Pirandello’s rightfor innovation, which was started by Zygmunt Greń who harshly attacked the writer for„pseudointellectualism” and using the metaphor of a mask as an empty stage effect. At thesame time, however, in Polish theatres, the author witnessed great prosperity. This includedalso Teatr Telewizji (Television Theatre) which in the course of 30 years showed his mostimportant plays, i.e.: Six Characters in Search of an Author, Henry IV, Right You Are (If You Think So), and comedies The Man, the Beast and the Virtue, Cecè, Il berretto a sonagli, The Manwith the Flower In His Mouth, and Tutto per bene.When analyzing two of them – Right You Are (If You Think So) from 1967 directed by IreneuszKanicki and Henry IV directed by Maciej Prus and shown as late as 1989 – it should be notedthat in both plays political undertones could be noticed. A characteristic interpretativefeature of adaptations of Pirandello in Polish theatres was the manifestation of the “role”his characters are doomed for, which happens at the price of their internal truth. Society,often using the institutions of power, tries to trespass the intimate space in order to conformit to predictable stereotypes uncovered by – real or pretend – “madness” of Pirandello’scharacters. Both Right You Are (If You Think So) and Henry IV gave us two different faces ofresistance of an individual in the context of pressure of collectivity, regardless of whether it isgoverned by institutions or stereotypes of worldview.Even though in the contemporary (almost non-existent) Teatr Telewizji it is difficult toimagine new adaptations of the author’s plays, in spite of gloomy prognosis of criticism, Polishtheatres are still interested in the author. Six Characters in Search of an Author treating abouta destruction of subjective structure and attempts of rebuilding it is especially constantlypresent in theatre programme. The play was even used in an experiment with theatre therapyin Lublin – a disabled group prepared the production.Therefore, maybe the Italian Nobelist still has a lot to offer to contemporary theatre?Keywords: innovation, myth, reception, truth, illusion, mask, theatricality, collectivity,stereotype, power, madness

For all readers of the text of the Lumen Gentium constitution of the Second Vatican Council during this event, and also immediately afterwards, it seemed that the document focused solely on the explanation of the Church from the perspective of Christ. Some of the conciliar observers, espe- cially the Orthodox theologians, brought up criticism that the reflection of the Council was marked by a Christomonism. This study presents the question of the pneumatological implications of the ecclesiology contained in the Lumen Gentium constitution from the perspective of Yves Congar’s theological thought. As the analysis of the undertaken research will show, the answer of the French theologian not only provides an essential response to the objection of Christomonism based on a direct commitment of this theologian to the co-writing of Lumen Gentium as early as March 1963, but it also gives a thorough insight into the subject-matter referring to his theological achievements already before and mainly after the Council. The Dogmatic Constitution on the Church has a dis- tinct pneumatological dimension. The theology contained therein is related to all the theses on the subject as they were formulated by Yves Congar in 1973.

Commentary on the unwritten history of modern Polish literature of Aleksander Wat The starting point for further consideration is for the author the intriguing convergence between the modern division of twentieth-century literature, proposed by Michał Paweł Markowski (for the “conservative” and “critical” modernism), and related to the same topic more than half century earlier Wat’s intuitions. In his Dziennik bez samogłosek [Diary without Vowels] (from January 1964) arguing with Milosz (who once teased Wat with a careless treatment of his work JA z jednej strony i JA z drugiej strony mego mopsożelaznego piecyka [Me from One Side and Me from the Other Side of My Pug Iron Stove]) draws an original story of Polish literature. Among important to Wat’s number of authors like Witkacy, Leśmian, Białoszewski and Różewicz, the author focuses on the last two, explaining why they occupy such a high place in Wat’s hierarchy. “Baka’s child” Białoszewski is dear to Wat because of the discoveries in the language area, and Różewicz on the other hand, although his presence in this statement may appear surprising, is for Wat a successor to the “full” stylistic secession. Another of the interesting to Wat writers – Gombrowicz, awakens in him ambivalent feelings from unrelenting criticism of a fellow writer (“complete ignorance”), to admiration of the Kosmos [Cosmos] (“Kosmos is a great book”).

The interwar period (1918–1939) on the Polish publishing market, was the time of mingling of the advice books presenting a conservative and progressive attitude to upbringing. Both in the publications recommending traditional educational methods, based mainly on strict discipline, and in the guide books promoting upbringing which takes into account the individuality and distinct character of child’s psyche – apart from guidelines, advice and information – one could find numerous words of criticism pointed at parents. Around a hundred of educational handbooks were published in the period of the Second Republic of Poland. A part of them were translations of books originating from foreign, mainly German pedagogical literature. Their authors were most often educationists and doctors; quite many books were written by clergymen. Advice literature for parents from the interwar period represented very different types. The majority of books were written in the form of advice or warnings directed straight to parents; large group were publications in the form of short stories, in which various problems and the means of solving them were offered; still others had a form of letters or memories, or they were collections of loose remarks concerning care and upbringing. There were also publications in which several of the mentioned forms appeared simultaneously. A frequently used technique was drawing upon personal experience or one’s own pedagogical or medical practice. That was presumably supposed to lend credibility towards the author and establish trust towards the methods of conduct he/she recommended. The scope of issues touched upon by the then advice books was incredibly broad. The advice was related to the matters connected with everyday hygiene and nourishment of children as well as moral, religious and patriotic upbringing. Some of the books were devoted completely to the selected aspects of care and upbringing, other, in turn, formed a collection of advice from many fields. A simple, understandable language of the majority of publications may attest to a broad audiences whom the authors of advice books from the interwar period tried to reach with their remarks and counsel. The far greater part of books was meant for both parents, and only few indicated mothers as their exclusive addressee. Those were primarily the publications devoted to hygiene and nourishment of children as well as formation of their religious attitudes. What is interesting, the reproaches concerning committed mistakes were always pointed at mothers as the persons who were directly involved in and responsible for the upbringing process.

It was not long ago that one prefecture of french culture was reinventing the idea of authorship while another one was trying to kill it off. The New Wave movement and post-structuralism, fundamental opposites in almost every respect, emerged at the same cultural moment. Roland Barthcs's Writing Degree Zero (1953) and François Truffaut's seminal essay in Cahiers du cinéma that instated auteur criticism (the first phase of the New Wave) appeared less than a year apart; the appearance of Michel Foucault's Madness and Civilization (1961) coincided with the triumph of New Wave filmmaking; and in the interval between 1966 and 1970, which saw the publication of The Order of Things, Of Grammatology, and S/Z, Jean-Luc Godard, the most iconoclastic of the New Wave critic-directors, released fourteen feature films, including four masterworks. In its classic phase poststructuralism was fixated on the written word, involved disciplined thought inflected by mainstream Continental philosophy, took on itself the burden of refashioning modern European history along Marxist lines, and could be uncompromisingly rectitudinous. The New Wave spoke the language of images, involved a loose and—except for its radical stylistics—rather tame avant-gardism, valued an aleatory, free-form aesthetic over political commitment, assailed mainstream French culture, and championed alternative forms of cultural production such as American popular movies. Yet the teleologies were similar: to inscribe a unique place in the history of authorship. To supplant the biographical author from the textual site, one of the primary motives of poststructuralism, was to make the collective space available for a higher entity, the philosopher-critic who is the author not of individual texts but of textuality, the social meaning of texts. In the same way, in claiming the textual site for a film author—a radical conception for the time—the auteur critics scripted a role for themselves that they would subsequently occupy as film directors.

It was not long ago that one prefecture of french culture was reinventing the idea of authorship while another one was trying to kill it off. The New Wave movement and post-structuralism, fundamental opposites in almost every respect, emerged at the same cultural moment. Roland Barthcs's Writing Degree Zero (1953) and François Truffaut's seminal essay in Cahiers du cinéma that instated auteur criticism (the first phase of the New Wave) appeared less than a year apart; the appearance of Michel Foucault's Madness and Civilization (1961) coincided with the triumph of New Wave filmmaking; and in the interval between 1966 and 1970, which saw the publication of The Order of Things, Of Grammatology, and S/Z, Jean-Luc Godard, the most iconoclastic of the New Wave critic-directors, released fourteen feature films, including four masterworks. In its classic phase poststructuralism was fixated on the written word, involved disciplined thought inflected by mainstream Continental philosophy, took on itself the burden of refashioning modern European history along Marxist lines, and could be uncompromisingly rectitudinous. The New Wave spoke the language of images, involved a loose and—except for its radical stylistics—rather tame avant-gardism, valued an aleatory, free-form aesthetic over political commitment, assailed mainstream French culture, and championed alternative forms of cultural production such as American popular movies. Yet the teleologies were similar: to inscribe a unique place in the history of authorship. To supplant the biographical author from the textual site, one of the primary motives of poststructuralism, was to make the collective space available for a higher entity, the philosopher-critic who is the author not of individual texts but of textuality, the social meaning of texts. In the same way, in claiming the textual site for a film author—a radical conception for the time—the auteur critics scripted a role for themselves that they would subsequently occupy as film directors.

In his contribution, the author presents the work on the codification (initially on the Act) of procedural criminal law in Poland in the years 1919–1928. Those works were initially led by the Criminal Department of the Codification Committee, and then by the Criminal Proceedings Section of the Codification Commission. The first period of the work on the criminal procedure law was characterized by some disputes between the members of the Department, i.e. supporters of the classical school (E. Krzymuski) vs. the sociological school (J. Makarewicz), the discussion aiming at defining the relationship of procedural criminal law and substantive criminal law. The work on the draft law was carried out faster after the appointment (on 16 July 1920) of the Criminal Proceedings Section, which in 1924 published the first version of the draft criminal law bill. E. Krzymuski, A. Mogilnicki, Z. Rymowicz and E.S. Rappaport had played the main role in the development of the project. After a very deep criticism in the columns of Gazeta Administracji i Policji Państwowej [The Gazette of State Administration and Police], Ruch Prawniczy, Ekonomiczny i Socjologiczny [The legal, economic and sociological movement] and Palestra [The bar], the project was rejected. Only the second version of the bill prepared in 1925-1926, re-worked by the committee composed of W. Makowski, A. Mogilnicki and S. Śliwiński (appointed by the Minister of Justice), became the basis for the President of the Republic of Poland to adopt the first Polish Code of Criminal Procedure of 19 March 1928.

The article discusses outstanding interpretations of the works by F. Nietzsche as represented in Polish educational thought during the “Young Poland” period and the following interwar period. The study aims at elucidating the pedagogical dimensions of Nietsche’s idea in the interpretation of the two periods and at identifying the space within which the concept of the author of Thus spake Zarathustra still remains topical and current. The section devoted to the “Young Poland” period includes an analysis of Jan Kurnatowski’s book Nietsche. Studia i tłumaczenia [Nietzsche. Studies and translations], the one and only work of the period that extracts from the output of the German thinker its strictly pedagogical reflections. The next issue to be presented is a discussion on the journalistic writing that was engaged inNietzschean themes that would be of interest to the present-day pedagogy of culture. Interpretation trends that aimed to discover a universal remedy for the crisis in culture and humanity in the works of the author of Untimely Meditations turned out to be dominant at the time. An approach to the interpretation of Nietzsche’s thought in a wide context of social and cultural interactions made it possible to conclude that the category of Bildungsphilister, castigated by the philosopher, reaches much further beyond just criticism of the contemporary model of education due to the tenability of the notion of Bildumg as the accumulation of cultural capital as it was viewed by Pierre Bourideu. In conclusion of the discussion on the modernist period, the author presents postulations that indicate a need for a shift in the reception emphasis towards directions hitherto unexplored. The section devoted to the interwar period presents the interpretation of the pedagogical thought of Nietzsche presented at the inauguration lecture (on the occasion of Antoni Bolesław Dobrowolski’s acceptance of the chair of pedagogy at Wolna Wszechnica Polska [Free Polish University]) delivered by the professor. The presentation is followed by a discussion on the different approaches presented in various pedagogical encyclopaedias and in Ludwik Chamaj’s Kieruki i prądy pedagogiki współczesnej [Trends and directions in modern pedagogy]. The latter approaches present Nietzsche as an instigator and a prime mover in contemporary intellectual currents and trends and discuss his influence upon individual philosophers, extracting from his philosophical output the notions of “individualism”, “criticism of the traditional educational system” and “irrationalism”. The journalistic writings under investigation fit well into this particular interpretative trend. The discussion on the interwar period is complemented with a reference to a booklet written by Stanisław Besser and entitled: Bohaterowie myśli. Nietsche i Weininger [Heroes of Thought. Nietzsche and Weininger] and an analysis of the article written by Marian Wachowski Wspomnienia z pism pedagogicznych Nietzschego i Grundtviga [Pedagogical reflections in the writings of Nietzsche and Grundtvig], being the only Polish contribution to the discussion on the series of lectures by Nietzsche Ueber die Zukunft unserer Bildungsanstalten

The article deals with the main aspects of organizational-pedagogical, scientific- research and theatrical-critical activity of the candidate of art studies A. V. Pletniov. Little-known biographical data on the life of the theater scientist and the creative environment, in which his professional formation took place, are presented. It is noted that A. V. Pletniov was one of the first graduates of the State Institute of Theatrical Arts named after A. V. Lunacharsky (now – RUTM). He studied there in 1934–1938, surrounded by highly-qualified students, many of whom subsequently became the pride of Russian theater studies. A. V. Pletniov entered the history of the theatrical culture of Kharkiv as a talented scientist-researcher, a well-known theater critic and teacher. He stood at the origins of theater studies in Kharkiv and for almost 30 years he headed the department of the History of the Theater (now – the Department of Theater Studies) of the higher theater educational institution in the city. However, the value of his activity is much wider. The formation of the Kharkiv State Theater Institute is closely linked with the personality of A. V. Pletniov, since 1963 he wax also connected with the theater department of the Kharkiv Institute of Arts named after I. P. Kotliarevsky, and in general – with the theatrical culture of our city. However, until this time his organizational-pedagogical, scientific-research, and theatrical-critical heritage has not been properly investigated and objectively not covered. The purpose of the research is to analyze the organizational, pedagogical, scientific, research and theatrical-critical activity of A. V. Pletniov, writing it into the socio-political and artistic context of time and, at the same time, into the history of theater studies of Ukraine. A. V. Pletniov started his pedagogical activity in 1938 at the Kharkiv Theater School as a teacher of the history of the theater and the head of the educational department. With the beginning of the war, the school, which merged with the Kyiv State Theater Institute, was evacuated to the city Saratov, where A. Pletniov as a teacher worked until January 1942. From this time until the end of the war he was on the front in the field force. In 1945 he returned to the newly founded Kharkiv State Theater Institute and was immediately appointed Deputy Director of Educational and Scientific Work and a senior lecturer at the Department of History of the Theater. Together with the director of the institute Z. Smoktiy, A. Pletniov was making considerable efforts to organize the educational process in the time of economic trouble, lack of staff with the corresponding education, and provided basic conditions of work and education in the newly created higher education. Existing and new departments were supplemented and opened, the prominent artists from Kharkiv theaters and leading scientists from other universities were invited to work. Among them: D. Antonovych, O. Serdiuk, M. Krushelnytsky, O. Kramov, L. Dubovyk, V. Chystiakova and others. The peculiarity of the organization of research and methodological work was its focus on providing educational process. Several comprehensive topics on the methodology of actor education, stage language teaching, encyclopedic dictionary of theatrical terms, and a study on the history of theater development in Kharkiv were planned. It was at that time that several dissertations were planned, including A. Pletniov’s “Kharkiv Theater of the Second Quarter of the 19th Century”, which he successfully presented in 1952 in his alma mater – State Institute of Theater Art after A. V. Lunacharsky, and he was awarded a degree Doctor of Arts. In 1960, the completed dissertation study was published in the form of a monograph titled “At the Origins of the Kharkiv Theater”, which until now has not lost its relevance and is actively used in the educational process. In 1947, while being the Deputy Director of the Institute, A. Pletniov also headed the Department of Theater History. It was with him as the head of the department, the actual renewal of the department as a theatrical research center and methodological center began, it largely determined the main directions of its activities for the future. Under the direction of A. V. Pletniov, the department trained a lot of talented theatrical scholars who successfully worked and work as teachers of higher educational institutions, heads of literary units of creative groups, heads of leading theaters, heads of cultural management, members of mass media staff, well-known theatrical critics. A. Pletniov headed the department for almost 30 years – until 1976 (with a brief break in 1961–1962), giving a significant impetus to the development of theater studies in Kharkiv, in particular, theatrical criticism. He himself was actively involved in the illumination of the theatrical process in Kharkiv, leaving after himself dozens of highly professional reviews, articles, notes, sometimes controversial, bearing the imprint of time. The article emphasizes that A. Pletniov was one of the most skilled and highly educated teachers. He taught a whole range of theater studies disciplines: the history of Russian theater, the history of foreign theater, the theory of drama, theatrical criticism. Until the last years of his life, A. Pletniov conducted active scientific research, methodological, theatrical-critical and public activity. In 1968–1972, he was the Vice-Rector of the Kharkiv State Institute of Arts named after I. P. Kotliarevsky for the scientific work and theatrical department. In 1975, he finished a doctoral dissertation “From the History of the Establishment of the Soviet Theater in Ukraine”, in which he for the first time thoroughly recreated the extremely complex and multifaceted theatric life of Kharkov in the October decade (1917–1927) in the socio-cultural context, but he did not have time to defense this study. Nowadays this scientific work is striking by its multidimensional and enormous amount of material. Conclusions. As a result of the research was established that with A. Pletniov personality as a well-known teacher, a scientist and theater critic, one of the leaders of the Kharkiv Theater Institute (1945–1953), later the Kharkiv Institute of Arts named after I. P. Kotliarevsky, more than thirty years of theater education in Kharkiv were connected. Particularly remarcable the role of A. Pletniov was in the development of theater studies and theater education in such a significant theatrical center as Kharkiv, where he nearly thirty years was heading the specialized department of the history of theater (now the department of theater studies). It was under his leadership that a methodology for preparing theatrical scholars of a broad profile was formed, based on a high level of general culture and education of future specialists, on the possession of a wide spectrum of theatrical research tools. Despite some contradictions inherent in A. Pletniov’s scientific and theatrical- critical activity and reflected in his heritage, that was typical for most scholars of the humanitarian sphere of the 1930–1970s, he remains one of the decisive figures in the development of theater education and theater researches in Kharkiv. All the above motivates for a further, more profound study of the scientific-pedagogical and theatrical-critical activity of A. Pletniov and, more broadly, the development of theater studies in Kharkiv.

This thesis is a complete bibliography of texts written by Růžena Vacková published in between years 1929 and 1948, supplemented by contemporary contextualisation of the time and characteristics of individual periodicals in which these texts appear. A substantial part of this study deals with magazines Vacková has contributed to consistently for a long period of time. This study presents a brief biographical summary, serving to facilitate the classification of individual texts and their relation to the author's persecuted life. The study also includes a brief outline of her views as an author and as an critic. Keywords: Růžena Vacková, bibliography, criticism, magazines of the 1930s and 1940s

Using an unpublished seminar that Roland Barthes delivered in 1966–7, this chapter considers the challenge to rewrite, re-use, and ‘re-cover’ other writers’ texts. It shows, first in Critique et vérité, then across the seminar ‘La linguistique du discours’, and finally in the 1970 essay S/Z, that Barthes was developing a creative, literary-critical, practice rather than promoting ‘la nouvelle critique’. In this spirit of creative criticism, using Kristeva, Bakhtin, and Menippus, Barthes designed his radical approach to Balzac in S/Z. An egregious reading of Barthes’s approach notwithstanding (Bremond and Pavel, 1998), three elements are identified in his essayistic rewriting of Balzac’s Sarrasine that point to creative criticism: digression, drama, and historiality. These techniques allow Barthes’s essay both to distance and bring nearer the ‘tutor-text’ Sarrasine which, written in 1830, raised important questions about the cusp of modernity, and how to write criticism as literature.

Konstanty Dobrzyński (1908–1939) was a young Polish poet from city Łódź. He published the volumes of poetry Czarna poezja (1936) and Żagwie na wichrach (1938). He received the “Prosto z mostu” Award in 1939. Konstanty went through difficult time when he was a worker in Łódź, but he became the editor of “Orędownik” in Poznań. He was related to National Democracy. Literary critics and readers who was associated with ND reviewed him very well, the opponents appreciated his budding talent. In September 1939, in the beginning of the World War II, gunner Dobrzyński was killed in battle in Częstochowa, when he standed up for his homeland to German aggression. After the War he was doomed to an utter oblivion.

This chapter discusses Cahiers du cinéma’s collective text “Young Mr. Lincoln de John Ford,” a critical re-reading of a canonical film from the classical era of Hollywood cinema, and places it in the context of the journal’s long relationship with Ford’s oeuvre. Highlighting the article’s status as a truly communal theoretical undertaking and its indebtedness to the structuralist reading method espoused by Roland Barthes in S/Z, this chapter closely scrutinizes the text on Young Mr. Lincoln. While later critics for Screen noted flaws in the political analysis offered by Cahiers, I show that the value of the Cahiers critics’ reading lies in their emphasis on the American director’s formal language, the play of visibility and invisibility that produces symptomatic discrepancies with the conscious ideological goals of the original project.

Abstract Yeats, William Butler (1865-1939) Nobel prizewinning Irish writer, cofounder of the Irish Literary Theatre, senator and one of the most influential dramatists and poets of the twentieth century, whose work dominated the Irish literary scene at the turn of the century. While Joyce admired Yeats’s artistic achievements, their approaches to creating literature were very different. Yeats’s involvement in the “Celtic Twilight”-that period of the IRISH LITERARY REVIVAL extending from the turn of the century to the beginning of World War I-his didactic and nationalist poetry and his commitment to political activity all reflected personal and artistic positions to which Joyce was opposed. Some critics have speculated that Yeats’s success as a poet influenced Joyce’s decision to concentrate his energies on creating fiction. Yet despite occasional friction (like his attack on Yeats in “The HOLY OFFICE”), any rivalry that Joyce may have felt was ultimately neutralized by a deep admiration for Yeats’s work.

A Feminist Fairy-Tale? On a novel Witches’ Daughter [Córka Czarownic] by Dorota Terakowska Highly awarded novel by Dorota Terakowska, Witches’ Daughter [Córka Czarownic], is considered by many critics as a piece of a YA feminist writing. The article asks not only if feminist ideas could be present in the novel written in 1988 but also if it could be seen as emancipatory by Polish readers after socio-political transformation (the novel was published for the first time in 1991). The author recreates three contexts to consider this possibilities: formal, socio-cultural and socio-political. Analysis of style, chronotop and characters of the novel prove that fairy-tale elements are only an ornaments in the novel, not always harmonically used in it. The statements about the female fairy tale made by I. Dan and S.S. Jones leads the author to a recognition that structure of a plot in Terakowska’s novel follows not female, but male script of the initiation present in the fairy tales. The socio-political transformation which took place in Poland in 1989 is a milestone put between the writing and publishing of the novel. Changes in women’s rights and women’s movement transformed the ideas that could have been read in 1988 as emancipatory into the backlash traits.

Lord of the Lewaw [Władca Lewawu] in ecocritical reading Last year marked the 30th anniversary of the ‘actual debut’ of Dorota Terakowska in fantasy prose. According to Jolanta Ługowska, who wrote an excellent work devoted to the output of this great Cracow writer, Lord of the Lewaw [Władca Lewawu] is ‘a story about power and its mechanisms’. To put it more precisely, the story of Bartek-Ketrab was written during the period of Martial Law, but the publication was blocked for political reasons. Since its premiere in 1989, the work has been one of the required reading books, it attracts the attention of critics and is popular among readers. Its long-lasting presence in the circle of literary selection, encourages readers to reach for it again and reinterpret it using the latest tools of literary exploration, which is represented, for instance, by ecological humanities or ecocriticism. Such an approach is stimulated by certain ‘ecotraces’, which may be distinguished in Terakowska’s work. These include: the threat of an ecological disaster hanging over Cracow due to air pollution and the contamination of the Vistula River, a layer of dust and dirt, which destroys the historical buildings in the city, as well as an illusory ‘ecological paradise’, as Wokark is at first perceived by the hero. Also, providing the protagonist of Lord of the Lewaw with the awareness of negative environmental changes, as well as the process of emerging from the ennvironmental crisis, which is included in the novel, seem close to ecocritical literature.