Zdzisława Kopczyńska
"Język a poezja. Studia z dziejów
świadomości językowej i literackiej
oświecenia i romantyzmu",
Zdzisława Kopczyńska, Wrocław
1976 : [recenzja]
Literary Studies in Poland 4, 144-152
146 Book Reviews
o f texts and interp retatio n s o f conclusions arising in the course of the analysis.
The boo k does not offer a com prehensive trea tm e n t o f the subject. T he au th o r confines herself to discussion o f several m otifs which, in her opinion, were b etter docum ented o r seemed especially im p o rtan t for the thinking on language an d p oetry a t the time. The first two studies o f the volum e, as dealing exclusively with the E nlightenm ent, will be discussed here in a m ore detailed way.
T he first one, entitled “Język i rang a poezji wobec głównego nu rtu językow ej i stylistycznej myśli O św iecenia” (L anguage an d the S tatus o f P oetry A gainst the M ain T rend o f the Linguistic and Stylistic T h o u g h t in the E nlightenm ent), is devoted to Polish co n ception s o f language an d style an d their influence on p oetry and its status. T he question o f the n atio n al language w as one o f the m ajor problem s o f the Polish E nlightenm ent. T he perfecting o f the Polish language and universalizing it in all kinds o f linguistic activities and in all circles o f society becam e the p rim ary m o tif o f the p rogram m e for the n atio n al ed ucation. F rom its very beginnings the Enlightenm ent struggled for a good n atio n al language an d this struggle was based on rationalistic prem ises: a good language is such a language which conform s to the laws o f logical think ing an d is an efficient tool o f com m u nicatio n. T his app ro ach , characteristic o f the E uropean th o u g h t o f the tim e (an d represented m ainly by the w orks o f Locke, Leibniz and the French gram m arians), underlies the first Polish utteran ces concerning the reform o f the usage o f language, those o f Stanisław K on arsk i, fam ous educationist an d w riter, the a u th o r o f De emendandis eloquentiae vitiis (1741) and
De arte bene eogitandi ad artem dicendi bene necessaria (1767).
O n this ap p ro ach also the gram m atical codification o f the Polish language was based, the m ajor achievem ent in this field being Grama
tyka (Gramm ar) by O nufry K opczyński. A category o f the “clarity
o f the language,” pu t forw ard by K opczyński, becom es the m ost im p o rta n t criterion o f the language perfection an d the principal p o stu late o f the E nlightenm ent as regards the language. P articu lar im p ortance was attached to the question o f the com m un ication al value o f the w ord, i.e., to its com prehensibility an d univocal c h a r acter. (This was also characteristic o f the views o f Locke and his follow ers.) T hus, all form s which used obscure, am biguous
Com ptes rendus de livres 147 o r unusual w ords an d expressions were frequently an d sharply criticized; verbosity, the so-called tropes, rhetorical figures an d all verbal o rn a m e n tatio n were reprehen ded, the m ain a ttac k being directed against the B aroque versions o f the rhetoric, still co ntin ued in the first decades o f the 18th century. C om p aratively seldom , how ever, was this censure for the d eterio ratio n o f the language addressed to p oetry; in this sphere a less valuable —according to the new postulates —way o f using the language seemed to be to ler ated . This m eant separating p o etry from o th er spheres o f linguistic activity and such a situation was clearly un favo urable for the statu s o f poetry in the co n tem p o rary consciousness. P oetry was losing its trad itio n al position as a high form , since its features o f the so-called high style were now objectionable. In all its activities concerning the language the E nlightenm ent endeav ou red to elab orate a n d popularize such form s which w ould be close to the stylistic featu res o f the so-called low style (in P olan d consequently called th e plain style), a p p ro p ria te for prose. T hu s poetry was th reatened w ith degradation and w ith falling into the b ack g ro u n d to play only a secondary role.
T o co un teract this there were attem p ts at m aking the poetic u ttera n ce conform w ith the preferred stylistic stan dard s, a t applying the principle o f the “clarity o f the lan guage” to poetry as well. P oets were w arned against verbosity and told to be econom ical in their use o f the so-called language ornam ents. G enerally, it was the function o f docere which was broug ht into prom inence.
T he postulate o f the “clarity o f the language” rem ained in force —with one relevant exception —to the end o f the Enlightenm ent. In the later p art o f the period there ap peared , how ever, various a tte m p ts a t diverging from this cano n, which was to o narrow for poetry and for the language o f literature in general. Some o f these attem p ts referred to the tra d itio n a l trea tm e n t o f the subject, justifying the right o f poetry to a distinct language, to the orn ate style. O n different grounds, the significance an d value o f figurative elem ents, know n from the rhetorical trad itio n , were reinterpreted. M etap h o r, for instance, one o f the especially con trov ersial items for the con tem poraries ceased then to be regarded as an ingenious, sophisticated o rnam ent, and cam e to be valued as a n atu ra l linguistic phenom enon , present everyw here a n d used by everyone. O ften
148
Book Reviewsexpressed was also the conviction th a t the language o f poetry and literature in general should be characterized by sim ple and easy m eans o f expression, m arked , however, by directness and sp o n taneity, i.e., not conventionalized in th eir functions, an d especially in tho se o f em otional value. Interestingly enough, statem ents co n cerning the high status o f p o etry are to be fou n d only in those cases in which the p o int o f reference is the rheto rical trad itio n , and only at these occasions is the essential difference between the language o f poetry and th a t o f non-po etry m entioned.
Irrespective o f differences, all approaches to the problem o f the poetic language had one distinct com m on d e n o m in ato r: in all o f them the regard for the audience was considered to be o f p a ra m o u n t im portance in both organizing an d functioning o f the poetic utterance. T his attitu d e, though, o f course, characteristic also o f the rhetoric trad itio n s, played an extrem ely im p o rtan t p art in the rationalistically oriented conceptions o f language, current at the time.
T he above-discussed study is supplem ented w ith an annex, en titled “ H asło ‘p o ezja’ w encyklopedii K rasickiego” (The A rticle on P oetry in K rasicki's E ncyclopaedia) and devoted to the first Polish encyclopaedic treatm en t o f the term “p o etry .” T he E ncyclopaedia, u nder the title Zbiór potrzebniejszych wiadomości ( Useful Knowledge), prep ared chiefly by Ignacy K rasicki, was published in 1781; the au th o r o f the article on poetry was Joachim C hreptow icz. a p ro m inent figure in the Polish Enlightenm ent though not a very d istin guished writer. C hreptow icz's article, conspicuous by its length, c o n tains m any various views and opinions on poetry, only loosely —if at all —connected. A pparently, the au th o r did not care a b o u t the coherence o f his article; a fte r all he declares th a t the precise defining o f w hat poetry is w ould be im possible. N eith er did he try to m ake use o f those articles on poetry which could be found in the Erench Encyclopaedia, already w ell-know n at the time. In effect, his read er was presented a picture th at in the m ain was not co n current with the Classicist theories. C hreptow icz questioned the validity and d u rab ility o f the cu rren t form ula that "p o etry is the art o f im itating n atu re in verse” , an d fo un d verse form an insufficient and irrelevant criterion o f poeticalness. He did n o t m ention the docere function an d said n othin g ab o u t the "clarity o f the language.” T he chief aim o f p oetry he saw in
Com ptes rendus de livres 149 “am using delightfully,” w hereas as its highest value he regarded its capability o f creating illusion th ro u g h pictures p ain ted w ith w ords.
“ M alow anie słow am i” (P ainting w ith W ords) is the title o f the second study o f the volum e, dealing w ith the actualities o f the E nlightenm ent. This one is devoted to the problem s o f the so-called “pain tin g p o etry .” In b oth P olish a n d o th er E u ro p ean poetics an d utterances a b o u t poetry this m o tif o f the p ictorial capabilities o f poetic w orks was very conspicuous. T he old fo rm u la ut pictora
poesis was frequently referred to an d its realization po stu lated, the
form ula itself being in co rp o rated into the whole co ntext o f views based on the m im etic theory o f poetry. “P ictures” an d “p ain tin g s” were characteristic phrases used at the tim e in co nnection w ith poetry. Highly appreciated were poetic descriptions, usually ackn ow l edged as a distinct kind which, though falling w ithin the realm o f the “painting p o etry ,” was by no m eans the only kind covered by the term . A m ong opinions on this m atter K opczyńska discusses also those o f B odm er an d B reitinger, especially representative o f this trend o f thinking a b o u t poetry. She draw s o u r a tte n tio n to the renew ed interest o f the epoch in com pariso ns o f po etry an d painting sensu stricto and in this co ntext the w orks o f D u Bos
(Reflexions critiq u e...) and Lessing (Laokoon) are m entioned.
In all con tem p o rary texts dealing w ith these problem s we find the belief th a t linguistic utterance is proficient in p ro du cing in m ind a vivid picture o f the object to which the utteran ce refers. It was m aintained th at objects can be seen in the sam e —o r nearly the sam e —way th ro u g h the m edium o f language as they are seen in the act o f im m ediate sense p erception. W ords in the linguistic utteran ce were said to be shapes, colours, light and shade o f the painting.
Thus, the fu ndam ental question posed in the study is the follow ing one: which aspects o f con tem p o rary theories o f language could be the source an d basis o f such views? T he a u th o r seeks the answ er in the prevalent conceptio n o f the linguistic sign. G enerally accepted at the tim e sign re la tio n : w ord —idea (G er. Vorstellung) — object afforded the function o f the w ord to be treated as im age- -form ative. If ideas, or m ental images, were evoked by co nrete w ords, i.e. by nam es o f objects an d o f those features which can
150 Book Reviews
be perceived by sense, they cou ld have visual ch aracter, in the general sense analogical to paintings. K opczyńska takes also into account a w ider context o f the discussed problem s. T he co nception o f the im age-form ative function o f the linguistic sign, as well as the whole co ncept o f “p ainting w ith w o rd s,” m ust have been greatly influenced by the cu rren t sensualistic views an d sensualistically oriented interest in psychology, w here sense perceptio n —an d especially visual perception —were th o u g h t to be o f p rim ary im p ortance and thus were p articularly valued an d stressed.
T he 18th century conceived o f linguistic sign as being o f co n ventional character, and the above-presented views on the functioning o f the sign were in line with this general tre n d ; those concerned w ith the “ p ain tin g ” were explicit a b o u t the arb itra ry n a tu re o f linguistic signs. Physical quality o f the w ord was irrelevant for its perfom ing the pain tin g functions. T o accom plish this task in the best possible m an n er the w ord should evoke the im age o f the thing quickly an d in an u n m istakable w ay; in o th er w ords, a w ell-painting w ord is a w ord w hose m eaning is definite and which does n o t abso rb atten tio n in itself. T hus, in accordance with the prevalent linguistic th eory, also in the sphere o f the “ painting p o etry ” the principle o f “unequivocal w o rd s” was fully respected, the denoting aspect an d the referential function o f the sign being considered as essential.
P oetry a t the tim e was deem ed to be particu larly a p t to m ake use o f the pictorial potential o f the language. C onsequently, the m ost im p o rtan t problem in organizing a poetic u tteran ce w as the choice o f a p p ro p ria te w ords, w ith preference for concrete vocabulary. R arely w as the question o f the pictorial function o f m e tap h o r m entioned in this context.
K in d red to the concept o f the “p ainting p o etry ” were, in K op- czyfiska’s opinion, the views o f A lexander B aum garten, which can be epitom ized in the definition o f p oetry as oratio sensitiva perfecta. T his fo rm u la echoed in poetics o f the late E nlightenm ent, a n d at the beginning o f the 19th century it becam e the m ain elem ent o f the theory o f poetry presented by Euzebiusz Słow acki, the a u th o r o f the first Polish com prehensive h an d b o o k on poetics.
O th er studies con tain ed in the volum e, in b oth the m aterial they analyze and problem s they discuss, p ertain to p re-R om anticism
Com ptes rendus de livres 151 an d R om anticism , and only sho rt inform atio n on them is possible here. G enerally, the a u th o r deals in those essays w ith th e fu n d a m ental reorien tatio n in think ing on language, as com p ared with the linguistic consciousness o f the E nlightenm ent. T he instru m en tal ap p ro ach to language w as a b a n d o n ed fo r the organic conceptions and belief in the creative character o f language. C onnected with this o rien tatio n w as the great interest in the characteristic features an d peculiarities o f n atio nal languages. H ence, in the 19th century there developed in P oland special interest in the characteristics o f the Polish language, its role an d significance in the life and literatu re o f the country.
In the essay “Poezja i język w wypow iedziach K azim ierza B ro dzińskiego i Leona B orow skiego” 1 (P oetry and L anguage in the U tterances o f K azim ierz B rodziński an d Leon B ofow ski) the au th o r studies the problem s o f poetic origin o f language in general an d poetic language in particular, o f its spo ntaneity and individualization, as well as the questions connected w ith the concept o f stages in the developm ent o f the language. T he read er will also find in this study a discussion o f w hat w as conceived as the ch aracter o f the Polish language an d o f how this affected po stulates co n cerning the line o f the developm ent o f Polish poetry.
D ifferent m eanings o f such co n tem p o rary phrases as “philoso phical language” and “the philosophical quality o f the language,” the related problem s o f the naturaln ess o f linguistic sign, and the question o f the im portance o f the “philosophical language” fo r the theories o f the rom antic poetry are the subject o f the study entitled “Z a co M ochnacki chw alił Jan a N epo m u cena K a- m ińskiego” 2 (W hat M ochnacki P raised in Jan N epom ucen K a miński).
In the next essay —“ K oncepcja język a w paryskich prelekcjach M ickiew icza” (C onception o f Language in M ickiew icz’s French
1 Brodziński was a well-known poet and translator o f poetry in the 1820's and 1830’s; at the same time both he and Borowski taught literature.
2 Maurycy M ochnacki, a man o f letters, published in 1830 his O literaturze
p olskiej w wieku dziew iętnastym (On Polish Literature in the Nineteenth Century),
the first com prehensive m anifestation o f the rom antic beliefs. In the same year, before M ochnacki’s work, there appeared two articles by Kam iński, a writer, devoted to the question o f the philosophical quality o f language.
152 Book Reviews
Lectures) K opczyńska studies one o f the leading m otifs o f Mic- kiewicz’s lectures in the French Sorbonne, viz. the qu estion o f the character and significance o f the Slavonic languages. Special atten tio n is paid to M ickiew icz’s conception o f the W ord (verbum, French parole), which form ed the m ain elem ent o f his belief in the organic an d creative ch aracter o f language. T he a u th o r stresses also the special place which the Polish language occupied in M ickiew icz's conceptions.
The last study o f the volum e —“Poezja jest sztuką przez języ k ” (Poetry Is A rt T h ro u g h W ords) —does not deal w ith Polish m aterial. The subject o f analysis here is H u m b o ld t’s definition o f poetry, contain ed in his treatise Ueber Goethes "''Hermann und D orothea,” 1798, and the conception o f two m ain varieties o f poetry, connected with different ways o f conceiving and treatin g the language by poets.
Sum. by the author Transl. by M aria-Bożenna Fedewicz
Z o f i a S in k o , Oświeceni wśród Pól Elizejskich. Rozmowy zmarłych:
recepcja — twórczość oryginalna (Dialogues of the Dead in the Polish Age of Enlightenment), O ssolineum , W roclaw 1976.
The study deals w ith the Polish reception o f the W est-E uropean dialogues o f the d ea d and w ith w orks belonging to this genre w ritten in P oland in the second h a lf o f the 18th century. The opening ch ap ter gives an outline o f the history o f the genre in E urope at the end o f the 17th an d in the 18th ce n tu ry ; it also discusses the basic features and form ulates the poetics o f the dialogue o f the dead. F u rth er chapters (II to V) con tain a detailed discussion o f the Polish tran slatio n s o f the dialogues by B. Fontenelle,
F. Fenelon, V oltaire, E. V attel, G . L y ttelton an d a few other unidentified foreign au th o rs. The tran slatio n s ap peared chiefly in the literary and m oral periodicals: “Z b ió r R óżnego R o dzaju W iadom ości z N au k W yzw olonych” (1770), “Z abaw y Przyjem ne i P ożyteczne” (1770—1777), “ M o n ito r” (1765 — 1785). T here were also separate editions in pam phlet form , an d an edition o f F enelo n's dialogues
