Marek Kwapiszewski
"Liryka w pełni romantyczna. Studia
i szkice o wierszach Słowackiego",
Czesław Zgorzelski, Warszawa 1981 :
[recenzja]
Literary Studies in Poland 14, 115-126
Book Reviews
Comptes rendus de livres
C z e s ł a w Z g o r z e l s k i , Liryka w pełni romantyczna. Studia i szkice
o wierszach Słowackiego (Truly Romantic Lyrical Poetry. Studies and Essays on Stowacki’s Poems), Państw ow y In sty tu t W ydawniczy,
W arszaw a 1981, 264 pp.
Lyrical p oetry o f Słow acki —the p oet w hom a distinguished literary theoretician an d co m p aratist, Z ygm unt Łem picki, called “the m ost R o m an tic o f ro m a n tic s,” according to him “the m ost p ro m in en t place n o t only in P olish R om an tic M ovem ent, b u t in R om anticism in general” 1 — has been the subject o f C zesław Z gorzelski’s scholarly inquiries for a long tim e. T he boo k co ntains studies and essays w ritten in the last three decades; it is the fruit o f inspirations, experiences and reflections p artly connected with the a u th o r’s long didactic practice —lectures and sem inars held in the C atholic U niversity o f L ublin.
Z gorzelski’s m ethodological ap p ro ach , derived from the best analytic trad itio n s o f R ussian form alism and the P rag ue school o f structuralism , ranges w ithin the co n tem p o rary “close re ad in g ” or
K unst der Interpretation. W hile acknow ledging to the full th e uniqueness
and singularity o f a poetic text, which he deem s to be his task as interp reter to reveal, he seeks —at the sam e tim e —the m ost effective ways o f d iachronic trea tm e n t o f the art o f literature. F o r the history o f p oetry is to Zgorzelski the history o f evolution o f b roadly conceived artistic form s.
W hat is especially strik in g in this collection o f essays and studies (differing, after all, in c h a rac te r and w ritten at different
1 Z. Ł e m p i c k i , “ R en esa n s, o św ie c e n ie , r o m a n ty z m ” (R en a issa n c e, E n lig h ten m en t, R o m a n tic is m ), [in:] W yb ó r p is m , ed. by H . M a rk iew icz, v ol. 1, W arszaw a 1966, pp. 1 8 4 - 1 8 5 .
116 B o o k R e view s
times) is uniform ity and consistency o f the consciously elaborated language o f analysis, free from the im pressional style o f literary criticism , bu t also far from trying to im press the reader with m odern term inological a p p a ra tu s; a language th a t seems to be im m une, as it were, to c u rren t fashions in literary scholarship. It is a language which allows to describe in precise and yet plain term s the org anization and functions o f p artic u la r s tra ta o f a lyrical w ork, as well as to expose its intrinsic integ ratio nal rules on which the laten t m eaning o f the whole rests. C onceiving th e poetic w ork as a “hierarchical system o f interplay o f v ario u s factors o f literary discourse, dynam ically in terc o n n ected — w hether in harm ony or in o p p o sitio n ” (p. 5), Zgorzelski does n o t conceal his cognitive m odesty resulting from his belief th a t the deepest arcan a o f individual artistry are beyond definition: “even after m aking the m ost subtle, m ost p en etratin g an d careful scholarly observations, th ere always rem ains the inexplicable core o f m ystery, the very ‘heart o f darkn ess’ (p. 45).
Lucid arran g em en t o f the boo k respects the ch ro n o lo g ) o f the poem discussed. Synthetic studies show ing the m echanism and evolution o f S low acki’s poetic art from the “o bservation distance” are preceded by essays th a t apply the m ethod o f “analytic close-ups” ; generalizations alw ays develop from th oro ug h-go in g em pirical ascer tainm ents. The a u th o r succeeded in presen ting a clear and convincing outline o f three stages o f S low acki’s developm ent as a lyrical poet, as well as in indicating the internal dynam ics and rich variety o f the p o e t’s creative achievem ents. Z go jzelsk i’s w ork, although no t m eant as a m o n o g rap h , poin ts out the regularities o f the p o e t’s evolution and introduces typological d istin ctio ns that can be applied to all lyrical writings o f Słowacki.
In the op ening study “L iryka m łodzieńcza” (Juvenile Lyrical Poetry) the au th o r characterizes S low acki’s early (till 1835) ventures at rhym ing —the stage o f the p o e t’s searching for his own expression, starting with con ven tio n al attem pts th a t ab o u n d in com positional inconsistencies and c o n tra d ic to ry attitu d e s and th at draw m ainly upon sentim entalism (e.g. elegiac stylizations in the passive, doleful, contem plative m oo d), b u t also upon C lassicism (as in the enthusiastic rheto ric o f the poem s o f the N ovem ber U prising o f 1830), and resulting in prelim inary crystallization o f both the R o m an tic attitu d e
(pessimistic view on the p o e t’s epoch, fatalistic conception o f hum an fate, th e an tin o m y : m a n —the w orld) and its characteristic ways o f suggesting lyrical m eanings (the artistic function o f w ords and poetic vision in the poem s “P ary ż” —Paris, “D o M. R ola-Skibi- ckiego” —T o M. R ola-S kibicki, “D u m a o W acławie R zew uskim ” — Elegy on W acław R zew uski).
P a rt II (“Z bliżenia analityczne” — A nalytic C lose-ups) brings inter p re ta tio n s of “ R ozłączenie” (Separation), H ym n “S m utno mi, B oże!” (I feel sad, G o d !), the cycle o f epistles from Egypt (“Listy poetyckie z E g ip tu ”) and the poem “N a sprow adzenie pro ch ó w N a p o le o n a ” (On the T ran sfer o f the D u st o f N apoleon), i.e. poem s w ritten in the p erio d when Słow acki was already a fully fledged R om antic p o et (1835—1842). H ere, like in his previous b o o k , O sztuce
p o etyc kiej M ickiew icza {On M ic k ie w ic z’s Poetic A rt, 1976),2 Zgorzel-
ski d em o n strate s a m asterly efficient analytic m ethod, com bined w ith his alm ost p ro g ram m a tic respect for the literary text and its specific features determ ining the basis and the h orizo n o f interpretative proceedings.
“R ozłączenie” is treated here as a poetic epistle addressed to the p o e t’s m o th er, and n o t —as it has been trad itio n ally se e n —as an erotic po em to S tow acki’s m use at th e tim e, M aria W odzińska; Zgorzelski bases his argum ents not on the biographical context, b u t on th e im m anent analysis o f the text itself. (The question o f the p resum ed addressee o f the poem was once the subject o f in terestin g b u t n o t definitely solved polem ics am ong Zgorzelski, K o n ra d G ó rsk i and W iktor W eintrau b.) T he constructive hinge o f “R ozłączen ie” is for him the ju x tap o sitio n o f two co ntrastin g landscapes (the trivial reality su rro u n d in g the addressee is co ntrasted with Swiss n atu re, heightened an d endow ed with the air o f u n co m m onness); Zgorzelski em phasizes the creative pow er o f R om an tic im agination and m etap h o rs bringing into being the unique landscape o f the environs o f L ake L em an —estranged, dynam ically visionary, as if in co rp o ratin g a dream into reality, th orou gh ly perm eated by subjective, extrem ely individualized vision and intensive feeling o f the speaking subject. The poem , opalescent with a m ultitude o f poetic suggestions, incessantly extending the range o f its m eanings,
118 B o o k R e v ie w s
has the ch a rac te r o f a direct, sp ontaneou s, th ough even-m inded, confession (sim ilar to elegy an d epistle), its lyrical th rea d being developed th ro u g h ap paren tly free v ariatio nal associations. The pen etratin g eye o f the analyst discerns, how ever, fairly com plicated, ingenious and regular interconn ection s in the p o em : th e net o f recurring, though each tim e slightly m odified, leitm otifs, as well as a set o f syntactic, in to n atio n a l and m etrical interrelations, based on a dialectic interplay o f unity and diversity. It is to be stressed th a t the detailed investigations in versification, which play such an im p o rtan t role in m an y o f Z gorzelski’s in terpretation s, always d o reveal an essential stylistic ch a racter o f th e verse form o f a given poem .
T he analysis o f the “H y m n ” focuses prim arily on the problem s o f the internal com position an d bro ad ly conceived style o f this p erh ap s m ost p o p u lar lyrical po em o f Słowacki. M ak in g use o f the genre sanctified by a very long religious trad itio n , solem n and dignified, the poet renders it in to an intim ate confession to G od, pervaded by the p ilg rim ’s grief and hom esickness, and kept in the elegiac tone o f pensiveness an d m elancholic resignation. It expresses a sense o f the boundlessness o f eternity and a b itte r reflection on all-pow erful and im perishable n atu re as opposed to the inexorable transitoriness and evanescence o f all h u m an achievem ents. The “ H y m n ” obeys the com p osition al principles o f the so-called open lyrical p o etry : individual stanzas, m utually ind ependent, realize the m ethod o f parallel synonym ous variations (repeated use o f the sam e m otifs, each tim e som ew hat m odified and tran sform ed), the integrating function being p erform ed by the refrain. T he poetic diction is inform ed by periphrases based on the principle o f m etap h o r and suggestive o f the R o m an tic way o f experiencing the w orld in the perspective o f infinity. T here is no clash here o f co n tra d icto ry forces; on the co n trary , there is a p re d o m in a n t tendency to sm ooth and harm o n io u s fusion o f all the stru ctu ral elem ents. T his unity o f the final form is, however, far from m o n o to n y : the p o e t is careful to variate unobtrusively the m eter o f the poem , by in tro d u c in g —am on g o ther devices — a subtle m o d u latio n o f the “m elod io us” versification.
Z gorzelski’s discussion o f the poetic epistles from Egypt shows how the epically oriented descriptions and narrativ es o f the cycle
becom e perm eated by to tally subjective insights evoked by observations and experiences o f the n a rra to r —a R o m antic voyager; how this poem o f travel, ap p a ren tly m eant as a “re p o rt,” becom es a lyrical and reflective piece o f poetry. T he n arrativ e technique o f th e epistles is characterized by sophisticated digressiveness, whimsical and ironic changeability o f attitu d es and perspectives assum ed tow ard the evoked reality by the n a rra to r, w ho playing with literary genres, d em onstrates richness o f associations and them es as well as dazzling artistic virtuo sity, b u t whose prim ary interest is to interpret the signs o f history noticeable in the present. F o r it is in term s o f time and space th a t he conceives the historicophilosophical idea o f the tragic decrees o f history o rd ain in g th a t even cultures once great and pow erful should perish. This idea is no t explicit in the poem , yet it is im plied by the lyrically m eaningful “p o larity ” o f the ju x tap o sed am b iguous im ages-sym bols. The am orp hic form o f the epistles and their incoherence th a t strikes the read er at the first read in g are — Zgorzelski argues — only a p p a re n t; a careful exam ina tion brings to the light hidden purposefulness o f the internal arrangem ent o f the cycle; and he concludes his discussion with an illum inating co m p ariso n with M ickiew icz’s “jo u rn ey to the E ast” — n o t with the C rim ean sonnets, how ever, bu t with the D igression o f P a rt III o f D ziady (Forefathers), a m asterpiece o f R om antic political pam p h let.
This p a rt o f the b o o k is closed by a m odel in terp retatio n o f the exquisite poem “O n the T ran sfer o f the D ust o f N a p o le o n .” H aving draw n a rich genetic-biographical and historical b ackground, and indicated the m ajo r factors co n trib u tin g to the rise o f the E m p e ro r’s m yth in E uro p ean culture, as well as the broad, both Polish and foreign, literary co ntext associated with N apoleon (Byron, L am artine, M anzoni, H ugo, H eine, L erm ontov, K oźm ian, A. C zajkow ski, K rasiński), Zgorzelski, characteristically o f his m ethod, focuses on the stru ctu ra l analysis o f the poem itself. H e views it as “a m o n u m en tal R o m an tic d ra m a a b o u t the conflicts inherent in the world o f the p o e t’s times, a b o u t actual and ap p a ren t forces th at govern this w orld, ab o u t irony o f m e n ’s fortunes in which hum an w retchedness an d greatness are in term ingling ” (p. 95). The poetic w orld is here organized by tw o visions, each o f them referring to a different trad itio n and generic con ventio ns: the excavation
120 B o o k R e v ie w s
o f the body and its triu m p h an t re tu rn to F rance. T he m ain events and m otifs, only seemingly concrete, are p ervad ed by great em otional (and no t visual) expressiveness, for their p rim ary function is to evoke lyrical and sym bolic suggestions. The first p a rt o f the poem is in th e m ood o f elegiac-funeral reflections, its p re d o m in a n t tone being th a t o f the funeral lam en tation . O n the o th er han d, the im agery o f the second p art, full o f enthusiasm and pathetic exultation, is o f a hyperbolic c h a rac te r: it is derived from the poetics o f the “elevated” classicist ode, and serves chiefly to glorify the hero. Yet the poem is not a dich otom ous co m p o sitio n ; the p o e t’s artistry consists in the m asterly fusion o f the m elodious elegiac with the declam atory rh eto ric into a whole th a t is coh eren t, though based on dynam ic co n trast o f its inform ing factors, an d therefore characterized by a certain duality. “O n the T ran sfer o f the D ust o f N a p o le o n ” is at the sam e tim e a threno dy an d a trium p hal elegy; it is b o th a lyrical reflection and an em ph atic m onologue, dram atized by passionate, accusing rhetoric. Zgorzelski traces with subtle precision and insight all m anifestations o f this co njun ctio n o f styles and conventions on various levels o f the te x t’s stru ctu re (he gives a lengthy analysis o f the syntactical-intonatio n, rhythm ic and m etrical structu re), ran k in g the poem am ong tho se which he calls “the m ost truly R o m a n tic ” (together with such poem s as “ R ozłączenie,” “R zy m ” —R om e, “S um nienie” —C onscience, H ym n “S m utno mi, B oże!,” or “Pogrzeb k a p ita n a M eyznera” —T he Burial o f C ap tain M eyzner).
A fter such an extensive p re p ara tio n p art III o f Z gorzelski’s boo k presents attem p ts at synthetic generalizations. T he au th o r deals here with the m atu re lyrical p oetry o f Słow acki (of the years 1835—1842) in its several aspects: he discusses the factors o f the so-called lyrical resonance, investigates the p ro blem o f the “m elodiousness” o f S low acki’s poetry, proposes its general typology and division into periods, and finally, dwells on the category o f “the d ram atic q u ality ” o f the lyrical m onologue, and specifies the range o f the notion.
O ne o f the m ost characteristic m anifestations o f the poetic art o f the au th o r o f “R ozłączenie” is his m asterly capability o f expressing feelings and reflections indirectly, o f con stan tly suggesting — th ro u g h im plications, allusions and aposiopeses —new sem antic dim en
sions o f his poem s. This difficult artistic task is accom plished thro ug h introduction o f tw o m ain factors by m eans o f which his poetry gains a deeper lyrical resonance. In the earlier period it is rom anticized n a tu re which is charged with the fu nction o f m ultiplying poetic m eanings (a good exam ple is “S um nienie,” where the landscape m otifs po in t sim ultaneously to several different, yet interpenetrating, senses). L ater on —in the R o m an p eriod —it is reflection on the p ath o s and passing away o f history, sensed in one fleeting m om ent o f the present, which is tinged with lyricism (“ R zy m ,” “Listy poetyckie z E g ip tu ,” “O n the T ran sfer o f the D u st o f N a p o le o n ,” “Pogrzeb k a p ita n a M ey zn era”). T he antino m y o f n atu re and history, so crucial in th a t stage o f the p o e t’s developm ent, will ap pear again in the m ystical po etry o f Słow acki, b u t then it will acquire a different shape and a different in terp retatio n .
In the essay “ Śpiewu tajem nice” (M ysteries o f Song) the au th o r is concerned with an extrem ely com plex ph eno m eno n, cum bered w ith a ra th e r bad scholarly tr a d itio n : the so-called “m usical q u ality ” o f S łow acki’s poem s. D eclining the tem p tatio n o f easy “m u sical” analogies, Zgorzelski assum es the perspective o f strictly literary scholarship. H e treats p o etry as the verbal art, and therefore looks for m an ifestatio ns o f this “m usicalness” in “those elem ents o f the text [ ...] which in the set o f com position al elem ents determ ine the m ain to n e o f a poem and its m eanderings in the developing stream o f speech” (p. 125). In trod ucin g the relevant distin ction betw een the “singsong” q uality (the dom ain o f m eter and rhythm ) and “m elod iousn ess” (the d o m ain o f in to n atio n and syntax), the a u th o r distinguishes three basic types o f S low acki’s lyrical poem s. T he first type covers the elegiac poem s (such as “ R ozłączenie,” H ym n “ S m u tn o mi, B oże!”, “O statnie w spom nienie. D o L au ry ” —The Last M em ory. To L aura), am on g which —as an extrem e v arian t o f the type —he ran k s also the “songs” (such as “Pieśń legionu litew skiego” —T he Song o f the L ith u an ian R egim ent, “D u m a o W acław ie R zew uskim ,” “C h m u ry ” —The C louds, “Pieśń na N ilu ” — T he Song on the Nile, “ R o zm o w a z p iram id am i” —A T alk with the Pyram ids, songs included in S łow acki’s poetic tales and dram as, as well as som e playfully satirical or p aro distic poem s). Those “songs” are characterized by Zgorzelski from the p o in t o f view o f their versification stru ctu re (strong p ulsation o f the m etrical
122 B o o k R e v ie w s
pattern th at som ew hat stifles the in to n atio n and syntax, th e factors reducing the syllabic-accentual m ono tony ). T he second ty p e —contrast ing with the first one —includes rh etorical m onologues, full o f rage and passions, presenting argum ents th a t are in sh arp conflict, and m arked by “theatrical ex u ltatio n ” (such as “P rzeklęstw o” — The C urse, sonnets “T o A . M ., ” “ G r ó b . A g a m e m n o n a” — A gam em non’s T om b, “D o pan i Jo an n y B obrow ej” — T o Jo a n n a B obrow a, “Testam ent m ó j” —My T estam ent, “T ak mi, Boże, d o p o m ó ż ” —So help me G od). Zgorzelski’s close exam ination o f the gro up brings to the light the stylistic m echanism o f those d ra m a tic -o ra to ric al com positions th a t are entirely co nform ing with the principles o f R om antic expression (e.g. in their o rien ta tio n tow ards p sy ch o lo g ies and em otional facts). The third type, the m ost interesting and poetically m ost innovatory, often co un terb alan cin g the elegiac m elodiousness w ith rhetoric (as best seen in “The T ransfer o f the Dust o f N a p o le o n ”), are poem s which have the stru ctu re o f lyr:cal or n arrative description (e.g. “R zym ,” “S um nienie,” “W sztan b u c h u M arii W odzińskiej” — In the A lbum o f M aria W odzińska, “Pogrzeb k ap itan a M eyznera,” “A nioły stoją na rodzinnych p o l a c h . Angels stand on my native field s...).
A separate essay is devoted to the p ro blem s o f “the dram atic ch aracter o f the lyrical m o n o lo g u e,” h ardly ever noticed in earlier studies on Słowacki. A m ong the features th a t co n trib u te :o this dram atic quality Zgorzelski sees
the c o n flic tin g rela tio n betw een elem en ts o f a p o e m , im plied p o ly p h o n y generally su g g estin g a d ia lo g u e , the p o la rity o f m ain p erso n s an d p o in ts in sp a ce around w h ich a p o em cen ters, co n te m p o r a r iz a tio n o f th e situ a tio n as a d evice bringing th e situ a tio n , as it were, nearer to the reader, th e u se o f “the p resen t” in its su b seq u en t d e v elo p m en t or in ch a n g es in the m en tal a ttitu d e o f th e speaker, and the “th e a trica ln ess” c o m b in in g to the illu sio n o f ex p erien cin g the m o n o lo g u e as if it w ere d elivered on the stage, a m o n g theatrical sc en ery , w ith gestures and m im ic exp ressio n , and p articu larly w ith n o tic e a b le su g g estio n o f differentiated, d y n a m ica lly fa lterin g in to n a tio n (p. 159).
T he com plex n atu re o f this phen o m en o n and its functions are analyzed on such differing exam ples as “W sztam bu chu M arii W odzińskiej,” the tw o sonnets to A. M ., “P rzek lęstw o ,” and the poem p ro b ab ly w ritten a year before S łow acki’s d eath an d fulfilling the principles o f the m ystical period o f his po etry — “K iedy pierwsze kury Panu ś p ie w a ją ...” (W hen the first cocks crow to the Lord).
A n intensified dram atic elem ent inform s prim arily the rhetorical m onologues and those poem s which b ear a distinct discursive and polem ic stam p ; the least affected by it are, o f course, m elodious com positions —internally harm o n io u s and rhythm ically sm ooth.
Sum m ing up his reflections Zgorzelski traces o u t th e line o f evolution o f “the m ost truly R o m a n tic ” poetry o f Słowacki. G enerally speaking, it runs from lyrical treatm ents o f landscapes (bearing the traits o f descriptiveness) to lyrical treatm en ts o f situations and events (acquiring the stru ctu re o f narrative). In o th er term s, it is an ev o lu tio n from lyrical po etry o f em otion to poetry o f reflection, which tow ards the end o f the period 1835—1842 leads to a certain p rog ram m e. It is to be rem em bered, how ever, th at such a schem e levelling individual ch a rac te r o f p artic u la r poem s stresses only th e p redo m inance o f certain features, an d n o t their exclusiveness.
P art IV o f the b o o k , “L iryka ostatnieg o e ta p u ” (The Lyrical P oetry o f the L ast P eriod), deals with poem s o f Słow acki-the m ystic en rap tu red by his new “perceptio n o f n a tu re ” . A radical turning-point in the p o e t’s inner life, in 1842, b ro u g h t a b o u t also serious tran sfo rm atio n s in his poetics, alth o u g h —as it is em phasized by Zgorzelski — “we c a n n o t speak o f a com plete cut off from the lyrical art o f his m atu re p e rio d ” (p. 215). A new vision o f the w orld, founded on the sense o f m etaphysical oneness o f the universe, on the belief in the ab solute unity and integrity o f the sensory and the transcen d en tal, com pelled Słow acki to fundam ental revision o f his own artistic achievem ents, predilections and habits. The principal p ro b lem th a t he faced th en was to elab orate such m eans o f expression which co uld render reality in “form s th a t are poetic and real a t the sam e tim e” (as he p u t it in a letter to K rasiński in July 1843), and which w ould allow him to present in a plausible way the tangible reality o f the unreal shining with the tru th o f m ystic experience. This unreality h ad cosm ic dim ensions, it was unlim ited in space and time. Such a view o f th e w orld h ad to result in elim ination o f d ream from poetry, in rejection o f “overt p o etizatio n o f reality ad o rn ed with w reaths o f the beautiful d etails” (p. 221) in fav ou r o f literal p re sen tatio n o f n aturaln ess and perceptibility o f w hat ap p ears to be im m aterial and elusive. A nd at the sam e tim e
124 B o o k R e view s
everth in g that by the reality o f its ex isten ce and rela tio n s w ith the everyd ay w orld had seem ed c o m m o n and sim p le, b eca m e c o m p a sse d by th e atm o sp h e re o f the p o e tic stra n g en ess [ . . . ] C o n se q u e n tly , the w orld as given to us in this p oetry strikes us [ ...] w ith an u n u su a l, stro n g ly intensified p o e tic q u a lity o f its stru ctu re” (p. 226).
This is due m ainly to the m ethod o f “m ultidirectio nal opening o f sim ultaneous sem antic perspectives o f a m o tif o r expression introduced into a p o e m ” (p. 222); these perspectives glisten with at least tw o interplaying and interp en etratin g senses: one taken from the do m ain o f m aterial pheno m ena, the o th er —from the realm o f the supern atu ral, thereby m aking the presented p hen om en a function n o t only as concrete, sensuously distinct elem ents o f im agery, but —above a l l —as signals leading to the u n d ersta n d in g o f what is hidden b eneath the o u tw ard o rd er o f existence.
T he poetic diction o f S low acki’s m ystical p o etry is determ ined by the tension betw een tw o co n trad icto ry tendencies: inclination to the p ro p h etic elevated style on the one h and, and stylization on sim plicity and unaffectedness on the other. O n this basis Zgorzelski divides the poem s o f the last p eriod into three different, thou gh related in som e o f th eir stru ctu ral aspects, groups. In th e first one, linked in a way to the trad itio n o f d eclam ato ry rh etorical m onologues, we w ould find p ro g ram m atic confessional poem s, im passionately apostolic an d testifying the fervent faith o f the m ystic (such as “T ak m i, Boże, d o p o m ó ż ,” “ W ierzę” —I Believe, “ D o L udw ika N a b ie la k a” —T o L udw ik N abielak), alongside the inspired prophetic poem s envisioning the future history o f P o lan d an d the w orld (e.g. “K iedy praw dziw i Polacy p o w s ta n ą .. . ” — W hen true Poles will r is e ..., “ W yjdzie stu ro b o tn ik ó w ” —A H u n d re d W orkers will C om e o u t .. ., “R atujcie się! Pan wielki n aro d ó w n a d c h o d z i...” — Rejoice, the great L ord o f th e nations is c o m in g ..., or the m ost brilliant o f the prophecies, and poetically m ost am azing, “ U sp o k o je n ie ” —A ppeasem ent). P red o m in an t in this grou p is the to ne o f
solem nity, far from rh etorical affectation, this to n e being strengthened by frequent Biblical allusions. The second group w ould include — beside “songs” in the naively devotion al style (“C hw al P an a, duszo m o j a ...” —P raise the L ord, my s o u l..., “B aranki m o j e ...” —My flock, “Bo mię m a tk a m oja m iła .. . ’’ — F o r my d ear m o th e r.. . ) —also contem plative, prayer-like, intim ate poem s in the to ne o f beseeching
im plo ratio n or religious w orship (e.g. “K iedy pierw sze kury P an u ś p ie w a ją ...,” “G dy noc głęboka w szystko uśpi i o n ie m i...” —W hen the d a rk night puts everything to sle e p ..., “O! wielki Boże — o P anie w szechm ocny” — O! great G o d —o alm ighty L o r d ..., “D usza się m oja zam yśla g łęb oko” —M y soul is p o n d erin g deeply, “Jeżeli kiedy w tej mojej k ra in ie” —If ever in my c o u n try ...). T hose poem s, to a certain extent exploiting the inspiratio n o f the reflective elegies ch aracteristic o f the preceding period, express frailty and subm issiveness o f m an tow ards his M aker. “But sim plicity is not always a decisive elem ent o f the style in this group o f poem s [...] It m ight be said to be p re d o m in an t, b u t never overw helm ing” (pp. 230, 232), for it usually clashes with a force th a t leads to p o etizatio n and m arks the poem s with m anifestations o f the typically “literary c o n stru c tio n ” (p. 232). The th ird , m ediate, group w ould cover poem s whose stylistic dynam ics is determ ined by a struggle o f tw o co n tra d icto ry tones o f the speaker: p ath o s o f the p ro u d -h earte d p ro p h e t and his hum ble sincerity before G o d (e.g. “P anie! jeżeli zam kniesz słuch n a r o d u ...” —L ord, if you m ake the n atio n d e a f ..., “N ajpiękniejszy, najśw iętszy Boga tro n n a z ie m i...” — T he m ost beautiful, m ost holy th ro n e o f G o d ..., “Zachw ycenie” — E n rap tu re).
This general trea tm e n t (contained in the study “O statni etap liryki S łow ackiego” —T he L ast Stage o f S łow acki’s Lyrical Poetry) is verified an d com pleted by the analyses in interpretative essays concerned with the poem s “ G dy noc głęboka w szystko uśpi i o n ie m i.. . ” and “K iedy pierw sze kury P an u ś p ie w a ją ...,” as well as by a co m p re hensive study entitled “ ‘M in ia tu ry ’ liryczne” (Lyrical “ M in iatu res”), in which Zgorzelski investigates sh o rt poetic fragm ents h ith erto neglected by h istorians o f literature. T hose diary pieces, practically scraps, spontaneously recorded in the private n o teb o o k o f the m ystic on the spur o f the m om ent, while exam ined under a m agnifying glass o f the critic prove to be “the m ost lyrical o f lyrical u ttera n ces” ; referring to the m ost essential and u ltim ate questions, they reveal their asto nishing artistry in the m any-dim ensional sym bolism o f “o p e n ” lyrical m eanings, sem antic density o f succinct co n stru ctio n s, the role o f p re te ritio n s and aposiopeses, fine cohesion o f interconnection s betw een even the sm allest bits o f the whole, internal dialectics o f discipline and liberty.
126 B o o k R e v ie w s
The b o o k closes with the essay w ritten a q u a rte r o f a century ago, “ W odbiorze dzisiejszego czy telnika” (R eception by the M odern R eader). P oin tin g o u t those features o f S low acki’s p o e tc art th a t are close to literatu re o f o u r tim es (such as the revealing o f general tru th s and perspectives th ro u g h individualized situations m ade concrete and u n iq u e; m o d ern use o f m etap h o r as a m eans o f extending the sem antic range o f the text, indirect suggestion o f artistic m eans), the au th o r finds th at m ost appealing to the co n tem p o rary reader are —beside m editative m ystical m m atures — those poem s which have the stru ctu re o f lyrical narrative or description.
The collection o f Z gorzelski’s studies is an outstanding b o o k ; presenting the m ost serious so far, and in m any respects illum inating, treatm en t o f S low acki’s lyrical poetry, and thu s becom ing a classical p osition in Polish literary scholarship, the b oo k opens new interpretative horizons also before those students o f R om anticism who base the herm eneutics o f poetic text on quite different m ethodological principles.
M a re k K w c p isze w sk i
T ransl. by M a r ia -B ożen n a F e d ew icz
A d a m K a r p i ń s k i , Staropolska poezja ideałów ziemiańskich. Próba
przekroju (La Poésie vieille polonaise des idéaux campagparis*. Essai d’analyse), O ssolineum , W rocław 1983, 208 pp.
Il y a près de cin q u an te ans, Stanisław W indakiew icz a rem arq u é que la littératu re vieille polonaise se d istin gu ait p a r u n culte particulier de la vie à la cam pagne. L ’engouem ent p o u r la cam pagne a a ttein t en P ologne un degré inégalé d ans aucune autre littératu re de cette ép oque, ni d ans la littératu re italienne, ni dan s la française,
* Je trad uis ain si, fa u te d ’un autre term e, l ’a d je c tif zie m ia ń sk ie q u i signifie n o n se u le m e n t «se rap p ortan t à la ca m p a g n e » , m ais au ssi «se ra p jo rta n t à la p ro p riété terrien n e». C elle-ci éta it, en P o lo g n e p lu s q u ’ailleurs — ra>pelons-le — l ’a p a n a g e d e la cla sse — n o m b r e u se — d es n o b les, lesq u els éta ien t souvert le s propres géran ts sin o n les cu ltiv a teu rs de leurs terres, d es g en tlem en fa rm e r s en q u elq u e so r te (n o te d u trad ucteu r).
