Seria "Polemika Krytycznoliteracka w Polsce"
Permanent URI for this collection
Browse
Recent Submissions
Item Wacław Borowy versus Adam Grzymała-Siedlecki. Spór o racje literatury polskiej(Wydawnictwo Poznańskiego Towarzystwa Przyjaciół Nauk, 2023) Gorczyński, Maciej; Panek, SylwiaThis book covers the polemic between Adam Grzymała-Siedlecki (1876–1967), historian and literary critic, and Wacław Borowy (1890–1950), literary scholar and historian. The publication unveils six texts from the period 1911–1957, where the polemic takes place over research methods in literature; the question being whether a scholar should accept the historical provenance and context of a work, or indeed also aim to explore a work independent of the external context of its essence. From the comments of the above-mentioned scholars it can be seen that what appears as a disagreement over a technical detail is treated as a fundamental matter on the issue of the very nature of Polish Literature. The introduction to the anthology places this polemic in a historical and political context in the first decade of Modernism and discusses both authors in relation to their biography, research in literature and literary criticism.Item Między idealizmem i naturalizmem. Jana Gnatowskiego i Józefa Kotarbińskiego dyskusja o modelu literatury i krytyki nowoczesnej(Wydawnictwo Poznańskiego Towarzystwa Przyjaciół Nauk, 2023) Jauksz, Marcin; Panek, SylwiaThe book presents the debate on the meaning of realism and naturalism for European and Polish literature. Jan Gnatowski’s 1878 study O realizmie w literaturze nowoczesnej (On Realism in Modern Literature) is a fundamental, though marked worldview, analysis of French 19th c. novels – from Musset, through Balzac and Flaubert, up to Daudet and Zola. This conservative attempt at analysis met with strong opposition from the positivist camp – its chief proponent being Józef Kotarbiński, who in 1879 published the article Wstecznictwo w krytyce literackiej (Backwardness in Literary Criticism). This edition contains the complete reprint of these two texts together with a commentary that shows Gnatowski, although strong in his judgments, reads texts ideologically foreign to him carefully – even with a certain fascination. Kortabiński when defending realism’s right to exist, however, approaches these uncompromising stories with a marked distance.Item Spór o Polską Akademię Literatury(Wydawnictwo Poznańskiego Towarzystwa Przyjaciół Nauk, 2022) Zawiszewska, Agata; Panek, SylwiaThe Polish Academy of Literature functioned in the period 1933–1939 and was established by the government in order to realise the programme of ‘nationalisation’ of literature. It should be noted though, its formation resulted first and foremost from demands put forward by writers since the beginning of the 20th century, who had been demanding the establishment of the Academy from the moment Poland regained its independence in 1918. The most coherent project of the Academy was presented in 1918 by Stefan Żeromski, which proved to be a constant point of reference for others involved in the polemic. Most called for the Academy to be a non-governmental institution, but one funded by the government as a means of preserving the high prestige of literature and the symbolic capital of the profession – as well as improving and stabilising the material situation of writers after the Great War.Item Spory o powieść w dyskusjach krytycznoliterackich drugiej emigracji niepodległościowej(Wydawnictwo Poznańskiego Towarzystwa Przyjaciół Nauk, 2021) Pasterska, Jolanta; Panek, SylwiaThe polemic presented in the work concerns the clash of swords over the concept of the novel led by Second Migration Over Independence circles and had two main aspects. First, in the context of so-called literary engagement and resulted directly from the goals of Polish Migration and the associated conceptual and moral aspects. The other aspect of the conflict was more universal in nature and was tied to discussion of the novel per se – its greatest possible ‘largeness’ for it to answer the challenges set by a postwar world amidst ruin. In the context of this worldview there occurs both a longing for the Polish migration ‘masterpiece’ (Epopee in Exile) and the polemic around the form of the novel. The discussion of standpoints is set against a historical-literary outline examined from three main perspectives: generational, aesthetic and that of worldview.Item Młodopolski spór o Sienkiewicza. Kampania oskarżycielska „Głosu” i reakcje obrońców Litwosa(Wydawnictwo Poznańskiego Towarzystwa Przyjaciół Nauk, 2020) Fiołek, Krzysztof; Panek, SylwiaThe work presents the polemical campaign of progressive Warsaw journalists against Sienkiewicz, one that played out in 1903 on the columns of the weekly Głos. The polemic presented their functions not only in respect to Literary Studies. It was also an integral part of the polemic over the assessment of the nobility’s heritage as well as a source of questions on a new formula of Polish identity – one viewed in terms of psychology, esthetics, life style and social organisation. The anthology contains both the texts of those attacking and defending Sienkiewicz, calls to uphold fundamental principles and to honour God and country, as well as that of pamphlets and libelous pasquinades.Item Estetyka „zdrowego rozsądku”?(Wydawnictwo Poznańskiego Towarzystwa Przyjaciół Nauk, 2020) Budrewicz, Tadeusz; Okulicz-Kozaryn, Radosław; Panek, SylwiaThe study discusses the polemic over the criteria and nature of realism in art. In 1885 Bolesław Prus criticized the means of determining values in art based on the categories of ideas because it defies common sense. Wiktor Gomulicki in turn, refuted the cognitive bases of realism. In this context, both sides advanced arguments for and against the concept of the ideal in art – taking as their palette of theories that of the aesthetic according to Hippolyte Taine and Eugène Véron. The brouhaha of 1885 saw a climax of polemics and the cut and thrust of opinions that concerned naturalism in literature, the historic in painting, painterly impressionism as well as that of monumental and allegoric art. The canvas upon which the war of words was waged concerned writers and painters grouped around the weekly Wędrowiec who campaigned for their manifesto, the polemic between Stanisław Witkiewicz and Henryk Struve on the meaning of colour and light in painting and the nation-wide discussion that ensued from the competition for a monument to the Polish bard Adam Mickiewicz. The most significant voices of polemic were published in the Warsaw press of the time and moreover, the echo of positions taken resounded throughout the breadth and width of Poland. Casting a glance as it were back to the polemic of 1885 affords one the opportunity to deepen and broaden discussion of what may be said to be a milestone in anti-positivist movements in the related arts of that period.Item Spór o realizm 1945–1948(Wydawnictwo Poznańskiego Towarzystwa Przyjaciół Nauk, 2020) Mackiewicz, Paweł; Panek, SylwiaThe polemic over understanding realism and its usefulness in literature was given birth in the early post-war years out of the need to refer to the rich tradition of Great Realism. This was to be a remedy to the problems with the literary presentation of current events and recent history, especially the war years and occupation as well as helping in ‘balancing the ledger’ in the Polish interbellum. The interest in realism swiftly reached beyond literature itself, while the polemic also moved onto the canvas of paining and the plastic arts. In the context of the polemic over realism there evolved also other disputes in the period 1945–1948 such as the discussion on the work Lalka. The subject of polemic under discussion in the present study ebbed and flowed over the columns above all the publications Kuźnica and Odrodzenie, but also Twórczość and Tygodnik Powszechny. Taking part in this exchange of viewpoints was a broad community of literary critics representing a greatly varied kaleidoscope of esthetics and beliefs. Among those clinking swords were Jan Kott, Kazimierz Wyka, Adam Ważyk, Stefan Żółkiewski, Artur Sandauer, Stefan Kisielewski and Melania Kierczyńska.Item Uchwały Związku Pisarzy Polskich na Obczyźnie – stosunek emigracji do kraju(Wydawnictwo Poznańskiego Towarzystwa Przyjaciół Nauk, 2020) Moczkodan, Rafał; Panek, SylwiaThe study is devoted to discussions taking place around the three resolutions of the Polish Writers Association in Exile, serving émigré writers as a community. These, passed the first resolution in 1947, calling for a refusal to work with Polish publishing houses and literary periodicals. This evoked a lively discussion, which took on another life in 1956 when the Association, distancing itself from the changes taking place in October 1956 in Poland, renewed its resolution, taking an uncompromising stand against the communist authorities in Poland. The second round as it were of the polemic revealed that the majority of writers in exile were in favour of making use of the possibility to publish their work in Poland. In the end, the Polish Writers Association in Exile tempered its stand on this matter and in the third resolution left such decisions up to individual writers to decide.Item „Powinna być nieufnością”. Nowofalowy spór o poezję(Wydawnictwo Poznańskiego Towarzystwa Przyjaciół Nauk, 2020) Pawelec, Dariusz; Panek, Sylwia‘Distrust Should Be Its Mission’. The New Wave Polemic Over Poetry The study undertakes the most important programme presentations from the period of the so-called ferment and tension (1967–1976) of pokolenie 68 (Nowa Fala) [Generation 68 (New Wave)] in Polish Poetry with poets such as Stanisław Barańczak, Adam Zagajewski, Julian Kornhauser and Krzysztof Karasek. The introduction outlines the circumstances tied to the beginnings of this generation’s awareness and subsequent crystallisation as well as the programme theses and polemics within Generation, as well as polemics with literary predecessors (Orientacja Hybrydy, pokolenia 56) [The Hybrid, Generation 56]. Source texts were chosen by dividing into 5 groups the collection of early manifestoes, important drafts of programmes and polemics, proven diagnoses concerning the Generation’s situation and discussion on the so-called thesis on the world not represented – including the intra-Generational polemic over the value of Zbigniew Herbert’s poetry. Finally, completing the study, a discussion on the period of Generation 68’s development of polemic over the actualization of Tomas Mann’s Magic Mountain and it’s reception.Item Polemika wokół „Pułtawy” i „Jagiellonidy”, czyli oświeceniowy spór o kształt eposu(Wydawnictwo Poznańskiego Towarzystwa Przyjaciół Nauk, 2019) Kwiatkowska, Agnieszka; Panek, SylwiaThe Polemic around Jagiellonida and Pułtawa: Enlightenment Controversy on The Nature of The Epic Genre In the 18th century the convention of the literary epic underwent radical changes. These were responsible for numerous episodes of discussion in regard to among others, the chronological distance of events described and the nature of the function of fantasy. The most renowned literary critics entered the fray (in Poland among others, Filip Neriusz Golański, Franciszek Ksawery Dmochowski and Ignacy Krasicki). Leading Polish writers in turn, created new epics, fusing traditions of the Antique World with that of innovative literary devices. Critical-literary opinions in regard to particular works can be seen to be part of the broad polemic in respect to this genre convention. Literary reception at the time to these particular works (Pułtawa by Nikodem Muśnicki and Jagiellonida by Dyzma Bończa Tomaszewski) provides a critical portrayal and undertakes the most vital issues concerning the genre per se.Item Spór o przyszłość literatury polskiej, czyli polemiki ze Stefanem Żeromskim po jego odczycie Literatura a życie polskie(Wydawnictwo Poznańskiego Towarzystwa Przyjaciół Nauk, 2019) Olszewska, Maria Jolanta; Panek, SylwiaThe discussion concerns the article Literatura a życie polskie [Literature and Polish Life] of Stefan Żeromski delivered on 28 of August 1915 in Zakopane. Under the influence of World War I events his views changed. Żeromski, the writer recognized as the conscience of the nation, in his lecture put a question regarding the contribution of literature to Polish independence. In his opinion the autonomy of literature depends on the conditions in which it arises and is perceived. Thus the freedom of art is a prerequisite for the liberation of the nation. This is very important from the perspective of community life. This lecture caused a heated discussion with the participation of polish eminent representatives of intellectual life. This dispute turned out to be one of the most important discussions in this time in the perspective of resurrecting of Polish statehood.Item Spór o Granicę Zofii Nałkowskiej(Wydawnictwo Poznańskiego Towarzystwa Przyjaciół Nauk, 2019) Marzec, Lucyna; Panek, SylwiaThe study discusses the critical literary discourse that began to unfold, after the premiere of Zofia Nałkowska’s Granica [Boundary] (1935), among the most important literary journals and critics as well writers of interbellum Poland. The monograph begins with a broad-ranging commentary on the above and its debates through the kaleidoscope of literary life and its workings in that period, bringing to the fore ensuing interpretative questions facing its initial readers. The main theme of discussion at the time was the question of ethics, with the voices of criticism and those of polemics unveiling the galaxy of worldview tensions in the first half of the 20th century. The second part of the study constitutes a selection of the thirteen most important commentaries on Granica and a critical reflection on the part of Zofia Nałkowska together with a critical commentary.Item Spory o Kamienie na szaniec Aleksandra Kamińskiego(2019) Karolak, Sylwia; Panek, SylwiaAleksander Kamiński’s work Kamienie na szaniec [Stones on the Barricade], first published in 1943, has precipitated several important polemics throughout recent Polish literary history. The first, had already taken place during WWII in 1943–1944. The next polemic witnessed the dawn of postwar literature in 1946–1947, while the third was played out during the so-called thaw, in 1956–1957. The last and fourth polemic taking place in 2013, is living proof as it were that Kamienie na szaniec remains a work of considerable influence, which despite the passing of the years continues to be the subject of critical analysis and discussion. Reprinted in the present volume, the most important polemics (voices concerning Kamienie na szaniec) were raised by among others, Karol Lipiński, Juliusz Garztecki, Jan Kott, Maria Straszewska, Krzysztof Teodor Toeplitz, Janusz Zabłocki, Elżbieta Janicka, Wojciech Feleszko and Przemysław Czapliński. These invaluable commentaries come to form not only an invaluable narrative on Kaminski’s book itself, but at the same time constitute a looking glass onto Poland’s recent history and its literary milieu in the respective periods of the above polemics.Item Artysta, sztuka i społeczeństwo. Spory i polemiki wokół Confiteor Stanisława Przybyszewskiego(2019) Sobieraj, Tomasz; Panek, SylwiaArtist, Art and Society: The Brouhaha around Przybyszewski’s Confiteor Stanisław Przybyszewski’s famous manifesto Confiteor, published in 1899 in the Kraków literary periodical ‘Życie’, evoked the most incandescent exchanges of views in the annals of Polish literary criticism. Its author, aspiring to the heights of a latter day coryphaeus among Polish modernists, formulated a programme aimed polemically at the prevailing concept of native literature – one freeing the artist from the constraints of all obligations without, placing art at the giddy level of the metaphysical absolute. Opponents of Przybyszewski were outraged in particular by the Confiteor thesis of the amoral and irrational nature of creativity, whose animus was to become the famous ‘naked soul’, considered to be the essence of being. Przybyszewski’s manifesto was supported by some modernist critics, foremost Jerzy Żuławski and to a lesser degree, Ignacy Matuszewski. On the other hand, Confiteor was vociferously opposed by positivists such as Piotr Chmielowski and conservatists of the ilk of Jan Pawelski and Teodor Jeske-Choiński. Many no doubt that Przybyszewski’s cassus belli fulfilled the role of his generation’s most singular supplication.Item Spory o sonet we wczesnoromantycznej krytyce literackiej(2019) Stanisz, Marek; Panek, SylwiaThe Polemic Over the Sonnet in Polish Early Romantic Literary Criticism Adam Mickiewicz’s Sonnets, published in 1826, initiated the vogue for this poetic genre in Poland and shortly after a passionate discussion broke out among literary critics on the place and significance of the sonnet in Polish poetry. In the space of barely several years from the publication of this collection there appeared a plethora of articles, reviews, polemics and satirical verse on this matter. Those who put pen to paper were among the most renowned literary lions of this period as well as those a good deal lesser known, often anonymous, standard bearers of traditional, renaissance views on literature as well as advocates of new, romantic tendencies. It is thus that literary exchanges on the sonnet became an important milestone at the Romantic turn, pursued in the 1820s in Poland. This anthology is pleased to unfold before the reader some twenty five expressions of literary criticism on the sonnet. These have been placed in chronological order and given detailed editorial commentary.Item Barbarzyńcy, klasycyści i inni. Spory o młodą poezję w latach 90(Wydawnictwo Poznańskiego Towarzystwa Przyjaciół Nauk, 2018) Jaworski, Marcin; Panek, SylwiaThe publication presents the most important fragments of literary discourse devoted to the NGP (New Generation Poets) in the period from the decline of Communist Poland to the end of the 20th century. Polemics in respect to poetry were one of the most vital phenomena of literary creation and associated cultural fabric of the 1990’s. The introduction outlines the emerging presence and establishment of poetry after 1989 in Polish and Western literature in the 20th century. It also offers a commentary on the crossing of swords among and between poets and literary critics, among others on aesthetics, and the conscious building by the NGP of their own, other tradition, for this poetry. Further, there is a discussion on the provenance and dichotomy (in literary criticism) of rhetoric pertaining to barbarians-classicists, which became a popular matrix for characterising the latest poetry. The polemics thus presented on poetry after 1989 came to be written into the history of Polish modern literature as both a vivid and vital part of its final chapter.Item Spór o Borowskiego(Wydawnictwo Poznańskiego Towarzystwa Przyjaciół Nauk, 2018) Krupa, Bartłomiej; Panek, SylwiaThe polemic at the turn of 1947 caused by Tadeusz Borowski’s pamphlet Alicja w krainie czarów [Alice in Wonderland] (Pokolenie 1947, nr 1) raised the portcullis to the annals of Polish post-war prose. To the defence of Zofia Kossak-Szczucka, author of Z otchłani [Out of the Abyss], took arms several literary critics of Catholic provenance while in turn their shields did raise for the neophyte writer, well known pens from literary periodicals such as Kuźnica or Odrodzenie. Soon however, the exchange of blows reached beyond the very issue of diction in writing on concentration camps or indeed, Marxist-Catholic wars waged across ideology. The cause itself raised questions on the very nature of prose. More so, lines were drawn across its literary essence (obligation and tasks of literature), theoretical nature (status of the narrator and their obligations towards the author), historical role (social attitudes during World War II and the period of Stalinism) and finally, the moral question (nihilism and the ethical responsibility of the creative artist). This author therefore discusses respectively three stages of The Polemic Over Borowski; the 1940s, the 1970s and discussion that has arisen since the 1980s. This literary chronology testifies to the “long extent” of the debate and its continued relevance, proof of the everlasting endurance of national myths, which the neophyte writer was to question in the yester beginnings of modern Polish prose.Item Spór o Conrada 1945–1948(Wydawnictwo Poznańskiego Towarzystwa Przyjaciół Nauk, 2018) Ratajczak, Wiesław; Panek, SylwiaThe publication of Jan Kott’s article O laickim tragizmie [On the Secular Tragic] saw the birth in 1945 of the most vital literary polemics in the immediate post-war years. The creative work of Joseph Conrad became an ammunition round for a series of commentaries on the ethos of the Home Army as well as the heritage of Polish culture in the context of the reverberations of World War II and the imposition of communism at the time. Kott, engaged in the revolutionary transformation of society and its body politic, disavowed the intellectual unknown and considered history as the measure of human deeds. Conrad, expressing in his work the conviction of humankind’s unchanging nature, was for the former a writer at the behest of the ideals of heroism and faith, serving no purpose to society. In the name of traditional humanism a polemic with Kott was undertaken by renowned writers and journalists, among others Antoni Gołubiew, Jan Dobraczyński, Maria Dąbrowska, Hanna Malewska, Stefan Kisielewski, Józef Chałasiński and Gustaw Herling-Grudziński.Item Spór o „niezrozumialstwo” w dwudziestoleciu międzywojennym(Wydawnictwo Poznańskiego Towarzystwa Przyjaciół Nauk, 2018) Panek, Sylwia; Panek, Sylwia; Stankowska, AgataThis polemic was the product of Karol Irzykowski’s article Niezrozumialstwo [Dysunderstandableness] published in 1924. The curtain of literary discourse was first raised on the pages of the Warsaw weekly Wiadomości Literackie and later, to the end of the interbellum in various newspapers such as Przegląd Wieczorny, Zwrotnica, Goniec Krakowski, Gazeta Artystów, Przegląd Warszawski, Kurier Wileński and Pion. The polemic, over the rationale and function of dysunderstandable literature, engaged renowned writers and literary critics such as Jerzy Hulewicz, Jan Nepomucen Miller, Stanisław Ignacy Witkiewicz, Tadeusz Peiper, Julian Przyboś and Jan Brzękowski.Item „Pan Tadeusz” po angielsku. Spory wokół wydania i przekładu(Wydawnictwo Poznańskiego Towarzystwa Przyjaciół Nauk, 2018) Budrewicz, Aleksandra; Panek, SylwiaThis publication is devoted to numerous polemics and discussion that accompanied the English translation of Pan Tadeusz by Adam Mickiewicz (1885). The translator was Maude Ashurst Biggs (1857–1933), an English woman, fascinated in the literature and culture of Poland. The introduction discusses the life of Biggs, the role of Edmund S. Naganowski in the completion of the translation, attempts at the time by Michał Dziewicki to translate this work by Mickiewicz and the role of William Richard Morfill. The principal part of the study is an anthology of articles that arose on the occasion of the above-mentioned polemics. Reviews of the translation from the Polish press and that from abroad were also included. The texts from the press that were reprinted in this publication concern foremost all of the polemics around the publication of the discussion. Other texts discuss the controversy around the translation. Several fragments of the correspondence of M. Biggs that appeared in Kronika Rodzinna were included as well.