Antoni Czyż
"Europejskość i polskość literatury
naszego renesansu", Janusz Pelc,
Warszawa 1984 : [recenzja]
Literary Studies in Poland 19, 137-144
Book Reviews
Comptes rendus de livres
J a n u s z P e lc , Europejskość i polskość literatury naszego renesansu
(The European and Polish Character o f the Literature o f Our Renai ssance), C zytelnik, W arszaw a 1984, 644 pp., ill.
The new b oo k o f Janusz Pelc presents the epoch in this very tw ofold way. The extensive volum e o f studies is an o utcom e o f the a u th o r’s m any years’ research on R enaissance culture an d it gives a coherent and com pact synthesis o f the period. This synthesis becom es especially stim ulating because it is focused on the prob lem o f the trad itio n s which are still vivid for the m odern Poles. This question was posed already in the “ In tro d u c tio n ” w ritten in 1981, and then it recurs th ro u g h the whole w ork bearing furth er question s : o f the identity o f m odern Polish cultu re and o f o u r R enaissance. Since if we w ant to develop a m ultivocal cu ltu re trustfully open to m any ideas, the pluralism o f approaches to the achievem ents o f the p ast is indispensable. F o r now adays, ap art from th e im p o rta n t heritage o f the R om anticism and B aroque, also the legacy o f the R enaissance constitutes a p a rt o f vital trad ition .
The R enaissance u n d ersto o d as a fragm ent o f the lasting and prolific p ast is an easily recognizable epoch. D id it com e into being in the close connection with con tem p o rary W estern culture, merely co n trib u tin g to it and accepting its values from a d istan ce? O r did it ra th e r uncover at th a t very m om ent o ur own specificity, a distinctive characteristic o f Polish culture? W hat was the Polish R enaissance like, th en ? N atio n al, E u ro p ean or universal? T hese are the m ain problem s, the roo ts o f P elc’s book, which is a consciously shaped attem p t to answ er the above questions. H ow ever, after studying the whole volum e, the reader becomes convinced th a t the questions were n o t very well form ulated, and th at they even m ade it difficult to u n d erstan d the epoch. A nd, since u n d ersta n d in g is
138 B o o k R e v ie w s
the way to identity, the a u th o r shows the R en aissance era in a different way and u n d erstands it m ore deeply: he p resen ts the literature and culture o f the R enaissance in P olan d as a w onderful u nion o f native and foreign elem ents which are inseparable, m utually im portan t, and equally prolific. T hus at the very beginning o f his work (and also further on) Pelc stresses—b orrow ing from works o f H enryk Sam sonow icz and especially o f W ładysław T ata rk iew icz— the achivem ents o f the late M iddle Ages in P oland. In this period Polish culture was becom ing ro o ted in C entral E u ro pe an d was establishing ties with R enaissance Italy. In the end o f th e 15th century P oland has already m atu re an d receptive cu ltu re. W ith its medieval heritage, Polish cu lture absorbs R enaissance novelties as a crystallized form ation. The ideas from R enaissance Italy deepen the identity o f Polish culture. They neither suppress it n o r create it. A fter all, these ideas reach a E u ropean cou ntry which is linked with the W est and they sim ply m ake it easy for P olish culture to strengthen its own specific features.
T his thread o f argum ent is a great value o f P elc’s boo k. He opposes the p o p u lar image o f the Polish R enaissance as the period o f greedy and passive ab so rp tio n o f W estern culture. It was neither passivity (suggesting helplessness) n o r greed (lacking in selection). The book describes Polish culture im mersed in a wise dialogue with all ideas reaching the country, presents the rad iatio n o f Polish cultu re ab ro ad and its co n stan t presence b oth in the E ast and the West o f O ld Europe. T hanks to this dialogue P olan d was one o f the ch ief creative forces in E u ropean culture o f those days. W'hen, in the last ch apter o f the book, Pelc m entions the R enaissance changes in the R oyal C astle a t the Wawel Hill as a p ro o f o f the com m union o f P oland with E uropean art (and culture in general), his w ords sound not only credibly bu t also sym bolically: they constitute the significant conclusion o f his am bitious synthesis o f our R enaissance. If already in the M iddle Ages Polish cu lture could create its own lasting values, retaining universally E u ro p ean traits at the sam e time, then the R enaissance becom m e a p rocess o f inheriting, transform ing and enriching m edieval achievem ents. M edie val them es were continually vital in the literature o f the P olish R e naissance. Pels stresses this fact accurately. Some writers em ployed them o u t o f inertia (Rej), but, w hat is interesting, often they were
a specific p re p ara tio n o f B aroque literatu re (the hym ns o f D antyszek and G rochow ski). H ow ever, the vitality o f the M iddle Ages inten sified, in a p aradoxical way, the developm ent o f the Polish R enaissance which m ade use o f classical heritage often borrow ing from m ediaeval works, and alth ough it looked for m odels in G reek and L atin poetry, it never stopped to trea t the Bible in a sim ilar way. The R enaissance changes ad o p t num erous m edieval form s and ideas, and, th an k s to this, the exchange between the Polish cultu re and E u rope expands and augm ents.
The ties are striking. The Latin courtly p oetry created durin g the reign o f Sigism und the Old (the ep ithalam ia by Paweł o f K rosno, D antyszek and K rzycki) are exam ples o f the literary practice typical o f E uro pean hum anism . B iern at’s o f L ublin B a jki (The
Fables) and his Ż yw o t Ezopa (A eso p ’s Life) have their co u n terp arts
in o ther p arts o f E urope. There are a lot o f such exam ples. M utual bonds do no t elim inate an individual ch aracter which is due to diffe re n t tone, subject m atter, or to o u tstan d in g creative pow ers. Here Pelc points ou t num erous p henom ena from Rej, O rzechow ski, G ó r nicki to the writers whose w orks ra d ia ted all over E u ro p e : Frycz M odrzew ski and K ochanow ski. Their w orks no t always deal with universal subjects. Som etim es they sim ply show how n atio n al identity was rising in th at epoch. However, this is also a value. In P elc’s b o o k there em erges the im age o f P olish culture which exists in E urope. Because in the R enaissance it existed in E urope and in teracted actively. The writings o f Frycz, K rom er, H osius an d C op erni cus circulated in num erous editions in L atin and in translations. They were read and discussed. Polish cu lture was present in Europe.
T he assum ptions and the concept o f the R enaissance e ra presented above constitute, as the a u th o r him self p oints o u t in th e “In tro d u c tio n ” and in the last, fourth ch ap ter o f the boo k, entitled “T he P erspectives,” the bases o f the central p a rt o f th e work. It consists o f three parts. In the first one (“ M o vem en ts—Styles—D i rectio n s”) Pelc reconstructs the m ost im p o rtan t con ceptual categories o f the period , presents the chronology o f the Polish R enaissance, shows the literary life o f the epoch an d the tendencies in the de velopm ent o f literature, which is discussed here from the perspective o f the broadly u n d ersto o d history o f culture. In P a rt II (“The M etam orp hoses o f W riters and o f T heir W o rk s”), Pelc concetrates
140 B o o k R e v ie w s
on three im p o rtan t w riters: Rej, K ochanow ski, Szym onowic. P art III (“Topoi— Sym bols—C ategories— G enres. T heir Origins, In terrela tions and T ra n sfo rm atio n s”) com es back to general p ro b lem s and presents the lines o f developm ent in the literature o f the R enaissance through the analysis o f changes in aesthetic consciousness and in sym bolic im agination.
The analysis o f the term ‘R enaissan ce’ is based by Pelc on the p resentation o f various u n derstanding s o f the word in th a t p erio d : from Vasari, Boccaccio, E rasm us and D u Bellay (in their app reciation o f P etrarca as the re n o v ato r o f literature), to L uther (with his conviction th a t he was reborn thanks to his grasping the essence o f the exculpation by faith), and to P olish authors, seen here against th e b ackgro und o f the con tem p o rary belief th at an asolutely nes spiritual and artistic form ation is being built. Once again the unity o f P o lan d and E urope is felt. T his jo in t effort to create the identity o f the new era com es into being in the process o f tran s form ing (renovating) the classical heritage. This was d on e by h u m anism as the m ain cu ltu ral trend o f the R enaissance. Pelc views the R enaissance prim arily as a philosophical m ovem ent (and also, bu t to a lesser extent, as a philological one). It was determ ined by the m ain trends o f con tem p o rary th o u g h t: A ristotelism , neo- -P latonism , Epicureanism , neo-stoicism , scepticism . T hus it was a syn cretic m ovem ent im p o rtan t for the fu rth er developm ent o f E uropean thought. Pelc discusses the R efo rm atio n as a m ovem ent which was no t always closely related to hum anism . H e writes ab ou t the reform s o f C hristianity (the reform s after the C ouncil o f T rent am on g them ) characteristic o f the R enaissance era. Pelc draw s a very interesting parallel betw een Erasm us and A ndrzej Frycz M odrzew ski. B oth o f them were passionately interested in the renovation o f C hristianity, according to the ideas o f irenism. P robab ly because o f this stance, full o f tolerance for o th er ideas, E rasm us becom es such a vigorous personality in P elc’s book, apparently m ore im p o rtan t to the a u th o r th an Ficino or Pico della M irandola.
This b ro ad , colourful p a n o ra m a o f the epoch presented in the process o f transform ation (from the crystallization o f early h um anist ideas within the limits o f the M iddle Ages to characteristically late R enaissance m anifestations o f the m annerist style— interesting co m m ents on M ichelangelo) is a good illustration o f P elc’s simple
m ethod. H e uncovers the n atu ra l links o f Polish writers and thinkers with the culture o f the E u ropean R enaissance. R elations w ith Erasm us (correspondence, pop u larity o f his w orks) are especially significant. T hus it is possible to carry on th e research: Pelc defines the place o f the Polish R enaissance in the process o f the developm ent and m atu ra tio n o f the whole fo rm atio n in E urope. O ne should be aw are all the tim e th a t the dialogue betw een Europe and P oland in the R enaissance is an obvious phenom enon for Pelc. His book incessantly confirm s this idea.
Presenting the beginnings and the developm ent o f the R enaissance in Polish literature, the au th o r stresses the value o f early m ani festations o f the R enaissance in P o lan d . H e writes ab o u t the corresp o n dence betw een Zbigniew O leśnicki and A eneas Piccolom ini, ab o u t the activities and writings o f F ilippo B uonaccorsi called K allim ach (Callim achus), ab o u t the first association o f hum anists in P oland
(Soliłaś Vistulana) organized in K ra k ó w in 1489 by K allim ach and
Celtis (C onradus Celtes). H ow ever, Pelc also m entions vigorous mediaeval elem ents in Polish R enaissance cu ltu re: for exam ple, when he analyzes the fam ous gravestone o f K allim ach m ade by W it Stwosz. Pelc’s attem p t to use the category o f literary generation in his research into the Polish R enaissance is especially valuable in his work. T he generation o f L atin poets (D antyszek, K rzycki, Janicki, and others) is, for instance, a very distinct one. Janicki, whom it is still ra th e r difficult to identify with any literary generation, is o u r greatest lyrical p oet before K ochan ow ski; Pelc gives him a lot o f attentio n. T he generation o f O rzechow ski, Frycz M odrzew ski, and Rej, b o u n d with the year 1543 which was a tu rn in g p oint in the Polish R enaissance, is also im p o rtan t. In the mid-sixties there appears the generation o f K ochanow ski and Ł ukasz G órnicki. It will be still closely connected with the R efo rm atio n m ovem ent, b ut even m ore so with the Italian R enaissance, with the intellectual atm osphere o f P adua. Each generation fulfilled a different role in the Polish R enaissance. The generation o f K rzycki and D antyszek streng thened the presence o f the R enaissance style in o ur culture, the generation o f F rycz and Rej was building its m aturity , the generation o f K ochanow ski created the zenith o f the Polish R enaissance which lasted till c. 1565. Since th a t year until his death Jan K ochanow ski dom inates Polish literature. A fter him , there cam e the close o f the
142 B o o k R e view s
epoch m arked by the achievem ents o f K lonow ie and Szymonowie, and also connected with the p atro n a g e o f Jan Zam oyski.
G enerations. C entres (so P oznań with the L ubrański H um anist College, K raków , then Zam ość). A n o th er feature o f P elc’s m ethod m anifests itself here. W hat is ch aracteristic: the attem p t to build a syn thesis o f the epoch is accom panied by the a u th o r’s effort to rep ro duce the progression o f p heno m ena, their evolution, tran sfo rm ation and the rythm o f developm ent (adv ancem ent—zen ith —exhaustion). If this enriches the analysis o f the in terrelatio ns o f writers with their epoch, o f their m atu ra tio n and rootedness, the reader o f the boo k may p erh aps expect a less extensive reconstruction o f the ideas, literary froms, and the inner world o f the greatest m asterpieces o f the epoch. Pelc practises the history o f literature which is sensitive to the historical b ac kg roun d and the evolution o f literary processes, thus it is ra th e r carefully directed at the ergocentric research, although som etim es it m akes use o f im m anent analysis. It is understandable th at the im p o rtan t chapters a b o u t L atin poetry (including Janicki), ab o u t the dialoque and effigy as the specific m ethods o f presentation characteristic o f the evolution o f R e j’s writings, about the creative consciousness o f K ochanow ski, ab o u t the system atically R enaissance poetry o f Szym on Szym onowie, the a u th o r o f Sielan ki (The Idylls) are all chapters ab o u t the m etam orpho ses, changes and evolution o f writing. This m ethod co n trib u tes to u n d erstand in g o f K o ch a nowski, shows the creative principle o f R e j’s technique in his witnessing the epoch (from the tu m ult o f the R eform ation polem ics to the slowly crystallizing vision o f a pious life), and also explicates the sense o f S zym onow ic’s activities (from early L atin poetry follo wing the m annerist conventions to the late Idylls dem onstratively faithful to the aesthetics o f the R enaissance).
Eventually, the aim o f P arts II and III o f the book becomes to recognize and to reconstruct the epoch in m otion. P art III presents the specific unity o f R enaissance aesthetic consciousness. K ochan ow ski’s fam ous fo rm u latio n from his letter to Stanisław Fo- gelwerder is a m anifestation o f this unity. T he po et w rote: “Poetyka nescio quid blan du m spirans.” T h u s Pelc sees K o ch ano w sk i’s th ought a b o u t the elusive charm o f p oetry as a link o f the chain o f sim ilar thoughts in E uropean aesthetics (later on present in P ascal’s and L eibniz’s works, and before, as Tatarkiew icz, quoted by Pelc, proves.
already in the w orks o f A lberti), originating as topoi, from the rich trad itio n o f Plato, A ristotle, Saint A ugustine and even Cicero. W riting ab o u t the above p roblem Pelc presents Jerzy M a ń k o w sk i’s interesting hypothesis abo u t the im pact o f A ugustine and his visionary and m ystical concept o f topos on K ochanow ski. The ties o f K o chanow ski with R enaissance neo-Platonism are also m ade clear at this stage o f P elc’s argum ent.
The m o tif o f O rpheus, who was presented in the R enaissance as a m agician, sage and prim arily as a p o et who tam es the wildness o f nature, also confirm s the hom ogeneity o f R enaissance aesthetics. This m o tif was taken over and transform ed in the literatu re o f the Polish Renaissance, which desired, as in the w orks o f K ochanow ski, to m atch the old m aster. Pelc associates this cult o f O rpheus with the cult o f the biblical psalm ist D avid. B oth m odels o f m aster poets were equally vivid in the R enaissance.
There are m ore exam ples o f this hom ogeneity in the third p a rt o f P elc’s book. T hus there com es irony, as a figure o f th oug ht and as a trope, highly valued in the poetics and rheto ric o f R enaissance hum anists. E rasm us in The Praise o f the Folly m ade a w onderful use o f it, in P oland it was K ochanow ski who excelled a t practising it. There com es the facetious epigram . This literary from was represented in P o land by the texts o f K rzycki and by R e j’s
F raszki (Trifles), and above all by K ochan ow ski’s volum e which be
cam e the b ackgrou nd for the developm ent o f various form s in Polish lyrical poetry. P elc’s study Jan Kochanowski if tradycjach literatury
p o lskiej (Jan Kochanowski in the Traditions o f Polish Literature, 1965)
should be m antioned here. It discusses a sim ilar process, th at is, K o chanow ski’s im pact upon various form s o f literatu re in later periods (the satiric poem is the best example). T he com m ents up on the u n d erstand ing o f space and tim e in the R enaissance, placed in the end o f the volum e, reconstruct not only the basic ideas determ ining the R enaissance m odel o f the w orld, which would p ro b a b ly be the ch ief aim o f a scholar concerned a b o u t the history o f m en tality —see A ron G uriew icz’s Kategorie ku ltury średniowiecznej
(The Categories o f M edieval Culture), b u t also a b o u t the whole
variety o f changing images. In this cantext, there appears the analysis o f the m yth o f Icarus (and o f the fam ous picture by Brueghel) as a m o tif o f the ascent beyond m easure (against the
144 B o o k R e v ie w s
reason), and also as the m o tif o f different times, in w hich Icarus (and also a R enaissance artist) could fulfil his purposes.
P elc’s boo k builds up a synthesis ou t o f a great nu m ber o f m icroanalyses. This m akes his study very useful for h istorians o f literature. The read er is offered the im age o f the epoch in m otion and realized th a t the m ovem ent was a prolific dialoque o f P oland with the rest o f the West.
Sum . by A n to n i C z y z Transl. b y Z o fia L esin sk a
Swojskość i cudzoziemszczyzna w dziejach kultury polskiej (The Native and Foreign Trends in the History o f Polish Culture), ed. by Zofia
S tefanow ska, P W N , W arszaw a 1973, 411 pp.
In this review, the P olish w ords swojskość and cudzoziem szczyzna are generally tran slated as “native and foreign tren d s,” a solution which can no t render the various im plications and co n n o tatio n s o f the two concepts (in cudzoziem szczyzna the elem ents o f fashion and ap proval for any kinds o f im po rt from ab ro ad is very strong). These no tio ns are deeply ro o ted in the linguistic and cultural co n sciousness o f the Poles, which w ould be enough to give im portance to the book un d er discussion. This can be considered a synthesis o f Polish cu ltu ral history from the p o int o f view o f the attach m en t to local traditio ns and yet o f the openness to foreign or, in any case, “alien” elem ents.
Foreign and alien do n o t pose the sam e term inological problem s,
since they rend er quite well the distinction betw een obcy, cudzy on the one han d , and cudzoziem ski on the other, which is reaffirmed m ore than once in o ur book.
H istorically, th a t which is not related to a certain native or local culture is by no m eans said to be foreign because o f its nationality , bu t m erely outside or alien (in Polish, precisely obey,
cudzy), outside the b ound s o f a certain social, political, econom ic,
linguistic, ethnic or religious p red o m in atin g group. This is even m ore obvious in those p erio d s o f history in which a regular consciousness o f peo ples’ n atio n al m em bership was n o t yet shaped
