A few days ago Indeks 73 received an email from Petko Stoyanov. This Bulgarian artist is protesting against David Černy's Entropa. Yet, as in the case of phantom artists, seemingly co-authors of Entropa made up by Černy, we cannot be sure if Stoyanov really exists.

For the sake of the debate let's assume Stoyanov is a real artist, especially as his opinions stir up an interesting discussion. In his blog Entropa 2 Stoyanov states David Černy perceives many European countries through trivial stereotypes and avoids serious questions concerning current problems in Europe.

Therefore Stoyanov presents his own version of Entropa. He calls for a serious discussion on inequality and discrimination, insisting on Polish participation in this debate due to strong Polish reaction to covering Černy's presentation of Bulgaria with a black cloth (Stoyanov means an international petition initiated by Indeks 73).

By means of his work Stoyanov wants to draw attention to such issues as anti-semitism in Poland,  a tragic situation of the Romanies in Romania, a problem of minorities in France and Germany, prostitution in the Czech Republic, mafia in Bulgaria. However, the realization of these ideas is rather ambiguous. On one hand, particular presentations of the work reflect nobel messages, on the other hand, the accompanying commentaries seem to be ambivalent.

For example, is Stoyanov's intention to point out the Polish have never accounted for their anti-semitism, or that they are unnecessarily accused of it? In the commentary Stoyanov describes Poland as a country ‘the most open for Jews in Europe, but also place of their Holocaust. This is one of the biggest shames of this country, feeling guilty even if they were not the executors. Everything can be paralysed there by the word "anti semitism".’


In response to the question about the meaning of a “Polish shower for the Jews” he created, Stoyanov explains he wants to emphasize difficult times in the history of Poland. He points out his vision of Poland is similar to Černy's vision of Bulgaria. This is quite surprising, as Černy's defenders wouldn't demand to cover this presentation of Poland, and furthermore, anti-semitism is in fact one of the biggest problems in our country. Stoyanov's reaction indicates he wasn't upset with the image of Bulgaria as a toilet, but as a Turkish toilet, which presents Bulgaria under Turkish occupation. It's worth mentioning, however, not all Bulgaria citizens felt offended with this presentation. Indeks 73 petition has been signed by many Bulgarians, too.


Stoyanov's vision suggests also something else: a conviction that old and new EU members are not treated equally, which in his opinion is reflected in Černy's work. Stoyanov writes: “It's better to spend EU money on modernization or closing down the nuclear power plant in Bulgaria than to present Austria as an eco-friendly country”.
He also presents his left-wing attitude, declares a necessity of tolerance and the rights of the minorities. He emphasizes importance of socio-economic issues, environmental protection, dangers of anti-semitism and censorship. It's surprising again – if Stoyanov is against censorship, why is he angry with the Polish who protest against covering up Černy's work?

Stoyanov is convinced that these problems cannot be discussed while making fun of them (as in the  case of Bulgaria presented as a Turkish toilet). He thinks the Czech artist has created a vision of Europe from a point of view of a person that is higher-class and rich, yet at the same time a philistine and bourgeois. Stoyanov claims Černy's Entropa is deeply conservative.

On the other hand, his protest resembles Černy's work in its form !


Despite many doubts Stoyanov's work raises (some aspect of his work resembles the actions of a Polish group The Krasnals), it is undeniable he has initiated a new debate on Černy's work, as well as on the problems of Europe; the European Union policies, the issues of exclusion, discrimination and European phobias. He has complied with one of the most important postulates of Indeks 73: a controversial piece of art should not induce an act of censorship but initiate a discussion on its meanings and faults, arguments explaining our attitude, why we don't like it or cannot accept it. This kind of discussion is provoked by Stoyanov's Entropa 2, therefore his reaction is worth considering.


Izabela Kowalczyk
strasznasztuka.blox.pl

Translated by Małgorzata Głombiowska