Bez retuszu. Wywiad z profesorem Kazimierzem Dziewońskim

Without retouching. Interview with Professor Kazimierz Dziewoński Prof. dr Kazimierz Dziewoński (1910-1994) is a classic of modern Polish settlement geography. As a longtime employee, and at one time a deputy director of the Institute of Geography (and Spatial Organization), Polish Academy of Sciences, He created his own scientific school, which has gained widespread international recognition. He promoted 21 doctors, among whom the present author was the forteenth one. For his students and co-workers, Professor was an undisputed master and substantive authority, but also a hero of numerous anecdotes. This does not change the fact that the most prominent Professor’s students undertook with his master a scientific polemic, which he bravely endured. The most important Professor K. Dziewoński’s theoretical concepts are: the theory of the urban economic base, the theory of the economic region and the concept of the settlement system, which – despite having entered the canon of spatial research – are still a source of intellectual inspiration. Professor’s true format was manifested in the fact that he never rested on the intellectual laurels of his professorship, but not only worked intellectually, but also studied until the end of his days. Larry Bourne of the University of Toronto aptly wrote after prof. K. Dziewoński’s death: “He was a great man [...]. I personally learned a lot more from Him than He ever thought” (cf. footnote 1). This last sentence can be repeated by many of us – Professor’s students – who are aware that the criticism of the Master’s works by those of us who dared to do so, was – to paraphrase Yi-Fu Tuan – the sincerest form of praise. A formal, concise, biography of prof. K. Dziewoński can be found in the Polish edition of Wikipedia. The only foreign – English – language version strikes, however, with both a poverty of content and linguistic awkwardness. Despite an attempt to publish a volume devoted to Professor K. Dziewoński a few years ago, this undertaking – entangled in the modes of bureaucratic machine of institutional science – did not come to fruition. This text can therefore be regarded as a tribute to the Master on the 110th anniversary of His birth. The last two sentences of this interview are dedicated to those who understand anything of this: “scientific work, a good scientific work, defends itself. It will not die”.