Eszter Neuberger

Artistic Representation of the 2008-2009 Attacks on Roma – Contemporary Art

Exhibitions of Csaba Nemes and Szabolcs Barakonyi

Introduction

The focus of my paper is socially engaged art, more precisely the examination of a discourse

conducted by the means of art about a problem that strongly affects the entire contemporary

society. The chosen problem is racism and social exclusion.

The explicit and implicit anti-Roma attitude of Hungarian population, as a social experience,

manifested clearly in a series of attacks in 2008-2009 on Roma families in several villages of

North-Eastern Hungary. The trauma caused and the collective responsibility of the entire

population in what has happened to families just because of their ethnic qualities, is still

something Hungarian society has not been able to digest.

However, processing, taking responsibility, detecting and voiding racist behaviour in

contemporary society is in everyone’s interest. Collective rememberance of the unprecedented

trauma of Holocaust as well as racism- and xenophoby-motivated violence is the basic condition

of a society’s mental health; the rule of solid and irrefutable norms rejects the ones seriously

violating the basic rules of humanity and coexistence of people. (This is of course a utopia, as we

do not know about any norms which haven’t changed or fell through times.)

Contemporary art in Hungary existing in a democratized milieu since the transition and has the

access to means of public communication - therefore prooves to be able to reflect on its own

existential questions and the world’s shifts and changes. The motivation is to criticize or refuse

the dominant representation concerning social phenomena, or to give alternative publicity to

those –as Edward Said says - not having the power to represent themselves. (Said: 1993)

I am presenting two artists who consciously use the possibilities of a distended media space to

raise issues of the contemporary society. They are the ones who reflected on the 2008-2009

attacks against the Roma, as a social trauma in their works.

Critical aspects of Roma representation

Ethnic exclusion and racism is an untold social taboo in Hungary. By racism – after the

sociologist Anthony Giddens – I understand not only prejudices based on physical features but

something called new racism – creating hierarchies of dominance and subordination in society to

legitimize the marginalization of the imagined Other – said to be far away from the values of the

majority. Giddens calls it cultural racism as it emphasises cultural differences instead of biological

ones. (Giddens 1995)

The mindset of society and the individuum is also shaped by the media – building up its own

reality. As the set of represented and that of important is strongly overlapping, the perception of

people is influenced by the agenda-setting power of mass media. The latter brings to life the

politics of representation, theorizing the role of visibility and invisibility in hierarchic structures.

Although, when we talk about an ethnic minority (in this case the Roma) it is not enough to stick

to the context of visibility. When examining the media representation of the Roma, it is the most

determining factor who is speaking about whom. Except the roma media and the minority

programs of public television, the coin is quite one-sided: the representatives of the majority

supervise the media-filtered image we draw on the Roma.

A piece of research done by Zsuzsa Vidra and Borbála Kriza, titled Entrapped by Majority – Media

Representation of Minorities, studies the representation the of minority in the Hungarian press by the

means of quantitative research and discourse analyses. Although they come to a conclusion that

the most represented minority are the Roma, the study calls attention to the backstrokes of this

representation. One problem is the lack of the minority’s „voice” (Vidra and Kriza 2010: 405).

They argue that „the press rarely presents minority, but if its issues yet appear, members of the

minority hardly ever speak, major society’s representatives talk instead.” Another problematic

aspect of Roma representation in Hungary is the ambigous manner in which the media speaks

about sensitive topics. Quoting the conclusions on the so-called Olaszliszka case, Vida and Kriza

say: „…reports covering the Roma are subjective and evaluating, often referring to unconfirmed

information. The Roma-Hungarian relation appears to be full of tension, ambiguous,

misunderstandable phrases are frequently used – such as the ironic application of the word

’minority’.” (Vidra and Kriza 2010:406)

Non-Roma artists presenting the Roma can also run into a few traps. Artworks depicting Roma

are mainly photographs, often with socio-anthropological characters. In 2005, there was an

exhibition in Millenáris Park titled Pictures, Gypsies, Gypsy-Pictures presenting photos of

photographers, academic researhers and studio photographers showing Roma people. These

shocked the Roma intelligentsia, who criticized the artists and the curator in their own media for

presenting the Roma in an essentialist manner – showing them only as poor and deprived, living

amongst low conditions. The case is presented in Péter Szuhay’s article Who is speaking?

Gypsy/Roma representation in visual arts as the first example of so-called „counter-speaking” – the

Roma’s denial and opposition of dominant methods of minority representation. (Szuhay 2010)

My attempt to introduce the challenges of the Roma minority’s representation was to create the

context to the (i. e of of ) the chosen artists’ works, which are strongly linked to the narrative of

Roma and Non-Roma relations – a context in which we find the meanings of the 2008-2009

racist attrocities. To speak about this is a gesture from the artists and the art scene, if we mark the

importance of socially engaged art as a mirror held to society – to put it metaphorically. aques

Rancie re in his book, The Emancipated Spectator, sees art’s critical power in demolishing the existing

structure and showing an alternative order in opposition (Ranciere 2011). That is what the chosen

artworks do: they work through the trauma of the biggest failure of Roma and Non-Roma

coexistence using the toolkit of art. They make society face the taboo of racism by criticizing

general practices of representation.

Csaba Nemes & Szabolcs Barakonyi – speaking the unspoken

Thus, the 2008-2009 series of attacks on Roma have not stayed unechoed in Hungarian

contemporary art. Several artists discussed the topic; yet, in this paper I focus only on two of

them since there would not be enough place for a profound analyses for all of them. The subjects

are the works of the photographer Szabolcs Barakonyi and the intermedia artist Csaba Nemes.

The reason of my emphasis on them is that they are organically related to each other and can be

parallelled on many aspects.

The works of Csaba Nemes were exhibited in the framework of Kiscelli Museum’s exhibition

Stand here! in October, 2010. It was a solo exhibition and consisted of Nemes’s hyperrealist

paintings and a five minutes long puppet film – also titled Stand here!. Szabolcs Barakonyi’s photos

were exhibited in Kunsthalle Budapest, also in the autumn of 2010. Before the analyses of the

exhibits, it is necessary to place the artists into the contemporary art scene and to contextualize

their artworks by suiting them into the oeuvres of the artists.

It is relevant for both Barakonyi and Nemes that they started their carreer after the transition, so

they socialized into a democratized scene of art institutions, but due to their age, both of them

experienced socialist times (Nemes was born in 1966, Barakonyi in 1976). It is also important to

mention that they do socially engaged art which cannot be interpreted without knowing its

context.

Artportal.hu as a „database” of hungarian art world, defines Csaba Nemes as an intermedia artist,

whose works’ main motivation is searching personal and collective identity. Nemes is considered

to be an artist with strong social engagement. His art and his public activism can be understood

as his concern about contemporary artists’ role in postmodern society. The social character of his

art strengthened after the series of radical anti-government rallies on the 23rd October 2006.

Since then, social criticism is in the focus of his art more significantly then before. These rallies

were the subjects of his project Remake. The project consists of several animation films showing

what actions took place on the streets of Budapest at that time.

Szabolcs Barakonyi started his career in 1997 after finishing his photographic studies at Ghost

Picture Free School. From the beginning, he helds a position as a photographer, from 1998 at

origo.hu then from 2003 at Index.hu; although, primarily he defines himself as a photo artist. He

makes a clear statement about his double identity as artist and photo reporter in an interview

saying: „I gained my first endorsements as photo reporter. However I recieved the ózsef Pécsi

scholarship with experimental photo and neither was I nominated for the Lucien Hervé award

with a photo report. Many asked me how can I also have an artist’s carreer besides the

photographer’s. But I said: there are painters who earn for a living with graphic design but still we

don’t ask why they are painting. There are a lot in common between the two fields and this helps

me with constant developement.” (Beke 2010) Thus, Barakonyi’s roles as photo reporter and

photographer are interfering with each other, he does not percieve it as a conflict.

Csaba Nemes: Stand here! – Kiscelli Museum

Placing in the oeuvre

Csaba Nemes’s exhibition’s illustrated catalogue were supplemented by Edit Sasvári’s and Emese

Kürti’s introductions. Sasvári in her piece tries to set up continuity between Nemes’s earlier and

recent works and projects addressing social issues. In her opinion, Nemes’s turn towards socially

engaged art is a denial of subjectivity’s sovereingty in his art. As Sasvári says: „art seeking to

answer social questions is a manifestation of this change in attitude”. (Sasvári 2010) Sasvári

contextualizes Nemes’s socio-critical art also on a global level. In the 90’s, after the end of the

Cold War, social conflicts form in totally different fields and set-up, as before. (Sasvári 2010) This

gives art a challenge of re-interpretation of the situation. Thus, Nemes’s art represents not only

his journey of self-identification; but, on a bigger scale, art’s self-redefinition, too.

After setting up the personal and global context of Nemes’s art Sasvári tries to give an overlook

on socially engaged art in Hungary in order to place Nemes in the scene. She uses her own

typology, defining three different types of artistic attitudes within socially engaged art. There is art

which is being critical on a local or regional level, thus dealing with hungarian society’s issues.

Then, there is art following rather global theoretical impulses, as a basis for evolving art concepts

gaining inspiration from the newest trends of philosophy, sociology and politics. Finally, there is

socially engaged art based rather upon the artist’s personal observations, his very own perception

of the environment. According to Sasvári, Csaba Nemes belongs to this third „group”, as his art

is his personal reflection and his presence and this point of view is very stressful in the artworks.

(Sasvári 2010)

Composition and stand

Speaking about the exhibition Stand here!, I am going to

devide the exhibits first by genre. There is the puppet film,

as a video installation. In his short film Nemes is using rapidly

changing viewpoints (1. image) as a counterpoint to the

still, life-like paintings exhibited in the Templespace. These

are depicting the homes of the attacked Roma families and

other houses of the so-called „gypsy settlement” or „gypsy

row” using the media’s distancing images. These images function only as inserts in the tv-news

illustrating narration, they have a secunder importance being out of the spectator’s attention.

However, as paintings exhibited in a gallery or museum they become central and inevitable to

interpret.

Besides interpretation they oblige the spectator to take a position. To engage with one side or the

other. The title of the exhibition (Stand here!) is a strong imperativus with a double meaning. On

one hand, it invites the spectator to identify with the artist’s perspective, to accept and step into

his position. On the other hand, it can offer the position of the Roma having to experience

racism on a daily basis.

The title can also function as an imperative to choose a side, saying: in this question one cannot

stay neutral. Vidra and Kriza write in their book on the minority’s media representation that

coded racism’s indicator is the frequency of ambiguous talk: if a (media) message would deny

1. image

discrimination and racism in its totality, then it should be visible in the „text” (Vidra and Kriza

2010). Thus, when speaking of racism, one must distance oneself from it, without compromise

and condition. Any ambiguity implicitely surmises exclusive thinking.

Criticism of media representation

Nemes’s seven paintings exhibited in the Templespace are

copies of documentary photographs - this characteristic

makes them intermedial. These images in their style and

content can be familiar to the spectator. It gives us further

aspects for interpretation that they paraphrase and criticise

media image, more precisely mediated (pseudo) reality’s

images. For example, the painting titled Light wind, is a

specific play-off of the tv news’s criminal reports’ visuality, showing the location of the crime. (2.

image)

„The paintings show current social phenomena dealing with hungarian far right’s tension with rhe Roma and it’s

brutal and tragic consequences together with the political grey zone what’s surrounding them.” - writes Kiscelli

Museum’s homepage about the exhibition. In my interpretation „political greyzone” means the

simplifying manner of representation with which media images reduce the visual presentation of

the attrocities to inserts or illustrations of texts. Therefore, statistically over-represented images

will become the least noticable or interesting for the public, consumed only as „side dish”.

With paintings made after documentary photos the artist exaltates the merely documentative type

of picture from the context of the news media: it is given a title and eventually a „story” or a plot.

The mass images which has been consumed schematically and with monotonity, undergo

individualization. (3. image)

2. image

3. image

The credibility of the personal viewpoint

Previously, Nemes was defined as an artist relying very much on his own personal experince,

emphasising his individual viewpoint in his artistic self expression. He applies this approach in

visualizing the 2008-2009 attacks on Roma and their social context. Stressing his own viewpoint

as an artist makes the paintings very human, credible and understandable. Four from the

presented seven paintings depicts houses familiar from news media, as the locations of the racist-

motivated crimes and the other three show „common” houses from the gypsy row which

normally don’t get much media attention.

The fact that these paintings are included in the exhibition shows that Nemes has a broader

attendance towards the problems of the Roma, not just explicitly raising his voice against racism.

Like Ákos Birkás writes in a catalogue presenting Nemes’s paintings: „his topics effect very much with

their banality (…) walking where everybody walks he notices and shows what today’s people see.” (Birkás, no

date) According to this rethoric of the artist, those who did not fall victims to the racist attacks

but live under the same poor conditions, facing the exlusion of society every day, are also

affected and deserve no less attention than the actual victims of the attacks. This attitude gains

more relevance if we note that according to the criminal reports on the case, the victims did not

cause any damage to the principals, so their „fault” was only being Roma.

Idyl and behind

It is also symbolical that the puppet film Stand here! does not relate straight to the 2008-2009

attacks but shows the manifestations of racism being present underneath the surface and rooted

from society’s deeper structures. In the short film a verderer dressed as a member of the

hungarian far-right’s paramilitary organization (Hungarian Guard Movement) blames a Roma

man stealing wood from the forest. Népszabadság Online (the online version of Népszabadság –

one of the biggest Hungarian dailies published the review of Gyula Rózsa on the exhibition. In

this article the critic calls the film „brutal” and „infuriating” because of the shocking genre, the

grotesque visual compositions and the „boundless flooding of racism bursting the screen”. The

combination of grotesque and playful in the film makes it shocking – says the critic. The bright

colours, the puppets which are normally associated with toys make the film even more shocking

– and also these are the features to link it with the painting collection. (Rózsa 2010)

These paintings are full with the idyl of plein air style with the sunshiny houses and green gardens

in front of them. However, this idyl is shattered by something on each and every painting

including also those, depicting houses but not wearing the traces of racist attrocities.”Telling

signs” prove that we see a house from the gypsy row. The peeling plaster, the wet walls with the

parabola collecting tv signs, patchwork of walls with different colours, garden disfigured by wire

fence. Hidden allusions which can only be decoded by those who know the Hungarian Roma’s

living conditions closely. That is why Csaba Nemes’s art becomes local, experience-like and this is

what gives its social embeddedness.

Szabolcs Barakonyi: Confrontation

Szabolcs Barakonyi’s exhibition is the exhibition of a photo reporter and an artist. He visited the

victims’ families of the 2008-2009 attrocities village by village and photographed the survivors or

the closest relatives of the dead victims in front of their ruined or run-down homes. His portraits

are that of sociographic and documentative function and just like a crime dossier, they register

the victims of the attacks without taking any sides – at first view. Still the exhibition’s title makes

it clear that the artist wants the spectator to face these victims of Hungarian society’s racism and

exclusive attitude, that is to face his/her own crimes. The photos presented at the exhibition are

going to be analysed through Roland Barthes’ and Susan Sontag’s theories of visuality.

In his book, titled Camera Lucida, Barthes remarks that a photo always „points a finger to what is

in front of our eyes” – it says: „this is it” (Barthes 1985). Barakonyi’s photos also just point to the

victims saying: „it’s them!”. However,(sztem itt érdemes új mondatot indítani) this simplicity

makes them impressive because the confrontation with the victims (like in justice) prompts the

principal for repentance and reformation. The confrontation’s importance in case of racist

crimes lies in raising consciousness. It warns that we should recognize the fact that racism is a

present problem in the 21st century. It warns: things can come to such a pass that people are

being attacked or killed just because of their skin colour and their origin. What counts is not only

who is pulling the trigger, it is the morale filled with hatred what culminates in effective action.

5. image 4. image

Susan Sontag in her book, titled Regarding the pain of others, writes about the confrontation’s role in

transmitting and curing trauma and gives the theoretical framework for wartime photography and

the spectator’s attitude towards images of suffering broadcasted by mass media. In the case of

Barakonyi’s photos it is not relevant to talk about suffering in its physical meaning as the portraits

are depicting the post-attack states (4. image, 5. image). Even though the spectator meets much

more shocking pictures in the media, I still think it is relevant to use Sontag’s approach, as these

portraits are also showing the trauma of the victims and their relatives.

One chapter of Regarding the pain of others presents the different attitudes of mustering the agony

from a distance. She argues that sympathy as a possible reaction to such images is not an

appropriate attitude: as long as we feel sympathy we think we are not parts of what caused the

suffering. „Sympathy is not an enduring emotion. It has to be changed to action otherwise it

deflates” – Sontag says. By this she refers to the reaction she believes to be appropriate:

contemplation and search for answers to these questions: why our privilegedness is on the same

map with their misery and what is our responsibility in this misery? (Sontag 2004: 106)

Portrait and its meaning

In Camera Lucida Barthes states that photography’s subversive effect works when it makes the

spectator think– and not when it frightens, freaks out or stigmatizes. Barthes goes further: in

order to communicate its message a picture has to have a face, a front, a Mask. He applies the

word „Mask” referring to Italo Calvino who used the term when defining the social and social

historical meaning of a face. (Barthes 1985:41) In my interpretation the Mask is the role (in its

theatrical meaning) that the photographed face takes on. This gives Barakonyi’s portraits their

social significance: the faces appearing on them possess this Mask with which (instead of being

only individuals and victims) they signify the notion of racism what they fell a victim to.

Barthes accuses society of being beware of what he calls „Mask-Photography” and wishes it to be

surrounded by „blunting noise”. „If the photo’s meaning is too sharp they quickly throw it back, valuating it

aesthetically not politically.” – Barthes says. (Barthes 1985:39) But, Barthes continues, photography’s

nature, that it is at the same time critical (therefore worrying) and discreet, makes it unable to

articulate social criticism efficiently. The distancing attitude is a dead-end street of photography

according to Barthes, as one has to tear down this distance to understand the criticism a photo

expresses – and only those eyes can do it who are willing to. (Barthes 1985) Barakonyi gets

around this problem by putting media texts to the photos. These descriptions dissolve the

discretion of the pictures and pass a plain sentence on racism and anti-roma attitude.

Studium and Punctum

Barthes’s theory puts the spectator into the centre and builds his analyses on the binarity of

Studium and Punctum. Studium is the general attention the spectator pays on the picture. For

example, the photos of Confrontation can be percieved as evidence or a tableau registering the

victims. The other element is Punctum that „disturbs” Studium: „the accidental, something that

immediately sticks in me”, attracting attention.

Barthes does not spread out his ascertainments to the spectator in general, nor will I try to give a

universal interpretation to the analysed pictures. Proceeding from my own behaviour, as a

spectator, I detect the Punctum on almost all of the exhibits in the objects referring to the

attacked roma familes’ living circumstances, testifying

the reality of Roma society and the reality of the attacks

– on what the exhibition aims to remember. These

objects catching the spectator’s eye are the following:

the peeling plaster, burnt-down roof or even the

selection of places, like the photo, where the subjective

of the picture stands in the middle of nowhere. At the

very place where house stood before it completely burnt

down as a result of the attacks (6. image).

The second life of Confrontation

The photos of the exhibition Confrontation differ from mainstream media images in placing the

real drama outside the picture. We see the Roma people in front of the camera. Their stories are

written in the texts placed next to the photos or in the catalogue. The speciality of these texts is

that they were first published on index.hu as elements of a series of articles written by Veronika

Munk – illustrated with Barakonyi’s exhibited photos. Thus, Barakonyi’s exhibition is exceptional

because it operates not only in an isolated artworld, but in a broader publicity – in a well-read

online newspaper. Vera Munk’s articles give the chance to the survivors and relatives of the

6. image

victims died in the attacks to create their own narratives by letting them remember and share

personal details on their lost ones. With this individualization the drama and the trauma of the

victims revives and photos and texts together make the spectator confront.

Finally, Barakonyi’s works are originally press photos, therefore they reflect intentions of a press

photographer to inform, to document. But Confrontation (a title for the article series and the

exhibition) in the gallery as a medium, provokes a shift in emphasis: documentarist press photos

get critical overtone, dialogue of photo and spectator transforms into meeting of principal and

victim.

Operator – Spectator – Spectrum

According to Barthes, photography can be interpreted in three different aspects: we photograph,

we are photographed, or we watch photography. Therefore the act of photographing has three

agents: the Operator (photographer), the Spectator and the Spectrum (the photo itself). (Barthes

1985). Thus, we shall analyse Barakonyi’s photographs from these three aspects.

The role of the Operator needs some specification. It is hard to draw the line between a

professional and an amateur photographer or between a press photographer and an artist. There

are differences in attitude, undoubtedly, which can play an important role in the interpretation. In

Barakonyi’s case the press photographer-artist opposition is relevant.

Barakonyi’s photos depict the survivors and the relatives of the victims on portraits in front of

their homes or former homes. Barthes writes the following about this genre: „in front of the camera I

am who I believe I am; who I want to be seen; who the photographer sees in me; and who the photographer uses to

present his art.”

Barakonyi’s subjectives are aware of being photographed and it is necessary to reflect on their

situation. Barthes argues: when a photograph is being taken, the subjective transforms into an

object, in fact he/she feels this transformation. (Barthes 1985) Then using Sontag’s term, the

photographer takes posession of the objectified subjective. It is surrendering to the

photographer, because the subjective cannot foresee what the photo will be like and how it will

be used. In the case of Barakonyi’s photograpsh this phenomenon is stronger, as the member of

the major society captures the ethnic minority’s representatives.

Susan Sontag in her book, On Photography, discusses the ethical aspects of the photographer-

subjective relationship. She argues that the photographer has power on its subjective: the

photographer appears as a raider in their eyes. The words „load” and „shoot” used in

photographic jargon are the evidences to it, as they are coming from the context of guns. (Sontag

1973) Sontag highlights that photographing is never an impartial, objective act – it can be utilized

for several reasons including criminalization. At this point the photographer can be defined as an

investigator consequently visiting the locations of crimes and the victims. He/she is the one who

initiates the confrontation.

The relation of photo and title

The titles of the portraits exhibited are the names of those villages where the attacks took place

(Alsózsolca, Piricse, Nagycsécs, Tiszalök, Kisléta, Tatárszentgyörgy). Sontag in Regarding the pain of

others criticises the practice of not naming the subjective of a portrait. She argues that these

pictures maintain the power of fame as only the famous have the right to bear a name. The rest

are just representatives of their ethnic group, profession, etc. (Sontag 2003). However, in my

interpretation the unnamed victims on Barakonyi’s portraits are not considered as a mistake,

because these pictures are as much about racism in general as about the respective crime of

murders of/attacs on individuals. The purpose here is not to make the victims famous but to

raise consciousness on the fact that the anti-roma attitude is a daily experience in the

contemporary Hungary.

Conclusions

In this essay my focus was on presenting the artistic representation of the 2008-2009 attacks on

the Roma with two examples strongly related to each other. The statement of my essay is that the

close-minded and reserve-like art scene of the late 90’s, the conscious avoiding of social

engagement had a significant role in the subsistence of social taboos like racism. When these

repressed problems explode in the contemporary society, art scene’s actors pose the question: is

there not a need for art to come out from its closed bubble? Is it not time to express an intention

to turn back the process going unequivocally in the wrong way?

Nemes’ and Barakonyi’s works processing the trauma of the attacks on the Roma are the works

of two artists holding a mirror to Hungarian society. They make the spectator face his/her own

responsibilty and the society’s indirect responsibility in the manifestations of racist attitudes. The

two examples of representing and reflecting racism and racist crimes in art have key importance

in the Hungarian art scene. As I have argued previously, this significance lies in: firstly turning a

critical mirror to society; secondly setting an example of socially engaged art and strongly critical

artistic attitude. Above all, Nemes’s and Barakonyi’s exhibitions were in the focus of my research

because their works criticized and altered the general methods of representation and visualisation

of the Roma. The credibility of their artworks originates from their subjectivity.

It is beyond the capacity of this essay to approach the topic from every possible angle. However,

I strongly believe that it would be beneficial to continue the research of socially engaged art

addressing social issues of Hungarian contemporary society.

References

Barthes, Roland (1985), Camera Lucida, translated by Ferch, M., Európa Publishing House,

Budapest

Beke, Dániel (2010), „I’m a photographer, not a reporter” available at:

http://pixinfo.com/cikkek/interju_barakonyi_szabolcs (accessed 29 april 2012)

Birkás, Ákos (no date), „Nemes Csaba”, in Birkás, Á. (Ed.). Nemes Csaba (publisher unknown)

Giddens, Anthony (1995), Sociology,. translated by Babarczy, E., Osiris, Budapest

Rancie re, Jaques (2011), The Emancipated Spectator. Translated by Erhardt, M., Műcsarnok,

Budapest

Rózsa, Gyula (2010): „Critical impressionism. Csaba Nemes: Stand here!”, available at:

http://nol.hu/lap/kult/20101013-kritikai_impresszionizmus (accessed 30 april 2012)

Said, Edward (1993): Culture and Imperialism, Random House Inc., New York

Sasvári, Edit (2010), „Nemes Csaba: Stand here!”, in Sasvári, E. (Ed.) Nemes Csaba: Stand here!,

Metropolitan Gallery, Kiscelli Museum Budapest

Sontag, Susan (2004): Regarding the pain of others, translated by Komáromy, R., Európa Publishing

House, Budapest

Sontag, Susan (2007), On Photography, translated by Nemes, A., Európa Publishing House,

Budapest

Szuhay, Péter (2010): „Who is speaking? Gypsy/Roma representation in visual arts”, in

Feischmidt, M. (Ed.), Ethnicity. The Differentiating Society, Gondolat – MTA Research Institute for

Ethnic and National Minorities, Budapest, pp. 367-391.

Vidra, Zsuzsanna and Kriza, Borbála (2010): „Entrapped by Majority – Media Representation of

Minorities”, in Feischmidt, M. (Ed.), Ethnicity. The Differentiating Society, Gondolat – MTA

Research Institute for Ethnic and National Minorities, Budapest, pp. 392-406.