“The Poet’s Perspective: Jerzy Ficowski’s Romani Studies” – Interview with Prof. Emilia Kledzik. Part one: The Roots of Research on Papusza
What do myths remain silent about, and how has literature shaped the narrative about Roma communities in Poland? Prof. dr hab. Emilia Kledzik from Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań (Faculty of Polish and Classical Philology) discusses her latest acclaimed book, The Poet’s Perspective: Jerzy Ficowski’s Romani Studies (Perspektywa poety. Cyganologia Jerzego Ficowskiego), as well as the background of her extensive research into the works of the iconic Romani poet, Bronisława Wajs, known as Papusza. Recently, Papusza’s works were published by Brill in English and Romani translations, accompanied by a biography written by Professor Kledzik.
In this part of the interview, we speak with the Poznań-based scholar about her research, the works of Papusza and the influence of Jerzy Ficowski’s work on Romani studies and the contemporary perceptions of Romani communities in Poland.
Research in Poland: Your book is the result of impressive, long-term research. Does it focus more on the work of Jerzy Ficowski or Papusza? How would you explain the specificity of your subject to non-Polish-speaking readers?
Prof. Dr hab. Emilia Kledzik: The book examines the foundations of the mainstream narratives about the Roma in post-World-War-II Poland. The ideological stance toward minorities in the Polish People’s Republic (PRL) was variable and generally oppressive, allowing only a small margin for state-controlled folklore. In the case of the Roma, additional measures were introduced, including a productivity and settlement campaign designed to “solve” the problem of Roma nomadism and facilitate their assimilation. This campaign had its own discourse and propaganda, which became increasingly brutal as nationalists gained power. At the same time, the PRL—particularly in the late 1960s and early 1970s—saw the flourishing of “gypsy kitsch,” exemplified by the immense popularity of Maryla Rodowicz’s song Jadą wozy kolorowe (The Colorful Wagons Are Coming). However, beneath this popularity lay widespread Polish anti-Roma sentiment, with “ordinary citizens” writing letters to state institutions, outraged at having to live near “Gypsies.” I was interested in how Roma were defined in each of these areas, what attributes were assigned to them, and on what basis these descriptions were constructed.
And what conclusions did you reach in this regard?
It became clear that both the settlement discourse and the portrayal of “gypsyness” in popular culture were underpinned by the works of Jerzy Ficowski: a poet and enthusiast of minority cultures who was an unquestioned authority on Romani studies (Polish word: cyganologia) in the PRL and later in post-transformation Poland. Ficowski authored numerous press articles, Poland’s first Romani studies monograph (a synthesis of knowledge about the Roma), and was also a translator, editor, and self-described “discoverer of talent”—in this case, Bronisława Wajs. The deconstruction of Polish Romani discourse in the second half of the 20th century essentially involved tracing Ficowski’s works, the sources he used, and how his publications were received. Ficowski was well-read in global Romani studies literature. Therefore, my book, while discussing his readings, also addresses global Romani studies. I was particularly interested in the history of his fieldwork, which he sought to present as the basis of his publications. In reality, however, the knowledge he propagated was not empirical but drawn from older Romani studies.
Source: University of Adam Mickiewicz in Poznań website
What does this indicate?
It revealed that Romani studies is a conservative, pseudo-scientific discourse in which scientific facts intertwine with rumors, elements of self-promotion, unverified theses, and are further entangled with political life. By the late 1990s, Ficowski began building his image as someone persecuted by communism through the narrative of his “flight to the Roma caravans.” In reality, no such flight occurred, and his involvement with Roma issues was initially tied to a state campaign targeting this community. Additionally, the story of Papusza – known worldwide through numerous translations as the most important Romani poet, the mother of modern Romani poetry – was similarly fraught with mystification, as was much of Romani studies as a whole.
Why is Papusza’s work valued in Poland?
Papusza is not only recognised in Poland but is also regarded in Romani literary studies as the founder of modern, independent Romani literature. Through numerous publications, films, and reports, her image as a brilliant, self-taught poet who was helped by Ficowski to disseminate her work has been cemented – though this led to her being ostracized by her Romani community. In Poland, she initially became the face of the settlement campaign – a living proof, as presented by Ficowski, that the Roma had their own literature. Later, she was portrayed as a victim of the political system that assimilated the Roma and destroyed their culture, while Ficowski positioned himself as the one striving to preserve that culture. In the 1990s, as the global Roma movement emerged, Papusza became a prototype of a Romani activist and feminist. The content of her poems mattered far less than the vivid, detached-from-reality story about her as a poet.
What is Jerzy Ficowski appreciated for the most?
The story of Ficowski is equally flexible. In Poland, he is appreciated for his passion for minority cultures and for promoting Bruno Schulz’s works. In the 1970s, when he was subject to censorship, he published an important poetry collection, Odczytanie popiołów (Reading the Ashes), which foreshadowed Poland’s reckoning with its co-responsibility for the Holocaust. In the 1990s, a decade marked by a revival of minority discourse, Ficowski reemerged as a prominent Romani scholar.
So what was their relationship like?
The relationship between Ficowski and Papusza always struck me as asymmetrical and oddly idealized. Ficowski emphasized their friendship, claiming that Papusza called him “little brother,” yet in his monograph, he regarded her coolly, as an object of study. Moreover, it’s unclear what their friendship was based on. How did it form, given that there was no “flight to the caravans”?
Did you manage to answer these questions?
Confronting Ficowski’s narrative with Bronisława Wajs’s letters revealed that he was a master of self-promotion, and he also narrated Papusza’s story in a way that bolstered his authority in Romani studies. In an autoethnographic essay written in the mid-1980s, Ficowski depicted himself as an almost tragic figure who, upon encountering Papusza’s poetic genius, had to choose: reveal her poems to the world and risk her ostracism for “betraying” the Romani language and customs or remain silent. In this framing, poetry inevitably prevailed.
In reality, as revealed by Papusza’s letters, Bronisława Wajs was a person burdened with illness from the beginning of her acquaintance with Ficowski—very sensitive and trusting. She believed that “Mr. Little Brother” would help her and her family navigate the postwar reality in the Recovered Territories. This is why she engaged in various actions Ficowski encouraged, such as going to the Ministry of Public Administration to declare that the Roma wanted to settle. She willingly shared her memories with him, even very intimate ones. The publication of Polish Gypsies, in which she appeared not as a friend but as a subject, must have hurt her.
For the full interview, including more on orientalist discourse and Romani studies and the wider cultural implications read the second part of the interview TOMORROW.
