An Open Access Review Journal Encouraging Critical Engagement with the Continuing Process of Inventing the Middle Ages

November 1, 2020

Russo: 'Girls Make Better Kings'

 

“Girls Make Better Kings”: Queer YA Literature Saves Camelot

 

Keith C. Russo (keithcrusso@gmail.com)

 

The duology Once & Future and Sword in the Stars stands as a lamppost between many worlds, illuminating the crossroads of a never-ending loop of neomedieval reiterations of the Arthurian legend, and by whose light the reader witnesses the authors champion teenagers of every LGBTQAIP+ type, joust at hyper-capitalism and racial genocide, and even venture into combatting ableism. Medieval literature is perceptible in the distant landscape while we peer into twenty-first century young adult literature, warmed by the conscious perception of deja vu winking at those that already know other medievalisms and medieval texts. Amy Rose Capetta and Cory McCarthy negotiate their position within a multiplicity of medievalisms to construct a more equitable version of Arthur. Simultaneously and in a myriad of ways, this innovation becomes the medieval, allowing a reader’s imaginations to replace history and legend. Indeed, the novels insist that the Arthurian legends must be rewritten for each new age in order to disrupt the Arthurian canon as a means to preserve it.

 

Initially set in our future, in which humanity has destroyed Earth and lives among the stars, the books belong to the space fantasy young adult section. But because Arthurian medievalisms must discourse with a hundred other versions, even as they continue the medieval process of reproducing its stories by using established auctoritas and infusing them with a new spark, it becomes useful to investigate the provenance of this medievalism by reading backward through the most recent versions in the play of reiterations. While one might be tempted to think of Arthurian space fantasy as C.S. Lewis’s moralistic re-envisioning of the Fisher King story, That Hideous Strength, or as Camelot 3000, the erstwhile Arthurian DC Comic series, these books come closer to Mary Stewart’s Crystal Cave and the Adventures of Merlin television series in their bildungsroman of Merlin and Arthur. The Mists of Avalon’s determined protest against masculinist heteronormativity in Arthuriana permeates the books with more than a soupçon of Monty Python and the Holy Grail because metafictional hilarity substitutes our tolerant future for the Middle Ages when the teenaged space-knights become the legendary characters. However, Once & Future is more deeply indebted to T.H. White, whom Capetta and McCarthy thank in the Acknowledgements of the first book for “showing us that the Arthurian legend could be high-spirited, funny, sad, and resistance literature” (Once & Future 351). They are also a direct reaction against recent depictions, like when Cory McCarthy says in an interview, “Guy Ritchie’s King Arthur was the last straw” in the shelving of a long-time desire “to do a girl King Arthur.” It is not difficult to understand why the former hyper-masculine version would be answered by the “rainbow knights,” who seek to dismantle the prejudices of our own time and the Middles Ages.

 

The demolition begins with the co-protagonist, Ari Azar—written by McCarthy while Capetta wrote Merlin’s chapters—is a brown-skinned teenage girl orphaned from the quarantined world of Ketch and adopted by two mothers and their son, Kay. She is also the forty-second incarnation of the quondam et futurus rex because she is inhabited by the spirit of King Arthur. The device of the soul of Arthur cyclically repeating a version of the tragedy of le Morte Darthur is not more disruptive than any other contemporary medievalisms, until we consider that Arthur has chosen a girl in a future that is tolerant of all relationships between people. Ari meets her cohort—a “panoply of queerness” that reflects the reality of the authors—as children prior to the opening of the novels on the planet of Lionel, a global medieval faire that features a knight camp.  Guinevere, queen of Lionel when the novels open, and Ari marry and explicitly consummate it for more than just political reasons. The other post-medieval “knights” are Val, short for Percival, a Black genderfluid femboy, known by he/him, whose brother Lamarak identifies as non-binary, preferring the pronouns they/them. Kay is the only cis-gendered heterosexual character, and Jordan is an asexual female knight sworn to protect Gwen from all harm. Merlin, the other co-protagonist—who has been aging backwards from the proto-typical old wizard in the time of Camelot to a hormonal teenager in the future—attempts in every “cycle” or generation to “Find Arthur / Train Arthur / Nudge Arthur onto the nearest throne” and “[d]efeat the greatest evil in the world and Unite all of mankind” (O&F 24). As always, Merlin is trying to encourage Arthur to be the perfect king. But in this version, the humanist progressivism of White is adapted to the authors’ message of inclusivity and tolerance of people of all orientations and identities. as well as depicting displaced refugees, non-patriarchal families, and the differently abled. Unsurprisingly, Merlin is the link between the past, our present, and the future. 

 

Capetta and McCarthy retain Merlin as the authorial avatar, like White, Stewart, Malory, and authors as far back as Geoffrey of Monmouth, exploring the agendae of the moment and structuring the temporality of the narrative through him. The revision from canon versions is that this Merlin is simultaneously the reader’s avatar, too. Merlin makes several gendering mistakes early in Once & Future, like when he finds out Lamarak is present in this cycle of Arthur, Merlin refers to this knight as “he.” Kay corrects Merlin: “Lam is fluid. They,” to which Merlin apologizes, saying, “I come from a society with a history of gender assumptions based on physical markers, aesthetics…et cetera” (O&F 42). Contemporary readers uninitiated in the language of inclusive identities have a representative by which the audience might be tutored, much like White’s Wart. Merlin begins as inept student of gender identity and interaction but explores his love and attraction for Val throughout the duology. Proving Jes Battis correct that “magic is always gendered, sometimes transgendered” in young adult fantasy, Merlin’s elaborate magical shield around the planet Lionel—which is repelling the Evil Empire of hyper capitalism, the Mercer Corporation—collapses when he resists the urge to kiss Val in O&F. Merlin is only fulfilled when he expresses his desire for Val, linking Merlin to Kathryn Bond Stockton’s idea of a “gay child” who is “born backward” from the moment of their straight self’s death, which is usually after childhood. Merlin is always depicted in comparable temporal anomalies, but now it signifies his true self being set free rather than being entrapped in a cave by heterosexual romantic desire. Furthermore, the storyline reveals that his magic is also what makes him age backwards, until he becomes a teenager struggling with his sexual curiosity. Maria Sachiko Cecire unites all Queer theories in children’s fantasy by demonstrating the link between Bond’s and Carolyn Dinshaw’s ideas, saying “how amateurs’ promiscuous pairings of past and present can buck the expectations of linear temporality and produce queer alternatives.” The medievalism either works to imitate or disrupt the previous versions, but usually is reacting against the most recent medievalisms that deal in the same subject matter and the authentically pre-modern material. And, instead of recapitulating the tragedy of Camelot, through Merlin’s overlap between queerness, magic, and time, the authors have, I believe unwittingly, revived Merlin Silvestris as well as Merlin Ambrosius, who appears to sort out gender identities and social norms in the Roman de Silence.

 

In that poem, patriarchal avarice disinherits women, resulting in Cador using heteronormative marriage as a way to bully Eufemie into raising their female child as a male heir, saying, “Since my sweet, our flesh is one, /let our will be one as well” (Roche-Mahdi 1721-2). Because Cador “restrains” her noble female Nature and insists on mis-gendering his progeny, she is literally silenced in every agentive way, except being the greatest of knights. While the allegorical Nature of Silence is an essentialism that contemporary gender theory rejects, denying Silence’s true self makes her life miserable and awkward, culminating in a rape accusation that can only be rectified by Merlin. Silence is only able to catch him because she is a chaste woman, disproving the allegations by Queen Eufemme. But beyond this revelation, Merlin laughs at King Evan because he is fooled by the wife’s accusation when her illicit lover is dressed as a nun by which to tryst with her. He also reveals Silence’s true sex saying, “Only the clothes are masculine” (6537). This is the laughing Merlin, descended from the Vita Merlini, who is the arbiter of the truth of a situation, usually as the author employs dramatic irony. In Monmouth’s work, Merlin laughs at Rhydderch for being cuckolded by his wife, Ganeida. In an attempt to discredit the accusations, she dresses a boy up as a girl so that he will mispredict the boy’s death. As in the Vita, a bound feral Merlin in Silence laughs at a king dishonored by a faithless queen and ridicules judging people by their clothes. The irony of transvestite chicanery disappears in Merlin’s gaze. Unfortunately, Maistre Heldris uses Silence’s new-found correct assignment of gender to perfunctorily force the character into a heteronormative marriage. Merlin reestablishes patriarchal “nature” over nurture in Silence, but he proves to an audience conditioned to be receptive by the Capetta’s and McCarthy’s encouraging development of the Silvestris that Nature is the freedom to be “born this way.”

 

Similarly, when the rainbow knights travel through time to medieval “Camelot,” they are forced into a binary system of genders and heteronormativity and into the roles of the Arthurian canon, all of which is mostly expressed through their clothes. Ari is forced to become Lancelot, complete with breaking the first King Arthur’s heart by publicly courting Gweneviere, the one from the future posing as the legendary queen. The medievalism replaces the medieval legend when young Merlin realizes that Ari and Gwen “were the original love story of the Western canon, two girls from the future hidden in the folds of the past” (Sword in the Stars 86). While perhaps overstating the case for the primacy of Lancelot and Gweneviere, hiding their genders confirms Jody Norton’s thoughts that “Children are harmed by the male and female stereotypes developed in traditional literature,” especially when they are taught to suppress their own.  Ari asks Lam at one point in the second book: “how are you doing with the constant misgendering?” to which the non-binary character replies, “It’s breaking me.” However, Lamarack finds solace in counseling a girl named Roran who he tells Ari: “He’s trans. But he doesn’t know that word or that there are so many more like him. Or that one day someone like him won’t be stuffed into a dress, made to feel like he’s come out all wrong….I did get to give Roran hope—which fills me with joy” (SitS 59). Lamarack stays in the past, as their brother, Val, jokes, “to start humanity’s first GSA” (SitS 157). The reason Capetta and McCarthy chose to reinvent Camelot is because “When we go to schools: there are GSAs of queer kids; there are only token characters in most books in young adult” genre and the Round Table is “western civilization’s first fictive nod to equality.” Young adult Arthurian fantasy allows a space for inclusivity, despite the genre’s borrowing from two canons that stifled gender choice and identity as well as the agency of female characters. This medievalism replicates medieval authorship by adapting the story to the contemporary needs, but it also knowingly plays with the Arthuriana to reconstruct it into a simulacrum of past, present, and perhaps future.

 

The ending reconciles the two Merlin problem first raised by Gerald of Wales, completes the epicycle of medievalism continually replacing the medieval, and uses Cher’s “If I could Turn back Time” to defeat Nimue’s attempt to prevent the fulfilling of the quest. Completing the cycle of replacement, Merlin fashions a new sword named Kairos for Ari when they return to the future. The sword is in an amusement park on Earth’s moon called CAMELOT, Mercer’s false corporate medievalism—recalling Disney World’s Sword in the Stone in the Magic Kingdom—and can only be drawn by Ari and Gwen together, united and free to express their love. In an epilogue, the authors’ voices can be heard in the characters, when a happily queer Merlin explores the library on Ketch, which contains a collection of Arthuriana medievalisms curated by Val. He thinks, “the stories were never just a string of pretty words on a page or attractive strangers on a screen. They climbed inside your head, reordered things. Tore up parts of you by the roots and planted new ideas. Magic, really” (SitS 344). Merlin and the others being proud of their true identities is the magic that changes the world, defeats evil, and rehabilitates the aspects of the Arthurian legend that we now find problematic. It seems that love is the true power of Camelot, the power that compels authors like Capetta and McCarthy to repeatedly reimagine the legends and make them relevant to each era.

 

Keith C. Russo

Independent Scholar

August 13, 2020

Barber: The Daemons

Matt Barber, The Daemons, The Black Archive, 26. Edinburgh: Obverse Books, 2018.

Reviewed by Stephen Basdeo (BASDEOS@Richmond.ac.uk)

Doctor Who scarcely needs any introduction. He is the person with two hearts who flies around space and time in a battered old police box that is bigger on the inside than on the outside, and the subject of one of the most popular sci-fi television series in the UK and USA with a cult following. Obverse Books have in the last couple of years commissioned brief book length examinations of each Doctor Who story, and it was a pleasure to read a companion to one of my favourite serials, titled The Daemons (which aired in May–June 1971), written by Matt Barber.

Perhaps, however, ‘companion’ is the wrong word. Yes, at the beginning of the book there are the usual production notes. We know who the director and producers of the serial were, who were the minor uncredited actors, but the really special thing about this book is that the main part of it is actually an analysis of the story itself. To my knowledge, Obverse’s series of books represent the first attempt to analyse the narratives of this popular five part Doctor Who story which, so Barber points out, garnered an average of nearly 9 million viewers per episode and remains among the top 20 ‘greatest ever’ Doctor Who stories according to fans.

Most Doctor Who stories from the 1960s and 1970s, when all is said, were produced on the cheap and suffered routinely from bad acting. The outer space stories of the William Hartnell and Patrick Troughton era featured flimsy sets and were melodramatic. It was only with John Pertwee’s Doctor era, with the Doctor deprived of the TARDIS by the Time Lords and exiled to earth, that the show’s writers began producing more thoughtful stories. Inferno was one highlight of the Hartnell era and The Daemons was another. The latter was particularly innovative because, as Barber points out, it is less sci-fi and more a gothic folk horror (p. 13). And as he further argues, The Daemons, by its very title, immediately cements its gothic credentials by using an archaic spelling of the word ‘demon’ (p. 16). The incantations spoken by a coven of witches on screen are of course always in Latin—a peculiarly ‘medievalist’ trope that filmmakers seem obliged to include in tales of the supernatural (the devil, of course, being the master of no other language save Latin).

The Daemons is an occult story. Barber, who completed a PhD in the study of historical texts of witchcraft, therefore gives a helpful overview of the meaning of ‘occult’:

The history of the occult is the history of a collision, sometimes a complex cooperation, between high and low culture. It’s the conflict between kings and peasants; mainstream and populist academics; high brow authors and pot boiling hacks; genre cinema and arthouse … But it isn’t just about binary oppositions. The occult is often a fusion or a reconciliation of the culturally high and low; of the politically left and right; of science and magic. It’s what occupies the liminal space between the elite and the popular; colonising the vacuum that remains when the rational tendencies of society erodes the religious structures (pp. 16–17).

Viewed in this manner The Daemons truly does represent the occult—that it to say that it represents the clash between the scientific and the supernatural—because it is the Doctor’s adversary The Master who attempts to use science to summon the devil in order to gain supernatural powers for himself. Barber then goes on to give a brief, though not overbearing, review of the occult in literature, referencing plays such as Ben Jonson’s The Witch of Edmonton (1621), the works of M.R. James, the academic research of Margaret Allen Murray, along with Hammer Horror films and other movies such as The Wicker Man (1973).

Interestingly, The Daemons was written and aired at a time when there was growing concern in the press and among politicians in Britain over the rise of Wicca—one of the stranger, if relatively benign, forms of modern medievalism/early modernism in Britain today (it takes its name from an Anglo-Saxon word, although some of its adherents do claim a longer lineage dating back to the Druids). As Peter Harvey noted in the Guardian in 1970:

Police and Churches are concerned at the growing popularity of black magic and witchcraft. Memberships of cults and covens particularly in the Home Counties, the Cotswolds, and the West Country are increasing (p. 20).

The Anglican vicar, Reverend Ronald Adkins, had the year before also been unmasked as a ‘black magician’ (p. 47). Barber, in fact, points to a number of high profile features on occultists in the 1960s and early 1970s. There seems to have been a short-lived moral panic; the Labour MP Gwilym Roberts calling for a ban on Wicca. Its adherents, too, seemed to be fairly affluent middle-class people living in the south of England. Witchcraft also became a topic of interest to modern academics at this point, for one year after The Daemons aired Keith Thomas’s classic Religion and the Decline of Magic was published. Barber points out that Thomas was not the only academic to capitalise on the growing interest in witchcraft. Among other texts published in this period were Christina Larner’s Enemies of God: The Witch-Hunt in Scotland (1981), Alan Macfarlane’s Witchcraft in Tudor and Stuart England (1970) and Hugh Trevor-Roper’s The European Witch-craze of the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries (1968). 

Thus, when Barry Letts and Robert Sloman put pen to paper and began writing a story that would become The Daemons, it made sense to set a story of the supernatural in a remote fictionalised small village in southern England, in accordance with the Guardian’s reporting of the rise of Wicca in the Cotswolds and Home Counties. Letts’s and Sloman’s serial would also feature a female “white witch” character named Olivia Hawthorne, much like the real-life white witch Eleanor Bone who was interviewed by the Guardian. The Master’s character in the serial also recalls the real-life Alex Sanders, who made headlines in the 1970s by proclaiming himself as ‘King of the Witches’, and founder of modern British Wicca (also interviewed by the BBC in 1970).

Letts and Sloman originally wanted to push Doctor Who’s boundaries when they first started writing for the show. The unfavourable reaction to The Daemons in the press indicates that they were successful in this endeavour.

The Daemons is also unusual among Doctor Who stories because

it does not feature military or scientific institutions, labs or bases. It doesn’t even feature the TARDIS or time travel. Somehow, despite all this it has become a reference point for a particular era (p. 103).

Barber’s book about this defining serial of the Pertwee era is a fairly short and easy read but it is packed with information. Footnotes guide the reader to Barber’s primary and secondary sources—an unusual feature in a book of this scope. There is much that will please the medievalist and Doctor Who fan in Barber’s book (indeed, most medievalists I know are fans of the show, to varying degrees). Barber has historicised the serial, pointing out the contemporary news stories which influenced its creation. I would have liked—and this is by no means intended to be read as a criticism (for the book had a limited remit)—Barber to expand a bit more on the “Anti-Pertwee Backlash” that apparently occurred among the “Whovian” fandom in the 1980s; Barber’s passing remark on this made me want to learn more through various internet searches. As a post-2005 fan I had always assumed that Pertwee was one of the better Doctors so it surprised me to learn that it was not always so. This book will also appeal to those interested in the history of witchcraft and its portrayals in modern popular culture; prior to reading this book I had no idea that The Daemons was inspired by the moral panic over the rise of Wicca.

Stephen Basdeo 

Richmond: The American International University in London


August 8, 2020

International Medievalism Studies and Current Media Debates: Kalamazoo, Italy, Poland

International Medievalism and Current Media Debates: Kalamazoo, Italy, Poland

 

Piotr Toczyski (p.toczyski@gmail.com)

 

This is the story of how a medievalist book, both in its Italian original and its reccent English translation, inspired my participation in the current public debate related to the Polish presidential election in the mainstream old and new media. If I take part in such debates, it is because I believe that we live in the period, when medievalism studies (and all other humanities) should be remediated and mainstreamed in the popular media. We need more scholars critically engaging with the continuing process of inventing the "Middle Ages"[1] to act as public intellectuals. What could this mainstreaming look like? I will suggest one such possibility, based on my recent media presence.

 

Like so many projects, it all started at the 44th International Congress on Medieval Studies in Kalamazoo in 2009, at the session "What, in the World, is Medievalism?," sponsored by the International Society for the Study of Medievalism and presided by Richard Utz[2]. There, I met an Italian scholar, Tommaso di Carpegna Falconieri, with whom we later exchanged some ideas. Tommaso referred to my working paper in his 2011 book Medioevo Militante (published by Passaggi Einaudi)[3] and acknowledged it thoroughly, as well as some of the sources I later suggested. This way two Europeans, having met at Western Michigan University, experienced a specifically transatlantic dialogue – meeting in the US, but never before dialoguing in Europe. This year, nine years since its first publication, the updated and revised English translation of the book was published, and has thus become more accessible globally than its earlier Italian, Spanish, and French editions.

 

In the meantime, intellectuals worldwide started more and more willingly to acknowledge that our liquid postmodern world may be retold in terms of neo-medievalism – or may just simply be quasi-medieval. The media agenda opened to mainstream these and related concepts. In July 2020, I included some of these ideas into a letter to the editor of Gazeta Wyborcza, the biggest Polish quality daily, both web and print, and the letter was immediately published on their website. In the letter, I decided to mainstream an idea from the inspiring Congress experience and the similarly inspiring book. In the next paragraphs the letter (to which I hold copyright) follows:

 

* * *

The letter begins with the names of the medieval rulers of what used to be Poland in medieval and early postmedieval period, respectively ca. 960–992; 992–1025; 1333–1370; 1506–1548:

 

"We are mentally in the Middle Ages. And not even the one that ended with the fall of Constantinople or the great geographical discoveries, but the one that the French mediaevalist Jacques Le Goff called a long, extended medieval period stretching to the 19th century. You don’t believe it? Then look in your wallets. In mine I can find Mieszko I, Bolesław Chrobry, Kazimierz Wielki and Zygmunt Stary.

 

When in 2009 I visited the world’s largest congress of medieval scholars in western Michigan, I saw illustrations with Polish banknotes on a big screen in one of the halls. These illustrations from Poland served the Italian scientist Tommaso di Carpegna Falconieri to talk about rooting our mentality in the Middle Ages. It was not until this year that the English translation of his book (The Militant Middle Ages, Brill) was published late, but the myth of the medieval ruler, who so caught the attention of the Italian scholar, accompanies us in our wallets every day. According to di Carpegna Falconieri, this is an affliction of Eastern Europe. He writes: ‘And the Medieval Era, which in the Western European countries is now a metaphor for the non-state, is seen in Eastern Europe as the foundation of both the state and the nation. The examples may be numerous, but we will limit ourselves to a few notable cases, starting with symbolism. Banknotes printed since the early Nineties and circulating in Bulgaria, Moldavia, Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Ukraine, Hungary... (all republics) represent medieval sovereigns as fathers of the nation.’[4]

 

If banknotes were the only evidence, it could be considered a trifle. But what if the subjective mentality shapes our daily thinking? Political myths spoil a lot by dividing people. At the same time, they are useful, even uniting entire civilizations. It seems that Poles are united by the medieval myth of a ruler. We also see it in the election campaign. The presidential candidate currently holding this office is called the president regardless of circumstances. When running for election, there is no separation between the his presidential duties and activities as a candidate. Journalists write about the president, not the candidate, without thinking.

 

The archive of Gazeta Wyborcza shows that for the 30 days between June 7 - July 6, 2020, the phrase ‘President Duda’ has been mentioned 420 times, ‘Andrzej Duda’ 317 times and ‘President Andrzej Duda’ 276 times. What does this lack of precision prove? It is a manifestation of mythical thinking. The myth is constantly in our heads.

 

That is why I wrote to my friends: ‘Believe me, calling a candidate president is a manifestation of feudalism, a longing for a king. It’s not the right thing for us to do as a free people. During the election campaign, the president is president perhaps for two hours a day. We pay him for his presidential work, not for the rally. He runs the campaign as a candidate –  if we don’t understand this, we are not democrats, but subjects of the king.’

 

The question was: is it not the same in the West? Yes, it is. They may have no banknotes with kings, but in campaigns there are presidents, not candidates. During the summer months in the middle of Barack Obama’s second election campaign (1-30 June 2012) in the New York Times the words ‘President Obama’ appeared 667 times, ‘Barack Obama’ 110 times and ‘President Barack Obama’ - 27 times. The difficulty in separating the candidate’s actions from those of the president is therefore also a tendency of the Western world. For now, only some people can see that our language is controlled by mythical thinking. We have the intellectual tools to separate what a person does as a candidate and what s/he does as a president. We learn this in primary school and repeat the lessons in college level logic courses.

 

But for some reason we don’t reach for these tools. Myth dulls our sensitivity. We see how presidents in election campaigns do things unworthy of their status, sharpen their language and render the highest offices dishonorable for the sake of the crowd. However, if we take away the president’s presidency during the election campaign, we would feel like subjects whose king abdicated. We don’t want to let that happen.

 

The extended Middle Ages continue in Eastern Europe and the U.S. alike. In the west of Europe there are also quasi-medieval structures underlying the thinking about presidential power. Let’s take the example of Portugal. In a work from 2006 by Antonio R. Rubio Plo, Spanish professor of international relations and history of political thought, I read: ‘The political model makes the president a kind of ‘father of the nation’ – someone who (...) through the magic of universal suffrage, becomes a living symbol of the nation. Portugal seems to connect in this way with its rich history and legends. In a certain sense, every five years there is the return or confirmation of a new King Sebastián, the young monarch who disappeared in the wars with Morocco in 1578 and whose unlikely return was awaited by many Portuguese. It could be said that Sebastianism is not entirely dead in Portugal (...) Sebastianism – this collective urge to put great hopes in a politician – was also present in other presidencies (...) And if the truth be told, the leftist candidates (...) would also have created Sebastianist expectations (...).’[5]

 

A feudal mentality gives way to precision only sometimes. I find very few articles in which I read many times about ‘the presidential candidate’. Example from ‘Gazeta Wyborcza Wrocław’ - looks like inspired by the words of the ‘Women’s Strike Wroclaw’ described in its content. Even there is a reference to the ‘acting president’, but this is a step towards thinking less of the mythical and a more rational reporting of the election campaign. Let’s think - what gap could we not bridge if we had a little less president and a little more candidate?”[6]

 

* * *

The newspaper website is kept in Web 2.0 mode, but only the subscribers may comment. The letter, published there on pre-election Thursday, received over 20 comments from registered readers, almost all of them faavorable. Next, the editors of Gazeta Wyborcza decided to republish the letter in the prestigious weekend print magazine section of the newspaper on Saturday[7]. The editors changed the title to "Let’s dethrone them!," which may have sounded ambivalent during the ‘election silence’ which began on Saturday. I received several appreciative phone calls over the weekend.

 

The newspaper, setting the web-letter-changed-into-print-opinion within the framework of throne and dethroning, clearly played with the Middle Ages again, as did the digital version by framing its title around feudal kings. This way the analysis of Polish banknotes and their quasi-medieval mythscape, the resource first shown in this context in Kalamazoo, and then analyzed in scholarly writing, has been remediated after more than a decade. It has finally reached the very audience which it describes.

 

The global dialogues around the Middle Ages resulted in an academic work and media activity. As we see, even the ad hoc popular media headings may enrich post-medieval responses to the Middle Ages. And certainly studies in medievalism(s) have a huge potential to enrich media contexts and their current agendas.

 

Piotr Toczyski

M. Grzegorzewska University in Warsaw

Head, Media and Sociology of Communication

 



[1] Mission [Statement] (2009): Medievally Speaking. http://medievallyspeaking.blogspot.com/2009/01/mission.html.

[2] What, in the World, Is Medievalism? Global Reinventions of the Middle Ages. A Panel Discussion. (2009, May 7-10). Sponsor: Studies in Medievalism. Organizer: Richard Utz, Western Michigan Univ. Presider: Richard Utz. A panel discussion with Tommaso di Carpegna Falconieri, Univ. degli Studi di Urbino “Carlo Bo”; Florin Curta, Univ. of Florida; Louise D’Arcens, Univ. of Wollongong; Mustafa Kemal Mirzeler, Western Michigan Univ.; William Snell, Keoi Univ.; Sandra Ballif Straubhaar, Univ. of Texas–Austin; and Piotr Toczyski, Institute of Philosophy and Sociology, Polish Academy of Sciences (Gründler Travel Award Winner). 44th International Congress on Medieval Studies, https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1003&context=medieval_cong_archive.

[3] Di Carpegna Falconieri, T. (2011). Medioevo militante: la politica di oggi alle prese con barbari e crociati. Einaudi.

[4] Di Carpegna Falconieri, T. (2020). The Militant Middle Ages: Contemporary Politics Between New Barbarians and Modern Crusaders. Brill (p. 178).

[5] Rubio Plo, A. R. (2006). Presidential Elections in Portugal: Cavaquism, Sebastianism and Popular Hopes, Resultados de la búsqueda, Análisis del Real Instituto Elcano (ARI),

http://www.realinstitutoelcano.org/wps/wcm/connect/elcano/Elcano_in/Zonas_in/ARI%2010-2006 (translated from Spanish original: http://www.realinstitutoelcano.org/wps/portal/rielcano_es/contenido/!ut/p/a0/04_Sj9CPykssy0xPLMnMz0vMAfGjzOKNQ1zcA73dDQ38_YKNDRwtfN1cnf2cDf1DjfULsh0VAepxmvs!/?WCM_GLOBAL_CONTEXT=/elcano/Elcano_es/Zonas_es/ARI27-2011).

[6] Toczyski, P. (2020, July 9). Nazywanie kandydata prezydentem jest przejawem feudalizmu, tęsknotą za królem [Calling a Candidate President is a Sign of Feudalism, a Longing for a King], Wyborcza.pl,  https://wyborcza.pl/7,162657,26103462,nazywanie-kandydata-prezydentem-jest-przejawem-feudalizmu-tesknota.html

[7] Toczyski, P. (2020, July 11). Zdetronizujmy ich! [Let’s Dethrone Them!], Gazeta Wyborcza, p. 21.