Revolutionary Papers held its first virtual workshop on October 26, 2020, via Zoom, kicking off with a discussion on periodicals, counterculture, and decolonisation. The seminar was structured around readings that came with lead questions:

1. How did periodicals help shape collective imaginaries of liberation?
2. How did periodicals shape the formation of local, anti-colonial literary and cultural scenes?
3. How did anticolonial aesthetics take shape through circulation between local, regional and international channels?
4. What role have periodicals played in processes of social change and collective self-definition?
5. How did anti-colonial cultural periodicals support endeavors such as literacy, education, and political mobilization?

The readings that were focal points for the discussion were:

1. Katerina Gonzales Seligmann’s “The Void, the Distance, Elsewhere: Literary Infrastructure and Empire in the Caribbean.”
2. Hala Halim, “Lotus, the Afro-Asian Nexus, and Global South Comparatism.”
3. Hana Morgenstern, “An Archive of Literary Reconstruction after the Nakba.”
4. Jane Rhodes, “Power to the People: The Black Panther and the Pre-Digital Age of Radical Media.”
5. Olivia Harrison, Transcolonial Maghreb, “Souffles-Anfas: Palestine and the Decolonization of Culture” (Section 1, Chapter 1).

After a round of introductions, Chana Morgenstern opened the discussion through a critical overview of the articles, noting how each author raises theoretical and methodological questions for the study of dissident publishing across several regions and disciplines. Drawing attention to the ways in which revolutionary periodicals across the globe can be analysed together, Chana began by discussing the shared material conditions of journals operating under conditions of colonialism, violence, and ruin. Bringing together the case of societal destruction in Palestine, with the “infrastructural blockages left in empire’s wake” in the Caribbean highlighted by Katerina, who was also one of the participants, she stressed how revolutionary journals saw themselves faced with a ‘cultural void’ lacking ‘literary infrastructures’ essential to any intellectual sphere. Chana identified how the lack of these material “conditions of possibility” was seldom discussed in studies of counter-institutional literary production.

Expanding this discussion on “literary infrastructures,” other participants contributed insights from their own regions and literary journals that they will be presenting at the main conference next year. Sara Kazmi spoke about the reliance on “infrastructures of orality” among revolutionary journals in Punjab, Pakistan, where dissemination through published copies went hand in hand with performative means of circulation. Further, Zeina Maasri and Zaib Aziz pointed out how radical publishing often subverted infrastructures of the dominant for their own ends. For instance, Zeina described how missionary printing presses were appropriated by anticolonial literary magazines in Beirut, and Zaib explained the importance of imperial shipping routes to the transnational transport of proscribed Communist papers to and from India. They were joined by Mahvish Ahmed and Alexandra Reza, who pushed the group to consider the kinds of infrastructures demanded by clandestine publications operating in underground conditions. Alexandra spoke about how dissident magazines were compelled to destroy their material to escape draconian repression under Portugese colonialism, while Mahvish highlighted how the Baloch nationalist magazine, Jabbal, survived precisely due to a “portable infrastructure” mandated by a situation of ongoing militant insurgency.

Thus, while the “infrastructural void” spotlighted by Katerina confronted radical publications in all these different regions, intellectuals were also able to respond creatively to the challenge, in ways that reflected the specific cultural and political contexts they were embedded in. Jane Rhodes further stressed the positionality of actors in a geopolitical setting, drawing on her study of the Black Panthers to point out how ideological shifts, changing personnel, and broader political currents are key to shaping revolutionary publishing, yet a narrow focus on literary content still dominates studies. Jane’s intervention facilitated a critical discussion around Hala Halim’s article on Lotus, the Soviet-funded Afro-Asian literary magazine based in Beirut. Michael Peddycoart spoke about how the Marxist-Leninist Palestinian organ, Al-Hadaf grappled with the tension between its financing imperatives and ideological commitment, a question that confronted many anticolonial, oppositional papers, as pointed out by David Johnson. However, questions of funding sources, particularly in the context of the cultural battles of the Cold War context, should not overdetermine our analysis of dissident publishing in the Global South. Layli Uddin for instance, spoke about the communities forged between peasants and urban intellectuals involved in the publication of Maoist magazines in 1970s Bangladesh, drawing attention to the social worlds and relations of revolutionary labour that made counter-political publishing possible.

Revolutionary Papers’ inaugural workshop contended with the cultural, material, and political conditions that shaped the form and content of liberatory imaginations found in twentieth century literary periodicals of the Global South. The role played by broader geopolitics, publishing infrastructures, ongoing regional struggles, and cultural institutions emerged as key considerations in the study of dissident papers produced under conditions of imperialism and neocolonialism. Participants will pick up the discussion next week, in a second workshop that will further explore these themes in relation to the “Counter-political”, which will focus on non-canonical political vocabularies of critique that addressed both regional and global struggles.