On Friday, March 13, the Jury of the International Satyrykon Exhibition 2026 convened in the Royal Hall of the Knight’s Academy. The jury consisted of Anita Wincencjusz-Patyna (chairwoman), Saskia Gheysens (Belgium), Shahrokh Heidari (France), Nika Jaworowska-Duchlińska, Halit Kurtulmus Aytoslu (Turkey), and Paweł Płoski. After many hours of substantive discussions, the winners of this year’s edition of the competition were finally announced.
Selecting the Satyrykon winner is a task that is as fascinating as it is demanding. Just moments after the official announcement and a brief press conference, the jurors were already heading to the Satyrykon Gallery for the opening of Michał Tatarkiewicz’s exhibition “Nothing Funny.” Despite their many responsibilities, we managed to stop them for a moment to learn more about this year’s artistic and satirical trends, as well as the motivations behind their choices. The conversation was led by Michał Przechera.
Anita Wincencjusz-Patyna: Satyrykon has not lost its role as a litmus test — a recorder of global and social vibrations. We saw many diagnoses of the contemporary world, especially in the context of wars, which — unfortunately — are taking place in an increasing number of locations. Artists also reflected on the human condition, likely influenced by this year’s theme. The “comfort zone” was most often related to modern individuals — both those who seemingly have nothing to worry about, and those living in extremely harsh conditions due to climate catastrophe, war, or social exclusion caused by poverty. There were also works referring to the omnipresence of artificial intelligence and commentaries on the younger generation. However, I must admit that the artists themselves have also found their own comfort zones. I have followed Satyrykon for many years, and I’ve coined a working term: too many works displayed what I would call “intellectual laziness.” They were excellent in terms of line and artistic execution, but not particularly groundbreaking in their perspective. At one point during deliberations, we noticed that our “no” votes — meaning rejection at the selection stage — were both frequent and surprisingly unanimous. For quite some time, there were very few thumbs up. Still, the long hours spent on selection were worth it, because the final set of around one hundred works chosen for the exhibition is truly impressive. Already now, we can guarantee a visually engaging experience. Some works operate through brevity and immediate interpretation, while others captivate with detail and invite a more attentive visual reading, unfolding into almost delirious narratives.
Paweł Płoski: We debated intensely, and at times even argued over the final decisions, especially when choosing the award winners. Each juror has a slightly different sense of humor and sensitivity. The final selection is therefore a kind of essence — we chose very rigorously. The “comfort zone” is a very popular concept today, and artists approached it knowing it strongly resonates with audiences and evokes emotions. I feel that in this category, two powerful sources met: a current theme and the natural need to comment on reality. However, Satyrykon is dominated by more metaphorical illustration, and there is definitely too little light humor and simple jokes. Very often, the works turn toward bitter satire, almost becoming press illustrations diagnosing what is wrong or saddening. Looking at many of the drawings, one is more likely to feel a tear in the eye than a spontaneous smile.
Nika Jaworowska-Duchlińska: Artists frequently addressed themes related to artificial intelligence and smartphone addiction — both among young people and adults. There were also many works with a war-related tone, though usually presented in a very universal way. However, these did not make it into the top tier, as similar perspectives appeared too often. This trend is still ongoing, which is why we tried to select works that did not have thematic “duplicates” and offered a more original perspective. There is also a noticeable departure from dark humor and grotesque. We discussed this during the deliberations — very few works today provoke that deep, cleansing laughter that comes “from within.” Instead, we more often encountered nostalgic reflection on the darker, more somber side of human nature and reality. When it came to the pool of works from which we selected the winners, we were largely in agreement. More discussion arose when determining the final ranking. We supported our choices with arguments, which helped us reach a shared decision. Even though we started from different points and sensitivities, we ultimately appreciated similar qualities.
Saskia Gheysens: I have been to Legnica twice before — nine years ago for a jury meeting, and the following year for the festival. I remember those visits very fondly. Being part of the jury is always a great experience: it involves engaging discussions, meeting kind people, and viewing very interesting works. In this year’s winning pieces, I especially appreciate that they all contain elements of humor and a sense of lightness. They are not overly complex, which makes them accessible and understandable to audiences. During deliberations, Polish jurors sometimes had to explain certain drawings to us — not only due to language barriers, but also because of cultural context, which was not always clear. Some works were also more political and strongly rooted in Polish realities. However, this is an international festival, so it is important that the message remains as universal as possible. What matters most here is playfulness and humor. I don’t think there was too much politics in the competition, but we tried to avoid works directly referring to wars or specific conflicts. There is already enough of that in reality. That is also why we did not select works depicting political figures such as Donald Trump.
Shahrokh Heidari: For me, the Legnica competition is number one in the world — consistently embracing a wide range of themes and techniques. I have a broad point of reference, having served on the juries of around twenty international competitions. Among the submissions, there is an enormous number of ideas, and we try to choose those that are the purest and most clear. We are looking for a graphic space we have not seen before — a moment where technique merges with idea. In fact, I believe the idea is more important than the technique itself. Some works are so creative that they almost choose themselves. Others require much longer discussion and sometimes explanation of context and humor. A challenge in contemporary satire is that artists increasingly rely on artificial intelligence; sometimes such works even win awards. However, Satyrykon maintains a strict selection process, and the humor we seek remains very distinct. I must also add that many experienced and recognized artists no longer submit their works to competitions. Some are already of advanced age, and original works are expensive — often they can sell them for more than any festival prize. Nevertheless, we still receive many excellent works, and the overall level remains very high. This year, I particularly appreciated the open category of humor and satire. Many artists from Iran would like to participate, but they face significant logistical challenges. Due to war, shipping costs are extremely high — sometimes a single shipment can cost up to half of a monthly salary — and the logistics can be very difficult.
Halit Kurtulmus Aytoslu: This is my second time in Legnica and my first time serving on the jury. I have participated in many juries before, so I do have some experience, although I must admit that I enjoyed being a participant more. Evaluating works is a completely different experience — more difficult and involving much greater responsibility. I am also aware that a different jury might have chosen entirely different works. Perhaps even we ourselves, if we had deliberated on another day, would have reached different conclusions. Art simply cannot be measured or evaluated in a fully objective way.