Introduction of the Editors
The world we once knew, structured by modern institutions and ideals, has changed dramatically and is now upside down: we now inhabit a landscape of profound uncertainty. A long process of modern history and the post-World War II order have been suspended. Modern history, with its roots in Enlightenment thought, has seen advances in universal rights, scientific progress, and rational governance. Yet these claims were often compromised from the outset. The celebration of human dominance over nature has set the stage to today’s ecological calamity. Rationalism’s suppression of spiritual and indigenous epistemologies left room for the re-emergence of superstition and pseudoscience. Foundational documents such as the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen,[1] while groundbreaking, excluded women and non-Europeans, non-whites, reinforcing hierarchies that enabled colonialism and systemic racism. This paradox—between universal ideals and embedded exclusions—has long haunted modernity.[2]
Nevertheless, the second half of the twentieth century witnessed courageous efforts to address and correct these shortcomings, such as the civil rights movements, feminist uprisings, and decolonial struggles. Socialist utopias, or existing socialism, at least in principle, tried to give an outlet to the oppressed elements to counterbalance these deficiencies, albeit with limited results. The loss of power counterbalance with the collapse of the socialist satellite system at the end of the century let the genie out of the bottle, which is now hovering over the world and misbehaving. The victory of neo-liberal capitalism and its spread through globalization after the Cold War, instead of expanding democratic ideas and systems, led to economic inequality between the centers and the (semi-)peripheries, reintroducing the previous hierarchy.
In financial capitalism, workers lost their jobs due to the collapse of traditional industries and outsourcing labor, and felt abandoned by the left and democratic parties that no longer focused on workers’ rights, alienating the working class from the urban professional elite and neo-liberal global capitalism. The shift in the main issues on the agenda of left thinkers to focus on issues of identity, gender, race and sexual orientation pushed workers further to the right, which attacked these issues along with the establishment elite and its institutions.
At the beginning of the twenty-first century, the waves of social resistance were on the rise, including the #MeToo movement, Black Lives Matter,[3] and critiques of structural privilege in the form of the Occupy movement.[4] These movements have opened up long-suppressed issues, however, the original emancipatory demands slowly have faded, and ossified into tokenism and bureaucratic measures. This tendency has been taken to its extreme and WOKE led to cancel culture, which has generated resistance even by previous supporters of these movements.
Today, the fragility of the liberal democratic order that was inherited and hoped for, is visible in every part of the world, which is entering a state of suspension when the “old is dying and the new cannot be born.”[5] The rise of ethno-nationalism, the authoritarian turn, and “spin dictatorship”[6] have resulted in coercive regimes in an increasing number of countries. In Eastern Europe, autocratic tendencies and populist agendas are challenging democratic norms (illiberal democracy in Hungary and Slovakia on its way to more open autocracy), while Russia’s authoritarian regime has abolished them altogether. Even in long-established democracies, such as the United States, populist currents have eroded institutional trust. Anti-institutional attitudes and actions, as well as re-feudalization, a return to a “rank-based hierarchy of privilege,” signal a return to pre-modern settings. Post-fascism[7] comes with a historical territorialism that neglects international laws and agreements. The exercise of brute force, Russia’s war on Ukraine, means a threat to neighboring countries, and the feeling of being threatened strengthens alliances and also leads to increasing militarization, while the rhetoric of war and peace is distorted and twisted due to actual political interests. Increased immigration due to wars and climate changes has also been exploited by right-wing governments to stir up fears and anxieties about job competition, cultural change and national identity, as well as about homeland security. The rampant exploitation of nature and other human beings is not even hidden. The convergence of ongoing crises across multiple sectors has been further intensified by inflation, the pandemic, and recent militarization in Europe due to the USA’s isolationist foreign politics. Expertise, science is overlooked and false doctrines prevail, facts and proven information are falsified, and we have lost sight of the path to take.
In the midst of this disorientation, uncertainty, collective anxiety, art faces an urgent challenge. The recent issue of Mezosfera raises burning questions, such as: How can art operate in a suspended world that resists coherence? Is art drifting between critique and escapism or accepts of being co-opted and commercialized by the ruling system? Can art still follow the rapidly changing world and bear witness? Does art retreat from the real world or reimagine it? Can art foster solidarity and resistance in the middle of fragmentation? Can art revive suppressed knowledge and marginalized worldviews and differentiate it from charlatanism? Does art retain political agency in an era often described as “post-political”? (Magdalena Radomska, Mariam Shergelashvili) Can art offer survival strategies, alternative imagination (Sándor Hornyik, Zuzana Husárová and Karel Piorecký), that reconnect us to each other and to the non-human world (Raluca Voinea)?
The issue attempts to provide an insight into the agendas formulated in the discursive fields of the two “renegade” countries of the region, Hungary and Slovakia. It also aims to shed light to the recent practice of the OFF-Biennale Budapest (an organization representing progressive contemporary culture in Hungary) at a time when the NER system[8] is fully developed, permeates the whole society, and, with the help of the planned “foreign agent” and “sovereignty” law, is about to completely eliminate critical voices, free speech, and independent media.
In 2023, in Budapest, Critical Culture Group, a trio of cultural activist, critic, curator of different generations, organized a well-attended conference on the freedom of intellectual life in the field of arts and culture. Then, several apropos made it timely, Hungary was excluded from the Erasmus funds, which was a serious harm for academic research co-operations, student exchange, Hungarian museums lost the remains of their autonomy as they were merged into one large organization, headed by a government-loyal person, etc. The Hungarian situation is characterized by the gradual takeover of the cultural institutional system by the government since 2010.[9] Step by step, slowly but surely. In May 2025, Critical Culture Group organized a symposium again on the state of culture, this time with invited international speakers. The focus of the symposium, what can culture do against oppression, was approached from the perspectives of the presenters, that of Slovakia, Poland, Georgia, Ukraine. The goal was to get to know the situation in other endangered countries, build international connections, find partners, learn from each other. “[t]o explore the problems/clusters of issues that arise, while trying to identify possible solutions or strategies to overcome the chaos,” as the group stated. Similar restrictional tendencies could be identified in Georgia, in Slovakia and in Poland. The presenters all discussed topics of control by centralization of cultural institutions, devices of censorship, LMBTQ rights, marginalized groups of people. Yuliya Yurchenko (UKR/GB) talked about the relation of economy and grassroot initiatives. Adam Straka (SK) described a, for Hungarians, familiar process of cultural restrictions in Slovakia (see more in detail below). Jakub Dabrowski (PL)) anticipated the difficulties that even when an authoritarian regime is replaced, changes may not happen soon, what is more, these changes are often undesirable. Anti-LMBTQ measures are very similar in the countries of the participating lecturers, as we could draw the conclusion from the presentation of Giorgi Rodionov, a Georgian artist and activist who lives in Berlin. It seemed, however, that local Hungarians were tired and apathetic, and this time the audience was sadly small. Even and in spite of the bill submitted a few days earlier, which intended to further restrict foreign support in the name of defending Hungarian sovereignty. The process in different countries seems to be rather similar, but Hungary is a cautionary example, as it is much ahead of all the participants countries. To be fair, we have to add that the Budapest Pride demonstration of June 28, which was the result of the attempt to prohibit the event, gives reason to hope for change even in Hungary.
What happened step by step in a slow and systematic way over the course of 15 years, in four consecutive Fidesz KDNP governance cycles in Hungary, unfolded in less than a year in Slovakia after Robert Fico was reelected. The “saturation bombing” of culture, as the locals call it, was so obviously barbarous that it mobilized cultural workers from all fields. In Hungary, the fragmented cultural sector only partially noticed the warning signs of the gradual takeover of all cultural segments, and the protests were likewise fragmented and failed to stir up solidarity, according to Ferenc Czinki.[10] In Slovakia, the rapid takeover prompted a swift reaction. Open Culture! (Otvorená Kultúra) platform organized a two-day international conference on May 29–30, 2025, with forty speakers from seventeen countries. The invited international participants were well aware that “what happens in the East could soon happen in the West.”
Culture was conceived by the presenters as a shield for democracy. Representatives of various Slovak institutions reported unanimous agreement on the incompetence of the new Ministry of Culture. Support for culture diminished with the introduction of consolidation rhetoric without transparency. Firstly, the director of Slovakian National Theatre, Matej Drlička was fired. This move was followed by unlawful removal of museum experts who were replaced with untrained individuals, and censorship was reintroduced. The Slovak National Gallery collapsed nine months after its newly renovated building began functioning. Its director was fired, followed by three interim directors with no prior experience in cultural institutions; two of them spent less than two months in the position. Currently, the fourth director is serving his term basically lacking professional workers, as from the 200 employees 160 were removed or have left the institution. Ignorance and incompetence have rendered the institution dysfunctional. Due to the collapse of the National Heritage Center renovations, reconstruction cannot move forward, and the consequences of repaying European Union funds are being faced. Directors of other museums were also dismissed, and professionals left, causing basic work to stop. There is chaos on the managerial side as well since the ministry lacks experts and specialists. Theater events are canceled, or cannot be realized, and projects are running late. The daily agenda has become impossible to execute.
The goal is to remove the far-right cultural minister Martina Šimkovičová and the state secretary, Lukáš Machala from their position. Her resignation was demanded at the beginning of a chain of events due to her incompetence, as stated in an open letter initiated by Ilona Németh and Ivana Rumanova, signed by nearly 200,000 people. [11] This act launched the Open Culture organization and later its sub-unite, a continuous art strike. The term “art strike” should not be taken literally in terms of labor. It is not a political request due to the precarious situation of the employees. Rather, it is the collective term for a direct response and collective protest against “Orbanization.” The Slovak scene wish to stand on legislative bases and reclaim the subsidies and normal operations. This is no longer a choice in the country that lent its name to this brutal procedure. The prompt and harsh attack in Slovakia was alarming and galvanized the cultural scene, fostering solidarity, solidarity which has been exhausted since the 2010’s, in its neighboring country, Hungary, where the takeover and centralization of culture was not random at all, but rather a meticulously crafted maneuver, slowly and cautiously implemented. Referring to legal arguments has not been an option in Hungary since the 2010s, because the governing regime of professional legal professionals adjusted laws (including the Constitution) according to their own interest. With their two-third majority, they could smoothly pass laws in the parliament.
In Slovakia, sociologist Zora Bútorová’s[12] list of disturbing features of the emerging autocracy is reminiscent of what other countries have already experienced (Poland under the Kaczyński brothers) or have come close to experiencing (not to mention those who have been living in it, like Hungary). Polarization penetrates everyday life regarding questions about the war at the Eastern border, gender identity, and vaccination. Migration and its instrumentalization have resulted in radicalization and a shift towards the far right. A low level of trust and fear of other people are also outcomes of anti-migration propaganda. Bútorová labeled the phenomenon of people desiring neutrality in war conflicts despite the country’s NATO membership a “knowledge crash.” The threat of Russia is underestimated because people are convinced by the media that Ukraine had initiated the war. In Hungary, the “war propaganda” (officially called peace-talk) directed against Ukraine’s European Union membership is much more prevalent and connected to domestic politics. The officially created fear, disseminated on billboards in Hungarian cities, is that if “they” (Brussels bureaucrats) accept Ukraine into the EU, “we” (Hungarian citizens) will pay for it. Populists are keen to exploit all crises to cover up real issues, such as economic decline, social inequalities, insecurity, mass-scale corruption, and a declining health system. Another speaker, Krisztina Lajosi, a historian with Hungarian origin working in Amsterdam, emphasized that independent press, art, and culture are able to question and criticize power. This is the reason behind the reenforced control.[13] In populist, authoritarian regimes culture is an instrument to divert the mindset of the people. The conference opposed this instrumentalization as the backbone of democratic backsliding. Many presenters spoke out in favor of preserving a free and diverse culture. They set forth the goals of protecting democracy, developing resilience, and nurturing solidarity.
The conference culminated in the Bratislava Declaration, a call to action directed at the leadership of the European Union, arising from an urgent need to resist threats to artistic freedom across European Union member states. The declaration calls for robust action against the growing influence of governments seeking to control and interfere with the cultural and creative sector, thus undermining internationally agreed human right standards. Fifteen institutions or platforms signed the declaration.[14]
“2013 was a key year in terms of the transformation of the Hungarian art institutional system and the narrowing of the institutional conditions for artistic freedom. At that time, in the early 2010s, the contemporary fine art scene was the first to firmly protest against the steps taken by the authorities. This is because in the cultural field, this scene was the first to recognize and identify the nature of these radical changes—as it has now turned out, accurately.”[15]
Ten years have passed since the first edition of OFF-Biennale Budapest. In 2015, some experts were asked to reflect on the lessons of the event.[16] In 2015 everybody could still remember the turbulent times of 2013, the Action Days in tranzit.hu, Occupation of the Ludwig Stairs, the group of Free Artists, the series of the Outer Space, Stand-out Every Week,[17] and the symbolic burial of Műcsarnok, then, in 2014, the Living Memorial. For the OFF-Biennale Budapest curatorial team the point was to show an alternative option that there could be life outside of state institutional frames, sponsorship. The first edition did not yet have a central concept unlike later editions. Gaudiopolis (2017), Inhale (2019), the participation in documenta 15 (2022) were focusing on one (or in case of documenta 15, two, Roma MoMA and Playground) concept. It is important that OFF-Biennale Budapest had an ambivalent relation to politics. The fact that they do not accept government money is in itself a strong political stand, on the other hand the first edition focused on showing up the independent art scene and did not reflect on the then-current political situation. Over the years, this has changed, parallel with the process that the regime penetrated each and every segment of culture. Sponsorship became increasingly difficult to get as business life was also penetrated and private sponsors had to take the risk of retortion (in business) if they support something “unofficial.” In the meantime, the curatorial activity of the group has become increasingly integrated into the international scene, acknowledgment grew, more appreciation came, mostly from abroad.[18] In 2025, the fifth edition was carried out in a more difficult than ever local and international situation. The central topic, Security resonates both on an individual and public level, personal security, and security in wartimes, in war zones. This time OFF-Biennale Budapest could not avoid being radically political; they radicalized along the radicalization of the local politics around them. The exhibitions and events could be organized in venues in districts where the local mayor is in opposition, or belongs to the Budapest municipality led by the opposition, like the refurbished Theater Merlin, the de facto central place of the event. OFF-Biennale Budapest addressed issues that are considered alien or condemned as threatening by official politics. These aspects are precisely those that Hungarian official politics push into the background, silence or oppose, declaring them dangerous to society. Such issues are connected to minorities, foreigners, marginalized people, LGBTQ+, Roma, women, sex workers, or to issues like border zones, environment, war. These topics, which are major concerns for international mainstream contemporary art, are excluded from state institutions and public debate in Hungary. Likewise, we could say that what is a strong curatorial work in the international, mainstream contemporary art scene is in a marginalized position in Hungary, forced into alternative venues, position. In 2025, this major contemporary art event is itself in opposition. OFF-Biennale Budapest is an art event first of all, a show of a female curatorial team, but the point of view is broader as the political environment radicalized them, forced the curatorial team to be more political than ever before.[19]
*
The articles of the invited authors broaden the spectrum, and offer a range of different art practices in this uncertain time focusing on our troubled geopolitical terrain in the eastern part of Europe.
Magdalena Radomska’s article No to Canon–Yes to Cannon: Engaged Political Art from Post-Communist Europe explores the resurgence and transformation of politically engaged art in post-communist Europe, focusing on practices that challenge neoliberal individualism and revive collective, class-conscious, and materially grounded approaches akin to a “contemporary socialist realism” as she prefers to name the phenomenon. Drawing on Marxist aesthetics, the author critiques dominant art historical narratives—Piotr Piotrowski’s Horizontal art history among them for not being horizontal enough—for marginalizing class analysis and calls for a return to “base analysis” centered on material and economic conditions. Through detailed case studies—including examples of the latest edition from the OFF-Biennale Budapest, queer protest art in Poznań, cultural resistance in Slovakia, dissociative performances in Romania, and subversive practices by Belarusian artists in exile—the article argues that contemporary political art in the region mobilizes artistic strategies of revolt to expose and resist authoritarian populism, neoliberal austerity, and the commodification of creative labor. The study highlights the ethical and relational dimensions of art-activism, advocating for a regional, transnational understanding of solidarity that transcends national borders and canonical hierarchies.
Mariam Shergelashvili’s article Theoretical Reflections on Revolt and Artistic Resistance of Contemporary Visual Art in Georgia explores contemporary visual art in Georgia as a site of revolt, resistance, and psycho-emotional transformation in response to intensifying political crises, authoritarianism, and systemic instability. Drawing from theories of performative protest, institutional critique, and philosophical reflections on revolt—writings of Julia Kristeva and Sven Spieker—the study examines how Georgian artists engage in symbolic, bodily, and spatial interventions that challenge hegemonic structures and reconfigure the public sphere. Through analysis of selected works by artists such as Andro Dadiani, the Bouillon Group, Sandro Sulaberidze, and others, the article considers how art operates as a collective act of rebellion. It situates Georgian artistic practices within post-Soviet and global contexts of populism, censorship, and (manipulated) nationalism, emphasizing their role in reflecting and reshaping civic identity and community resilience. The study argues that art in Georgia serves as a space for relational engagement and transformative potential, resisting commodification and offering alternative models of solidarity, care, and resistance in the face of escalating social and political violence.
Sándor Hornyik’s article, A Weird New World. New (Vital) Materialism and Weird (Dark) Ecology in Hungarian Contemporary Art explores the influence of new materialism, speculative realism, and weird ecology on contemporary Hungarian art, focusing on how post-humanist and post-Anthropocene philosophies have inspired artistic responses to ecological crisis, industrial decay, and non-human agency. Drawing on the intellectual legacy of thinkers like Lovecraft, Deleuze, Latour, Haraway, and Negarestani, the essay examines three key Hungarian artist groups—Xtro Realm, Alagya, and WOFT—that integrate themes from dark ecology, mythology, and science fiction into their work. Through installations, speculative fiction, and hybrid material practices, these artists invoke toxic landscapes, techno-shamanism, and post-apocalyptic beings to challenge capitalist humanism and imagine new planetary futures. The article positions this artistic movement within a broader turn toward the surreal, the abject, and the sublime, offering a rich analysis of how Hungarian art reflects and reshapes the epistemology of the Capitalocene. The paper situates this emerging trend within broader discourses on dark ecology and the new weird, contributing to the understanding of Eastern European contemporary art’s engagement with global ecological and philosophical debates.
Zuzana Husárová and Karel Piorecký’s article Deep Fictionality as a Pretext for Memetic Manipulation investigates the cultural, aesthetic, and political implications of generative neural networks (the term they prefer to AI, artificial intelligence) within the contemporary post-digital media environment. Drawing on case studies from meme culture, deepfake controversies, feminist and critical art practices, and legislative responses such as the EU AI Act, the authors examine how synthetic media are increasingly deployed for manipulation, misinformation, and memetic warfare. They propose the concept of deep fictionality to describe the layered artificiality of AI-generated content, which lacks reflexivity and blurs traditional boundaries between fiction and representation. Through examples ranging from viral deepfakes (Balenciaga Pope), auto-fictional AI literature, and artistic interventions like Miles Astray’s FLAMINGONE and András Cséfalvay’s speaking pterosaur, the article demonstrates how deep fictionality both mirrors and destabilizes human subjectivity. It advocates for subversive and critical artistic strategies that challenge the confusion of synthetic imagery and foster media literacy in an era increasingly defined by algorithmically generated realities.
Raluca Voinea’s article looks at the reconnection to the land as a way of countering the lack of a horizon of hope, deeply entangled in the current ecological crisis. Situated in the practice of The Experimental Station for Research on Art and Life in a village near Bucharest, the article identifies initiatives, positions and works of artists and cultural workers in the region that go beyond the representation of nature and the disconnectedness of human relations from it, instead focusing on growing and observing, gardens and other spaces or situations, of conviviality and coexistence with the nonhuman. On the background of the far-right’s appropriation of the lexis that defines the relationship to natural resources, enclosing it in the narratives of nation, religion and eco-fascism, the article emphasizes the need to resignify ecology as a territory of life practices, which are nurturing, open and inclusive. In this positioning, art emerges as a space for both critical reflection towards, and embodiment of, ecological values.
Edit András is a Hungarian art historian. She is a senior member of the Institute of Art History, HUN-REN Research Center for the Humanities, and a visiting professor at the Department of History, Central European University, Budapest/Vienna, 2016–2021. She holds a Ph.D. from ELTE, Budapest, and the academic title of Doctor Honoris Causa from the Academy of Fine Arts and Design, Bratislava. She is the Laurate of the Igor Zabel Prize for Culture and Theory 2024. Her research interests include modern and contemporary American art, modern and contemporary Eastern and Central European art, gender issues, socially engaged art, public art, critical theories, the post-socialist condition, and nationalism in the region. She has published five books and numerous essays in catalogs and art journals, and regularly participates in international conferences. For further information visit her website: http://editandras.arthistorian.hu
Hedvig Turai is an independent art historian and critic, who holds a PhD in art history from Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest. She taught Visual Culture at the International Business School, Budapest. Her main interests are Holocaust and visual culture, politics and art, gender studies, memory, memorials, and monuments. Her publications include a monograph on the Hungarian painter Margit Anna (2002), co-edited volumes Exposed Memories: Family Pictures in Private and Collective Memory (2010, with Zsófia Bán), Art in Hungary: Double Speak and Beyond (2018, with Edit Sasvári and Sándor Hornyik), and as guest editor, two special issues of the Hungarian journal Enigma (2004, nos. 37-38, 2005 no.42) presenting the theoretical and critical writings on Holocaust and contemporary art. Her book, A jelentés terei. Holokauszt a kortárs képzőművészetben (Spaces of Meaning. Holocaust in Contemporary Art) is under publication.
We are greatful for the images for Critical Culture Budapest, OFF- Biennale Budapest and Otvorena Kultúra Bratislava.
[1] https://revolution.chnm.org/d/295(July 14, 2025)
[2] Walter Mignolo, The Darker Side of Western Modernity: Global Futures, Decolonial Options (Durham, North-Caroline: Duke University Press, 2011).
[3] https://blacklivesmatter.com/)
[4] William A. Gamson and Micah L. Sifry, “THE #OCCUPY MOVEMENT: An Introduction.” The Sociological Quarterly 54, no. 2 (Spring 2013): 159–63. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24581895
[5] Quote from Antonio Gramsci, Prison Notebooks, trans. Joseph A. Buttigieg with Antonio Callari (New York: Columbia University Press, 2011).
[6] Daniel Treisman and Sergei Guriev, Spin dictators: The Changing Face of Tyranny in the 21st Century (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2023).
[7] Anton Jäger, “The prophet of Post-fascism:The late Marxist intellectual Gáspár Miklós Tamás Captured Europe’s Disorientation after the Cold War.” The New Stateman, January 17, 2023.
https://www.newstatesman.com/ideas/2023/01/gaspar-miklos-tamas-prophet-post-fascism
(July 14, 2025)
[8] Agnes Batory, “Populists in Government? Hungary’s ‘System of National Cooperation,” Democratization, no. 23 (2015/2): 283–303.
[9] See also Hungary Turns its Back on Europe – Dismantling Culture, Education, Science and the Media in Hungary 2010-2019 (Budapest: Humán platform; Oktatói hálózat, 2020)
[10] Ferenc Czinki in the panel Authoritarian Cultural Policies, https://platformaok.sk/conference
[11] https://artisticfreedominitiative.org/our-programs/advocacy-for-artistic-freedom/research-2/slovakia-2/
[12] Zora Bútorová in the panel Third Sector and Culture, https://platformaok.sk/conference
[13] Krisztina Lajosi in the panel Lessons from Central Europe, https://platformaok.sk/conference
[14] The Bratislava Declaration, https://platformaok.sk/bratislava-declaration
[15] Csaba Nemes, “Tíz éve. ‘Erős, nyitott, autonóm szellemi pozíció felé,’” A Mű, May 10, 2023. https://amu.hvg.hu/2023/05/10/tiz-eve-eros-nyitott-autonom-szellemi-pozicio-fele-nemes-csaba/
[16] Gábor Andrási, “A survey after the first OFF-bienniale from Budapest: Alternative, hope and chances for survival. OFF-Biennale Budapest Independent. Contemporary. Art. April 24 –May 31, 2015,” IDEA, no. 47 (2015): 49–62. The survey was an extended version of a first material published in the June 2015 issue of the Hungarian magazine Műértő.
[17] Curated by József Mélyi and Márton Pacsika, http://www.kivultagas.hu/dokumentacio/
[18] The team of OFF-Biennale Budapest received the Igor Zabel Award (2016), the Goethe Medal, the most prestigious cultural award of the German Ministry of Foreign Affairs (2023), and a professional local acknowledgement, Opus Mirabile by the Committee of Art Historians (2025).
[19] See also Hedvig Turai, “’Put it down, mama, put it down, put your sorrow down.’ A few aspects of OFF-Biennale, Budapest, 2025,” Contemporary LYNX, https://contemporarylynx.co.uk/a-few-aspects-of-off-biennale-budapest-2025; Flóra Gadó, “The Storm Is Already Here: A Review of the 5th OFF-Biennale Budapest,” NO NIIN, June 2025 https://no-niin.com/issue-30/the-storm-is-already-here-a-review-of-5th-off-biennale-budapest/; Teodora Talhos, “Resisting the Headwind–the OFF Biennale Turns Ten,” MOST Magazine, June 11, 2025 https://mostmagazine.org/2025/06/11/resisting-the-headwind-the-off-biennale-turns-ten/
