Teresa Kostkiewiczowa
"Słownik literatury polskiego
oświecenia", pod red. Teresy
Kostkiewiczowej, Wrocław [etc.]
1977 : [recenzja]
Literary Studies in Poland 4, 114-117
Słownik literatury polskiego Oświecenia (Dictionary o f the Polish Enlightenment Literature), ed. by T. K ostkiew icz, O ssolineum , W ro
claw 1977.
T he pub lication differs in its governing principle from typical encyclopaedias o r dictionaries. T he D ictionary does n o t co n tain entries opening w ith nam es o f w riters o f the E nlightenm ent period, or articles devoted to individual, even m ost o u tstan d in g w orks or to p articu lar literary facts o f the tim e. Instead, it presents 118 concise articles, arran g ed in the alphab etic o rd e r o f entries, on som e selected m ajo r p roblem s and p h enom ena o f culture an d literatu re o f the Polish E nlightenm ent. T hus, the bo dy o f the d ictio n ary entries treated in this way becom es an equivalent o f an exp an ded index to a synthesis o f the literatu re o f the period. Such a synthesis, how ever, usually prefers the chronological arran g em en t an d tends to present m ainly figures o f w riters, w hereas the o rganizing principle o f this Dictionary is the choice o f problem s, to which the alp h a betic ord er o f their p resen tatio n is wholly external. Individual entries are connected by a system o f cross-references, chiefly w ithin those spheres o f problem s which have been regarded as central and which cover: 1) literary cu rren ts an d trends o f the age, 2) ph eno m en a o f general cultu re com ing in co n tac t w ith literature, 3) form s, institutio ns and centres o f literary life, 4) aesthetic and literary consciousness o f the epoch, 5) artistic form s realized in w riters’ practice, an d 6) elem ents o f reception o f literary tend encies o f foreign provenance. T he references occurring w ithin the articles indicate n o t only “h o riz o n ta l” connections —betw een phe nom ena o f the sam e category, e.g. from the field o f aesthetics or literary life —bu t also “vertical” relatio ns betw een chosen aspects o f those spheres o f problem s, as well as in terrelations between those spheres them selves. T hus the ideal o f the D ictionary is to guide the reader through the separated universum o f literature o f the period an d to reveal, g radually an d indirectly, the internal laws governing this universum . In such a type o f d iction ary the very choice o f entries is —to a m uch greater degree th a n in other types o f encyclopaedic publication s —a result o f ad o p tin g a definite conception o f the epoch an d an indicatio n o f interpretative o p eration s m ade on the literary m aterial. In practice, how ever, this choice
becom es a result o f the com prom ise betw een the q uestions o f which the a u th o rs are fully aw are an d the possibility o f exhaustive answ ers to them , this possibility being determ ined by the state o f research a n d know ledge o f a given field, by present interests o f the scholars an d , finally, by the lim ited space o f the pub lication. F or these reasons n o t all problem s covered by the articles o f the Dictionary are discussed in equally detailed m an n er; e.g. problem s o f the aesthetic an d literary consciousness are treated in a m ore detailed way, w hereas the sphere o f sociological problem s o f literary life, o r stylistic and linguistic questions o f literature are discussed m ore generally. Some o f the articles are an outcom e o f a synthesis and generalizatio n o f long research, bu t there are also entries which are to be treated as a reconnaissance o f a given field, an attem p t at fo rm u latin g research problem s o r a p ro p o sitio n fo r fu rth er research. N o tw ith stan d in g the segm entation o f the m aterial an d the choice o f entries, those issues and problem s which are n o t treated separately, are discussed w ithin articles devoted to related or m ore general problem s. Index o f term s an d concepts discussed in the m ain entries indicates also those item s which are to be sought in o th er articles. T he Dictionary is also provided with an index o f nam es o f all those w hose w ork an d career are discussed in the articles. Each article co n tain s a sho rt bibliography concerning the problem s the article deals with.
T he Dictionary is m ean t chiefly for students o f the E nlight enm ent period. It can be helpful b o th in arran g in g p roblem s o f acquired know ledge o f the epoch an d in discovering those fields an d spheres which are still aw aiting research. C om plicated and varied m anifestation s o f culture an d literatu re o f the E nlightenm ent can be interesting also for non-professional observers o f literature, for those interested in sources an d genealogy o f their, personally experienced, co ntem poraneity.
T he E nlightenm ent is treated in the Dictionary as a literary period stretching from 1740 to the end o f the 1820’s. Fully aw are o f b oth the change in the situatio n o f Polish literature, which, ow ing to the political events, to o k place on the tu rn of the 18th century, an d the co ntinual process o f various literary and cu ltu ral changes, characteristic o f the Polish E nlightenm ent, the a u th o rs o f the articles express the conviction th a t the sense and
direction o f the literatu re o f the period are m ost distinctly revealed when seen in the perspective o f the natio nal history w ithin the dates 1 7 4 0 -1 8 2 0 .
T he Dictionary w as prep ared by the D e p artm en t o f the H istory o f L iterature o f the Polish E nlightenm ent in the In stitu te o f L iterary Studies o f the Polish A cadem y o f Sciences, th o u g h am on g the au th o rs o f the articles there are m any scholars from o th er university and academ ic centres.
The D ictionary contains the follow ing entries:
A lm anacs; A n acreo n tic; A n tiq u ity ; C afé littéraire; C a n ta ta ; C en sorship; C lassicism ; Classicism o f the first decade o f the 19th century ; C om edy; C riticism —literary and th eatrical; C u ltu ral p a tro n age; Deism ; D escriptive poem ; D ialogue; D ra m a ; D u m a (lyrical- -epical poem , close to b allad); E diting; Elegy; E loquence; E ncyclo p a e d ia s—D ictionaries; E nligh tenm ent; E pigram s; E rotic p o etry ; F able; F o lklore; G a rd e n s; G e n iu s; G essnerism ; T he G o th ic ; G ra m m ar; G rav ey ard School o f P o etry ; H eroic p o etry ; H o ra tio n ism ; H y m n; Idyll; Im ag in atio n ; Jaco b in ism ; Jo u rn a lism ; “ K uźnica K ołłą- tajow ska” (an inform al political g roup , g ath ering polem ical w riters); Language —theories; L ibertinism ; L ibraries an d read in g ; L iterary aw ard s; Literary co ntacts with o th er cou n tries; L iterary geography; Literary h ero; Literary m odels; L iterary polem ics; L iterary rules; L iterary salons; L iterary tra d itio n ; L iterary an d scientific co m p eti tio n s; Lyrical p o etry ; M em oirs; M im esis; M ock-heroic p o etry ; M onastic o rd e rs; “M o n ito r” (a m o ral periodical, m odelled on the English “ S p ectato r”, 1765—1785); M o n o d ra m a ; M y th olo gy ; T he N a tional language; T he N a tio n al T h ea tre —the history o f the in stitu tio n ; N a tu re ; N ovel; O ccasional political lite ratu re ; O d e; O p e ra ; O ra to ry ; O rientalism ; T he O ssianic; P am p h let; Panegyric; P eriodicals; P rin t in g —Bookselling; P hilosophy; T he Physiocratic d o ctrin e; Poetic dic tio n ; Poetic epistle; Poetic genres; P oem ; Poetry — theories ; P rose; Prose sho rt fo rm s; P ro sody; P salm ; Puław y (the residence o f A d am an d Izabela C zartoryski, centre o f the cu ltu ral a n d literary life); R heto ric; R o coco; R om ance; R ousseau —literary an d ideological tendencies connected w ith his influence; S a rm a tia n ism ; S atire; Senti m entalism ; S entim entality; Schools —E d u ca tio n ; Science; Societies — scientific an d literary; S ong; S terne —his literary influence; S tory; Style; Syllabic verse; Syllabic-accentual verse; T a ste ; T h eatre —
problem s o f the a r t; “T hursday D in n ers” (a kind o f the royal literary salon where the m ost p ro m in en t m en o f letters o f the time m et); T ow arzystw o Przyjaciół N a u k w W arszaw ie; T raged y; T ra n sla ti o n —A d a p ta tio n ; T ro p e ; U to p ian literatu re; V oltaire —literary and ideological tendencies connected w ith his influence; W it; W riters — generations an d social back g ro u n d of; “Z abaw y Przyjem ne i Poży teczne” (a literary periodical, 1770—1777).
Sum. by Teresa K ostkiew ic: Transl. by M aria-Bożenna Fedewie:
Problemy kultury literackiej polskiego Oświecenia (Problèmes de la culture littéraire des Lumières polonaises), ss la dir. de T. K ostkiewicz,
O ssolineum , W rocław 1978.
Au cours des dernières années, un im m ense progrès a été accom pli dans le savoir sur la cultu re et la littératu re des Lum ières p o lo naises, cependan t on s’occupait rarem ent de la question de l’influence réellem ent exercée p ar l’idéologie de cette époq ue sur les larges couches de la société du tem ps, ou on ne s’y intéressait que m arginalem ent. Les recherches sur les Lum ières polonaises s’étaient avan t to u t centrées sur l’oeuvre littéraire, principalem ent des au teu rs les plus rem arquables, sans que des études plus ap pro fo nd ies et systém atiques aient cherché à déterm iner la circulation des oeuvres, les goûts des lecteurs ou encore les besoins des récepteurs de la littératu re en ce tem ps (citons ce pen dant l’exception que constituen t d ans ce dom aine les travaux de J. Szczepaniec sur l’im prim erie et les problèm es de la censure sous Stanislas-A uguste).
C o nform ém ent à la tendence qui se dessine dans les sciences littéraires en E urope, on se rend com pte en P ologne de la nécessité d ’en glober d ’un nouveau regard la littératu re, de façon à pouvoir décrire le caractère des relations entre la créatio n et la société. En définissant le but et le program m e des recherches em piriques * en m atière de sociologie de la littératu re, on av ait cep end ant su rtou t à l’idée la culture littéraire con tem poraine. Il en était ainsi princi palem ent du fait que les difficultés q u ’o n t à affron ter les chercheurs (les pièges de la sociologie de la littératu re, p o u r em ployer les
