The experience of living in a hybrid cultural reality in a state of radical flux is central to the work of many contemporary choreographers. Artists’ day-to-day environments are subject to constant transformation, with subsequent transiently popular models of communication playing a part in this process. It’s no wonder that choreographers in their work seek to both describe and transform it. Thus it wouldn’t be amiss to analyse how concepts of remediation, postmediality and particularly post-Internet-ness ‘work’ in the context of contemporary choreographic practices; then to put these categories in the context of categories such as post-theatre and post-dance.

In the present article, I will consider TO [IT, MAAT Festival, 2015], a performance directed by the young Polish choreographer Marta Ziółek. With regard to practices discussed here, I will be referencing terminology used by performance theorist Bojana Cvejić.¹ According to that author, it is experimentation with the models of making, performing and attending – rather than the intentional modelling of body movements by ‘rhythmic, gestural, or other kinds of patterns’ – that constitutes the essence of creative practices within the new early twenty-first century choreography.² Terms used by Cvejić  – ‘new choreography’ and ‘choreographic performance’ – enable us to emphasise the significance of artists’ conceptual and intellectual involvement. The nominal link between new choreography and dance remains in place  (movement and the body still matter as categories), but the practices of new choreographers are becoming ever more heterogeneous; and forms of expression peculiar both to various artistic disciplines and to other non-artistic forms of communication are being recycled.³

I will take two tenets as my points of departure: first, the view that choreographic performance can be defined as a medium, and second, that artists working in new choreography ‘take into consideration’ the medial (and the potentially inter-, trans- and postmedial) status of the art form they practice.

Dance as a medium

Since the mid-twentieth century, the body-as-medium has been included in media studies theory. Primary media (Primärmedien) – in other words, non-technical media ‘drawing on human capabilities alone’ were one category in the four-tier classification proposed by Harry Pross.  Another German scholar, Werner Faulstich, quite openly described this type of media as ‘human’ (Menschenmedien).⁴ The communication perspective regards dance as a medium of just this kind. Alongside ‘old technological media (photography and film)’ and ‘new technological media (video and computers)’, artist, theoretician and curator Peter Weibel in his analysis of art media has introduced the concept of ‘old non-technological media’ to describe painting and sculpture. Weibel further argues that old non-technological media have only acquired their media status owing to the influence of technological media. He contends (and it’s a widely disputed contention) that the greatest achievement of the new media is not that they have opened art up to new possibilities, but rather that they triggered a new way of thinking about old non-technological media, leading to a radical transformation of the latter.⁵ If we accept both categories – human media (of which the dancing body is one) and old non-technological media (this is where dance as an art medium belongs) – we will be able to regard dance as an old non-technological art medium.

It follows from my second argument that some artists working in new choreography pose the choreographic performance ‘as a medium’ as a problem. As with any contemporary form of cultural activity, new choreography comes into being and is received in a media-saturated space, and the choreographic performance – conceived of as a medium – enters into relations of mutual reflection, quotation and processing with other media. Simultaneously to this intermedial relation, numerous attempts have been made since the 1990s to take stock of the issue of new technologies entering the sphere of performance. Extensive research into the mutual relation between performance and other media and performance and technology has resulted in the emergence of further categories and research paradigms – including digital, multimedia, Internet, cyborgian, virtual and intermedial theatre/performance. However, as theatre and performance scholar Jennifer Parker-Starbuck has observed ‘it has become so commonplace to see screens, projections, animations and electronic objects on stage that we might consider reverting “multimedia theatre” back to just “theatre” ’.⁶ The demise of the ‘performance and media’ paradigms has also been announced by the scholar Sarah Bay-Cheng, who references the category of convergence culture put forward by Henry Jenkins. This type of culture is characterised by a circulation of content between different media platforms and, consequently, a ‘contamination’ of models and methods of interpretation.⁷

Propositions outlined above obviously shouldn’t be take to mean that research into relations between theatre /performance and technology/the media should be abandoned – what they do indicate, however, is the need for change in research perspective. I would like to look into the distortions, transformations and the hybridization of creative strategies and methods. In doing so, I will put forward three interpretational categories borrowed from media studies and art theory: remediation, postmediality and post-Internet-ness. These categories enable us to analyse how artists practicing new choreography process language and strategies adopted by different media. The category of remediation allows for an analysis of the mutual relation between different media at the level of creation, impact and reception strategies. The category of postmediality enables us to take interpretation into a sphere where the concept of medium specificity loses its rationale in favour of the fluid processes and strategies belonging to no medium in particular. Finally, the category of post-Internet-ness makes it easier to surmise that new choreography operates within a broader field of art ‘contaminated’ with Internet dialect.

Remediation

The concept of remediation was first introduced by Jay David Bolter and Richard Grusin (an excerpt of their 2000 book Remediation: Understanding New Media has been translated into Polish).⁸ With a view to offering a clear definition of the new category, the two scholars juxtaposed it with adaptation (or repurposing, as it is known in the entertainment industry), a popular process of transferring content within an intermedial relation. Repurposing occurs when the content of a piece (a novel, for example) is borrowed or re-used without the medium itself being ‘appropriated or quoted’.⁹ As Bolter and Grusin have emphasised, ‘there may be no conscious interplay between media. The interplay happens, if at all, only for the reader or viewer who happens to know both versions and can compare them’. ¹⁰ With remediation, things are different: a given medium is presented, featured or processed in another medium. ‘Remediation operates in both directions: users of older media such as film and television, can seek to appropriate and refashion digital graphics, just as graphics artists can refashion film and television’.¹¹ Importantly, in the process of remediation it’s not only the forms, techniques and strategies of other media that are appropriated and refashioned – their ‘social significance’ is subject to the same processes.¹²

Within new choreography, remediation occurs in the adaptation of language and strategies of newer media (such as photography, film, television, video, computer media and the Internet) and new media forms and genres (tabloid newspaper, TV series, soap opera, video clip, podcast, video game, social and interactive media, advertising). By remediating their medium, artists working in new choreography appropriate and refashion strategies peculiar to another medium, seeing to it that the refashioned strategies remain discernible and easy to decipher. As the present article continues, I shall look at the processes of appropriating and refashioning operations peculiar to computer media, and also at online strategies of content presentation, distribution and reception.

Postmedial Culture

Bay-Cheng, as she commented in her 2016 piece ‘Postmedia Performance’¹³ on the efforts of scholars aiming to document and analyse the relation between performance and the media, has argued that ‘perhaps it is time to acknowledge that we may have entered a moment of “postmedia” ’.¹⁵ Without spending too much time over nuances of postmediality discourse, Bay-Cheng emphasises two characteristics of postmedial work: making reference to digital technology and targeting an audience capable of recognising references to other media – with the proviso that the specificity of a given medium is not emphasised. Within postmedial performance conceived of in this manner, different media or intermedial relations are not connected or staged: the specificity of individual media no longer matters, and mutual relations between them become equally insignificant.¹⁵

Two concepts come closest to the generalised definition of postmediality proposed by Bay-Cheng: Weibel’s ‘postmedia condition’ and Sigfried Zielinski’s ‘art after the media’. It needs to be emphasised that both theoriticians, when they speak of art and condition ‘after the media’, have in mind a situation caused by the domination of new digital media. In his 2006 article ‘The Post-Media Condition’,¹⁶ Weibel argues that in a ‘post-media’ world media lose their distinct identity: ‘no medium is dominant any longer; instead all of the different media influence and determine each other’ – meanwhile, ‘all of art practice keeps to the script of the media’. As for Zielinski, in his 2013 book [...After the Media], he defines ‘art after media’ as the kind of art that ‘does not require the media as a legitimation or as a special sensation any longer, but at the same time does not close its eyes, ears and mind to the media’.¹⁷

Post-Internet art

The term ‘post-Internet art’ is used to refer to artistic activities taking into consideration the impact of the Internet on culture. As with the term ‘postmodernism’, the prefix ‘post-’ does not imply the end of the Internet. Instead it signifies a relation, a reaction to the ubiquity of a certain paradigm – in this case, the situation where contemporary art is always linked with the Internet in one way or another. Thus what’s meant here is art that does not have to be Internet art or art on the Internet (though it may), but it is always art about the Internet. In the work of post-Internet artists, the Internet is not a repository of material but above all a matrix, a code or cultural software refashioning recipients’ experience, behaviour and perception of reality in a certain way. New York City artist and curator Marisa Olson, who introduced the concept of post-Internet in 2008, offers a useful distinction between post-Internet artistic practices and the quotidian, material, post-Internet culture on which these practices feed.¹⁸ Objects that can be used as material for further processing have been described by critic and curator Domenico Quaranta as ‘the vernacular imagery of the internet from the inside’.¹⁹ Amateur and professional photography, video, graphics, animation, objects produced and posted by institutions and corporations (such as news) can certainly be included as vernacular imagery, as can online performances: videos, fashion shows, political broadcasts or even game-runs. Post-Internet practices are relevant to digital and corporate culture, and to the effects of so-called ubiquitous computing and ubiquitous networking. Computer operational paradigms and network strategies such as ‘montage, postproduction, copying and remixing’,²⁰ and ‘various related ideologies such as sharing and copyleft’²¹ are used both offline and online.

Olson emphasises this crucial aspect of post-Internet art: ‘the notion of the postinternet encapsulates and transports network conditions and their critical awareness as such, even so far as to transcend the internet’.²² This means that even artists who don’t use digital media and don’t work online can be regarded as post-Internet artists. Mårten Spångberg, the Swedish choreographer with an interest in expanded choreography, sums it up thus: ‘Post-internet art is not an art that takes distance from the Internet but instead reflects the circumstances that art is confronted with when every art is reflected in, through and with the Internet’.²³

Marta Ziółek’s post-dance

The above concepts and definitions – remediation, postmedia culture and post-Internet art – are relevant to the practices adopted by new choreography circles over the past decade. Awareness of how contemporary technologies work and, more broadly, awareness of the mediasphere – that is, of a certain kind of techno-media sensibility – underlies the creative practice of numerous Polish artists. Below, I shall look particularly carefully at IT, a choreographic performance by Marta Ziółek from which this article takes its title [in the original]. As I do so, I shall make use of theories concerning content circulation on the Internet and point out strategies regarded by theoreticians as peculiar to postmedia culture and post-Internet art.

IT was completed in 2015 as part of the seventh edition of the MAAT Festival based in Lublin, taking as its theme the work of the legendary theatre artist Tadeusz Kantor. It premiered in December of that year (the description that follows and my interpretation of the piece are relevant to the performance that took place on 13 December 2015 at the Cricoteka in Kraków). The context in which the work was produced matters: Ziołek made a reference to Kantor’s bio-objects; and in her work enquired about the forms meaning can take, ways in which it can be produced and how it can operate in present-day hybrids: people (bio-) linked with devices (-objects). Ziółek addressed two aspects of this phenomenon: creating identity by means of gadget-objects and the implementation of technology into the cognitive process – devices used and given prominence during the performance such as a laptop, smartphone, a selfie stick or tablet are regarded by residents of the contemporary mediasphere as body parts no less natural than eyes or limbs. Further, the choreographer made use in her work of recycling, recontextualization and rematerialization strategies, defined as the characteristics of post-authorial ideology, peculiar to the postmedial era.²⁴ Ziółek subjected Kantor’s manifestos and theatre practices that were of interest to her to this treatment, and to Internet content trending during her work on the performance.

'IT', devised and choreographed by Marta Ziółek, premiere: 4.12.2015 as part of Kantor Now, 7th edition of the Maat Festival, Centre for Culture in Lublin and Centre for the Documentation of the Art of Tadeusz Kantor - Cricoteka. Photo: Grzegorz Mart, courtesy of Cricoteka.

In IT, Ziółek speaks the language of two realities: the world of performative arts and of popular media. As she processes snippets of both languages, remixes content (images, for example) and remediating strategies (ways of imaging, for instance), the choreographer extends her invitation to take part primarily to audience members who are at least vaguely familiar with both contexts. Her statement, like statements made by other post-Internet artists, is neither ‘unambiguously critical nor unambiguously affirmative of networked popular culture’ – it is, however, characterised by ‘irony, critical reticence and a fondness of juggling meanings’.²⁵

Structurally, the performance is based on a polylogue of recontextualized fragments taken from such media and spectacle forms as videos (by Justin Bieber, Major Lazer and Adele), advertisements (featuring Lance Armstrong and David Beckham), fitness choreography, poetic performance (‘Your Revolution’ by Sarah Jones), theatre installation (Kantor Downtown by Jolanta Janiczak, Joanna Krakowska, Magda Mosiewicz and Wiktor Rubin) and Romantic ballet choreography (Giselle). As she brings these together, the choreographer makes use of the flat dramatic-effect model known from videos: subsequent scenes don’t lead to a climax, and the attention of the viewer is held by her curiosity and the satisfaction of being able to recognise the points of reference. However, it needs to be emphasised that the simultaneity peculiar to the contemporary media-interfaces usage model is absent from the piece: structure-wise, ITbears more resemblance to the linear development of the so-called youtube party than the graphic user interface (GUI), enabling numerous windows comprising the visual surface of ‘contact’ to be open at the same time.

Ziółek’s practice can be described as a sort of rematerialization by embodiment of digital representations of the world and simulacra circulating on the Internet. Transient, phantasmagoric identities are performed in her work by means of half-finished ready-mades borrowed from the Web. Objects and images known from the media are displayed, embodied and performed in a new context. Because the bodies of the performers don’t conform to the standards constituted inside the media mainstream and bear no resemblance to body images explored in popular culture, the parody of narrative and media representations proposed by Ziółek features some interesting and amusing shifts.

From the very beginning of IT, the choreographer and the performers (Korina Kordova and Robert Wasiewicz, in the version I attended) employ a strategy of overlapping and overlaying differing, seemingly conflicting meanings. In the opening scene, the lyrics of ‘I’ll Show You’ by Justin Bieber provide a framework for their actions. The song’s title has a dual meaning. On one hand, it shows the singer opening up about pressure he is under as a celebrity, having to act in spite of himself and disregard his true, vulnerable and sensitive self. In this context, the title has to be understood as ‘I’ll show you’: I’ll reveal my true self. Kordova and Wasiewicz’s magnified faces are displayed only on tablets that cover their actual features – the pair perversely perform, embody and rematerialize the gestures and facial expressions from the singer’s clip. Their caricature-like, overblown performance is juxtaposed with Bieber’s professionalism as he ‘does’ honesty – thus the performers indicate that ‘truth’ is impossible and the ‘authenticity’ produced by the media is but a simulacrum. On the other hand, the title of Bieber’s song can be understood as ‘I’ll show you’: you will be shown, exposed. This is why Ziółek opts for the teasing (yet literal) manoeuvre of showing the audience ‘to themselves’. She enters the stage wearing an typical contemporary R & B singer-dancer outfit: her body lines and breasts emphasised, with the performer’s body movements in direct reference to the pop-media model, defining that norm of female behaviour with respect to the body. Holding a smartphone on a stick in her outstretched hand, making use of the selfie camera pointed at the audience, Ziółek introduces them (or their images, rather) on stage.

This opening scene already sets in motion the process of reproducing the image in performative repetition which will recur throughout the performance. In another sequence, the three performers rematerialise onto the stage a corporeal performance of a children’s fitness group, encouraging the audience to warm up together – cyclist Lance Armstrong’s monologue from a Nike advertisement is quoted alongside. The bodies of the performers become an exhibition space, where brands and celebrity gestures are being put on display. This ‘variety fair’ awakens the competitive instinct in the performers: in the following scene, the audience witnesses a dance competition which seems to have more in common with popular dance-contest shows such as So You Think You Can Dance than with street-dance competitions, the latter not as yet appropriated by the media industry. Going up against each other are such cultural-sphere features (‘texts’) as the score of the ballet Giselle and video choreographies (Bieber’s ‘Sorry’and ‘What Do You Mean?’, ‘Lean On’by Major Lazer & DJ Snake and ‘Hello’by Adele, sung live by Maria Magdalena Kozłowska); and the performers’ heart and energy seems in synch with popular culture rather than ‘high culture’ subjected to radical travesty.

Further into her piece, Ziółek re-performs Sarah Jones’ poetic manifesto hitting out at audiovisual culture for depicting female bodies as pansexual. In an intricate, multidimensional scene, Ziółek recreates ‘Your Revolution’, performed by Jones as part of the poetry jam Def Poetry. Jones’ work is a remix of ‘The Revolution Will Not Be Televised’by Gil Scott-Heron and, at the same time, a text based on quotations from the commercial hip-hop scene. Ziółek offers a mash-up of rematerialisation, combining re-performance of the simulacra style and the ‘hip-hop / R & B artist’ dynamics with the recreation of Jones’ performance at the level of choreography and text. It’s clear that, in the forty-five years that have elapsed between ‘The Revolution Will Not Be Televised’and IT, the processes of content production and distribution have been subject to a radical transformation. To point out the most obvious aspect of the change: mobile devices offering immediate access to content circulating in social media have replaced television in its role of the go-to device enabling viewers to follow representations of reality distributed by mass- and post-media operators.

'IT', devised and choreographed by Marta Ziółek, premiere: 4.12.2015 as part of Kantor Now, 7th edition of the Maat Festival, Centre for Culture in Lublin and Centre for the Documentation of the Art of Tadeusz Kantor - Cricoteka. Photo: Grzegorz Mart, courtesy of Cricoteka.

Theoreticians of post-media culture have been endeavouring to grasp these transformations. In the mid-1980s, Félix Guattari predicted a ‘post-mass media revolution’: the overcoming of mass media domination by groups and individuals with a strong sense of subjectivity and agency, and access to many different channels and means of expression.²⁶ A decade later, British cultural theoretician Howard Slater coined the term ‘post-media operators’ for a network of activists and independent artists critical of mainstream media. This theme has been developed by media theoretician Clemens Apprich, who proposed that ‘in the post-media times of the early 21st century, when electronic and digital media increasingly permeate all walks of life, the practices that were understood as distinctly “activist” or “tactical media” in the 1990s, have become part of the “everyday (post-media) life”’.²⁷ But above all the Internet, originally conceived of as the sphere of free, subversive, grassroots-level statements and valued for its potential for creating alternative identities, has been seized by corporations, subjected to the infiltration of state institutions, and its users have transferred real-world cultural matrixes within into communication apps and services.

Ziółek’s reproduction of Jones’ performance can be situated within this cultural change. Along with her, ‘live’ video selfies again appear on stage: Kordova and Wasiewicz, as they cover their faces with tablets where images of their faces are displayed, are not only ‘showing themselves’, but are also spying on others. From the users’ point of view, social media are a platform for self-presentation and for watching others. However, as far as corporate operators are concerned, they are a data fair, enabling the manipulation of decisions and choices made by users. ‘The Revolution’ being rapped about by the three performers will not be broadcast on the thoroughly commercial, propaganda-soaked television of 1970, nor will it be depicted by misogynistic hip-hop circles in 1999 –  not to mention the voyeuristic selfie culture in 2015.

Ziółek takes her place at the DJ’s table, ‘directing’ performers’ activities throughout the performance. Her pronounced presence refers back to Tadeusz Kantor’s practice of the director’s presence on stage. Nor is this the only reference to the patron of the 2015 festival: in the final scene of Ziółek’s piece, a video recording of Penny Arcade, originally featured in the installation Kantor Downtown is remixed. The recording of Arcade’s performance – which includes obsequious remarks about Kantor (the real Author) – is reproduced by Kordova, rematerialized and embodied. Embedded in an author-centric paradigm, those remarks are parodied using the repetition strategy, their ironic overtone emphasised by the fact they are now situated within the mash-up of several layers, analysed above. The choreographer deliberately juxtaposes two historically determined ideologies: authorial (where a work or event is analysed as a purposeful, intentional creation of the artist – of Kantor, in this case) and post-authorial, which has to do with creative collaboration and collective agency.

Post-...?

A final aspect of post-media / postmediality discourse has to do with attempts to define a medium within art history and art theory. In 2000, American art historian Rosalind Krauss devised the formulation ‘the post-medium condition of art’.²⁸ Krauss did so with a view of indicating a change in the way art is produced. This change had occurred in the 1970s and, in 2011, Krauss subjected it to critical reappraisal.²⁹ According to the critic, the change in question had to do with the weakening of the modernist paradigm of ‘the specificity of the medium’, based on identifying individual media with the material of which a given work was made. Nicolas Bourriaud drew very optimistic conclusions from this diagnosis: in the curator’s view, abandoning ‘a mode of thought based on disciplines, on the specificity of the medium’,³⁰ enables art to break free from the modernist corset in favour of ‘altermodernity’, which allows for a combination of not just any themes and styles, but also any media and materials.

Performative-arts scholars often grapple with the necessity of grasping and putting a name on the genre specificity of works they engage with. The matter regained relevance with regard to contemporary performative arts. In his 2016 interview for the art journal SZUM,³¹ critic Tomasz Plata introduced the term ‘post-theatre’, whose scope included works by young Polish choreographers which prove impossible to attach to any one field: not dance, not theatre and not the art of performance.

A few months before the IT performance analysed above, in October 2015 in Stockholm, a group of theoreticians and managing directors of arts institutions with links to new choreography (theoretician and scholar André Lepecki, Danjel Andersson, managing director of the MDT contemporary-dance centre in Stockholm, and Gabriel Smeets, managing director of Stockholm’s Cullberg Ballet) organised the conference POST DANCE. Two years later, a book of the same title was published as a result of the conference, edited by Andersson with choreographer Mette Edvardsen and Mårten Spångberg. As Andersson declares in his introduction, ‘Postdance or Post-dance or POSTDANCE is an open source concept’.³² As for Spångberg, in his article ‘Post-dance, an Advocacy’ quoted above, he endeavours to summarize the conceptual efforts of theoreticians and practitioners invited to the conference and attempting to map out the phenomenon provisionally termed post-dance. Post-dance parted company with causality and choreographic strategies and came to regard dance and choreography as forms capable of speaking about themselves, and developing their own epistemologies and ethics.

Post-dance recognises the times it ‘lives’ in – at present, dance in any form cannot but resonate with the Internet – and the fact that it’s available on the Internet means that its history is changing. Contemporary dance is conscious of the theoretical problems, contexts and borrowings – and it does all this within ‘an emerging epistemology of dance’.³³

Ziółek’s choreographic practices, and the practices of the group of performers collaborating on IT, fit perfectly into the scope delineated by both categories, post-theatre and post-dance. However, one needs to bear in mind that the postmedial condition of art requires that a theoretician working in new dance, new choreography and choreographic performance define on one hand the terms she uses (which at present seem to be a reconfigurable space of temporary records rather than a set of stable communication tools), and to regard these terms, on the other hand, ‘as a kind of resource we can use with a degree of freedom and simply concentrate on looking carefully at each individual work’.³⁴

The author has previously presented themes discussed above in her article ‘Performans choreograficzny w kulturze postmedialnej’[‘Choreographic Performance in Post-media Culture’], Didaskalia. Gazeta Teatralna 137, 2017, pp. 52–58.

WORKS CITED

Andersson, Danjel, Mette Edvardsen, Mårten Spångberg, POST-DANCE(Stockholm: MDT 2017)

Bay-Cheng, Sarah, ‘Postmedia Performance’,Contemporary Theatre Review: Interventions26.2, 2016, http://www.contemporarytheatrereview.org/2016/postmedia-performance/[accessed on 30 January 2018]

Bolter, Jay David, and Richard Grusin, Remediation: Understanding New Media(Cambridge, Mass. and London: MIT Press, 2000)

Bourriaud, Nicolas, The Radicant(New York: Sternberg Press 2009)

Broeckmann, Andreas,‘“Postmedia” Discourses: A Working Paper’(2013), http://www.mikro.in-berlin.de/wiki/tiki-index.php?page=Postmedia+Discourses[accessed on 1 February 2018]

Cvejić, Bojana, Choreographing Problems: Expressive Concepts in European Contemporary Dance and Performance(Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2015)

Duda, Artur, Performans na żywo jako medium i obiekt mediatyzacji(Toruń: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Uniwersytetu Mikołaja Kopernika, 2011)

Guattari, Felix, ‘Entering the Post-Media Era’, inGuattari,Soft Subversions: Texts and Interviews 1977-1985, ed. Sylvère Lotringer, trans. Chet Wiener, Emily Wittman (Los Angeles: Semiotext(e), 1996)

Kay, Alan, Adele Goldberg, ‘Personal Dynamic Media’,Computer10:3, 1977, pp. 31–41

Krauss, Rosalind,A Voyage on the North Sea: Art in the Age of the Post-Medium Condition(London: Thames & Hudson, 2000)

Krauss, Rosalind,Under Blue Cup(Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2011)

Manovich, Lev, Post-media Aesthetics(2001), http://manovich.net/index.php/projects/post-media-aesthetics[accessed on 1 February 2018]

Manovich, Lev, Język nowych mediów(Warsaw: Wydawnictwa Akademickie i Profesjonalne, 2006)

Olson, Marisa, ‘Postinternet: Art After the Internet’, FOAM29 (2011/2012), pp. 59–63, http://www.marisaolson.com/texts/POSTINTERNET_FOAM.pdf[accessed on 1 February 2018]

Parker-Starbuck, Jennifer, ‘Rethinking Media in/and/as Performance’,Theatre Journal Online (CFP),http://performancestudies.ucdavis.edu/2015/09/16/theatre-journal-cfp-for-2-special-issues-for-2016[accessed on 1 February 2018]

Plinta, Karolina, ‘Post-teatr i okolice. Rozmowa z Tomaszem Platą’, Magazyn SZUM online, (30 August 2016), http://magazynszum.pl/rozmowy/post-teatr-i-okolice-rozmowa-z-tomaszem-plata, [accessed on 1 February 2018]

POST DANCE conference programme http://www.lifelongburning.eu/fileadmin/files/postdance- conference.pdf[accessed on 1 February 2018]

Richards, Jason, ‘Is “Swag” Here to Stay?’, The Atlantic Monthly, 26 May 2011,  http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2011/05/is-swag-here-to-stay/239446/[accessed on 1 February 2018]

Quaranta, Domenico, Beyond New Media Art(Brescia: LINK Editions, 2013)

Slater, Howard, ‘Post-Media Operators: “Sovereign & Vague”’, in Provocative Alloys: A Post-Media Anthology, eds. Clemens Apprich, Josephine Berry Slater, Anthony Iles, Oliver Lerone Schultz (London: Post-Media Lab, Mute Books, 2013)

Soszyński, Paweł, ‘Oszołomy mody’, Dwutygodnik 161, 2015, http://www.dwutygodnik.com/artykul/5969-oszolomy-mody.html[accessed on 1 February 2018]

Weibel, Peter, ‘The Post-Media Condition’, http://www.metamute.org/editorial/lab/post-media-condition[accessed on 1 February 2018]

Wójtowicz, Ewa, ‘Sztuka w kulturze postinternetowej’, Artpunkt 23 (2014), pp. 5–9, https://issuu.com/galeriaopole/docs/artpunkt_nr_23[accessed on 1 February 2018]

Wójtowicz, Ewa, Sztuka w kulturze postmedialnej(Gdańsk: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Katedra, 2016)

Zielinski, Sigfried, […After the Media]: News from the Slow-Fading Twentieth Century (Minneapolis, Minn.: Univocal, 2013)