Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-cfpbc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T21:50:34.164Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The reception of Solomos: national poetry and the question of lyricism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 January 2016

Dimitris Tziovas
Dimitris Tziovas*
Affiliation:
Centre for Byzantine, Ottoman and Modern Greek Studies, University of Birmingham
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Through the reception of Solomos, this paper explores the tension between the lyric and the narrative, and the extent to which the roles of national and lyric poet are compatible. The critical reception of Solomos demonstrates that his recognition as a lyric poet was not on an equal footing with his presentation as a national one. It shows that his joint treatment as the national poet of Greece and its greatest lyric poet is problematic and not convincingly argued. It also argues that Solomos’s reception can be summarized as the conflict between the historical and the aesthetic approaches.

Type
Articles
Information
Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies , Volume 23 , 1999 , pp. 164 - 194
Copyright
Copyright © The Centre for Byzantine, Ottoman and Modern Greek Studies, University of Birmingham 1999

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. The reference to national history, either in terms of historical continuity or of national pride and valour, were essential prerequisites for the attribution of the label of ‘national poet’ (e.g. Valaoritis) or of ‘national historian’ (e.g. Paparrigopoulos) during the nineteenth entury in Greece.

2. See Dobson, Michael, The Making of the National Poet: Shakespeare, Adaptation and Authorship, 1660-1769 (Oxford 1992)Google Scholar. Today, however, Shakespeare can be seen as a transnational poet in Anglophone countries while the idea of the ‘Western canon’ seems to render the idea of ‘national poet’ obsolete at least in the English-speaking world.

3. Mackridge, Peter, ‘Dionisio Salamon/ Διονῦσιος Σολωμός: Poetry as a Dialogue between Languages’, Dialogos 1 (1994) 59–76 Google Scholar.

4. For the rehabilitation of Solomos’s poetry by the demoticists see Tziovas, D., The Nationism of the Demoticists and its impact on their literary theory (1888-1930) (Amsterdam 1986) 254–276 Google Scholar.

5. For a review of the evelopment of the concept of the national poet in Greek literature see Maronitis, D.N., ‘Ο τύπος тоῦ έθνικοῦ ποιητῆ: ό ὰντίκτνπος τοῦ άλβανικοῦ ἒπους στήν ποίησή μας’ in ‘Οροι τοῦ Λυρισμοῦ στόν Όδυσσέα Έλύτη (Athens 1980) 55–80 Google Scholar.

6. Palamas, Kostis, Διονύσιοζ Σολωμόζ, ed. Hatziyiakoumis, M. (Athens 1970) 96–97 Google Scholar.

7. See Mackridge, Peter, ‘Time out of Mind: The Relationship Between Story and Narrative in Solomos’ “The Cretan”’, BMGS 9 (1984/85) 187–208 Google Scholar. Politis, Linos, “Η δομή του ‘Κρητικοῦ” in Γύρω στόν Σολωμό: Μελέτεζ καί ἂρθρα (1938-1982) (Athens 1985) 402–413 Google Scholar; Maronitis, D.N., Οί ἑποχές τοῦ ‘Κρητικοῦ’, Athens 1975 Google Scholar (reprinted in Πίσω Мπрόζ (Athens 1986) 13-35). Maronitis defines the poem as narrative and Mackridge argues that ‘there is a kind of realism at work’ in it. Politis, on the other hand, does not fully justify his often repeated view that Solomos was a clearly lyrical poet and that ‘The Cretan’ is the ‘first proper modern Greek lyric poem’ (op. cit. 371).

8. See Beaton, Roderick, ‘Ο Σολωμόζ Ρομανηκόζ: Οι διακειμενικέζ σχέσειζ του ‘Κρητικοὐ’ και του ‘Πόρϕυρα’, Ελληνικἁ 40 (1989) 140 Google Scholar and Kriaras, E., Διονύσιοζ Σολωμόζ - ο βἱοζ - то έργο (Athens [1970]) 82 Google Scholar.

9. The two visions and the figurative language of the poem, particularly the similes, contribute to the non-temporal character of the poem. See P. Mackridge, op. cit., 200-203.

10. Lukács, Georg, The Theory of the Novel (London 1971) 63 Google Scholar.

11. Paul de Man challenges the customary view that the lyric is the antithesis of modernity in his ‘Lyric and Modernity’, Blindness and Insight: Essays in the Rhetoric of Contemporary Criticism (London 1983) 166-186.

12. Beaton, Roderick, ‘Dionysios Solomos: The Tree of Poetry’, BMGS 2 (1976) 162 Google Scholar.

13. Solomou, Dionysiou, Ποιἠματα καί Πεζά, ed. Alexiou, Stylianos (Athens 1994) 288 Google Scholar.

14. Solomos’s note in Italian concerning ‘The Free Besieged’ is the following: ‘Pensa fortemente che ciò accada romanticamente o classicamente, se è possibile, o in modo misto genuino. Omero è massimo esempio del secondo, Shakespeare] del primo, e del terzo non conosco’ ( Αὑτόγραϕα “Εργα, ed. Politis, Linos, 2 (Thessaloniki 1964) 425A 25–30 Google Scholar). Consider also his other Italian note: ‘Bada se torna il tripartire tutto il Poema in L. [Lyric] D. [Dramatic] ed Ep. [Epic]. Bada di esser assai parco nel corso del P. dei segni esterni del loro consumarsi (o forse astenersene) e solo manifestarli nell’ Epopea’ (AE, 2, 477).

15. See Savidis, G.P., ‘Δὐο αϕανἠ προβλἠματα δομἠζ του ‘Κρητικοὐ’, О Ερανιστής 11 (1974) 452 Google Scholar and Angelatos, Dimitris, Η ‘ϕωνή’ τηζ μνήμηζ· Δοκίμιο για тα λογοτεχνικά είδη (Athens 1997) 227–233 Google Scholar.

16. Iakovos Polylas, ‘Προλενόμενα’ in Solomou, Dionysiou, “Απαντα, Тὀμоζ πρῶτοζ, Ποιήματα, ed. Politis, Linos (Athens 1971) 20 Google Scholar.

17. Ibid., 42.

18. Ibid., 16, 20.

19. Ibid., 21.

20. Iakovos Polylas, ‘Προλεγὀμενα’ in Dionysiou Solomou, “Απαντα, Тὀμоζ πρῶτοζ, Ποιήματα, op. cit., 33.

21. Dionysiou Solomou, ‘Διάλογοζ’ in Ποιήματα καί Πεζά, ed. Stylianos Alexiou, op. cit., 543.

22. On the language of poetry and the individuality of the artist during the nineteenth century in Greece see D. Tziovas, The Nationism of the Demoticists and its impact on their literary theory (1888-1930) 130-139.

23. Σολωμός: προλεγόμενα κριτικ Στάη -Πολυγᾶ -Ζαμπελίου, ed. Kitsos-Mylonas, A. Th. (Athens 1980) 105 Google Scholar.

24. Ibid., 153, 157.

25. Ibid., 172.

26. Ibid., 175.

27. Σολωμόζ προλεγόμενα κριτικά Στάη -Πολυγᾶ -Ζαμπελίον, op. cit., 203, 206.

28. See Apostolakis, Y.M., Ή Ποίηση στή Ζωή μαζ (Athens 1923)Google Scholar. On Apostolakis’s relationship with Solomos and Carlyle see my article ‘Ο ποιητήζ ωζ ήρωαζ και η σὐγκρουση των παραδόσεων: Σολωμόζ, Αποστολάκηζ και Carlyle’, Πρακτικά Δἐκατου Συμποσίον Ποίησηζ -Διονύσιοζ Σολωμόζ, ed. Skartsis, S.L. (Patra 1992) 270–293 Google Scholar.

29. Varnalis, Kostas, ‘Ο Σολωμόζ χωρίζ μεταϕνσική (Athens 1925) 48, 126 Google Scholar.

30. Ibid., 154.

31. Ibid., 192.

32. Seferis, Yorgos, “Ερωτόκριτοζ’, Δοκιμέζ 1 (Athens 1974), 301 Google Scholar.

33. Linos Politis, “Ο Σολωμόζ ποιητἠζ έθνικόζ καί εύρωπαῖοζ’, Γὐρω στόν Σολωμό: Μελέτεζ καί ἂρθρα (1938-1982), 351-382.

34. Ibid., 372.

35. Ibid., 367.

36. Ibid., 363.

37. Yorgos Veloudis, ‘Ο Σολωμόζ των Ελλήνων,’ To Βήμα, 11 January 1998, 43.

38. Alexiou, Stylianos, Σολωμιστέζ καί Σολωμόζ (Athens 1997) 19–22 Google Scholar.

39. Dionysiou Solomou, Ποιήματα καί Πεζά, ed. Stylianos Alexiou, op. cit., 211, 285.

40. Ibid., 211.

41. Ibid., 214.

42. Ibid., 254.

43. Ibid., 294.

44. Linos Politis, Έκατόν πενήντα χρόνια άπό τή γέννησἠ τυ’, Γὐρω στόν Σολωμό: Μελἐτεζ καί ἂρθρα (1938-1982), 170. See Stylianos Alexiou, Σολωμιστέζ καί Σολωμόζ, 16-17.

45. Linos Politis, ‘Τά χειρόγραϕα тоῦ Σολωμοῦ’, Γύρω στόν Σολωμό: Μελέτεζ καί ἂρθρα (1938-1982), 254-255.

46. Often various adjectives were used to describe Solomos’s lyricism such as ‘pure’ (L. Politis), ‘extreme’ (άκροζ) and ‘extremely bold’ (τολμηρότατοζ) by Polylas without any further explanation or justification. This suggests that Solomos’s lyricism was stated rather than explained or analysed.

47. Kostis Palamas, Διονύσιοζ Σολωμόζ, 89, 98.

48. Ibid., 50, 98.

49. Ibid., 119.

50. Ibid., 99, 158.

51. Ibid., 59.

52. Ibid., 20, 30.

53. See Veloudis, Yorgos, Διονὐιοζ Σολωμόζ: Ρομαντική Ποίηση και Ποιητική - Οι γερμανικέζ πηγέζ (Athens 1989)Google Scholar.

54. Ibid., 395.

55. Lorentzatos, Zisimos, ‘Απόσωμα’, (1972), Μελέτεζ, vol. 1, 193 Google Scholar, 195.

56. Ibid., 94-5.

57. Ibid., 102.

58. Lorentzatos, Zisimos, ‘Άπόσωμα’, (1972), Μελέτεζ, vol. 1, 193, 195Google Scholar.

59. Rozanis, Stephanos, Σπουδἐζ στον Διονὐσιο Σολωμό (Athens 1982) 125 Google Scholar. See also his Διονύσιοζ Σολωμόζ: Ιστορική αίσθηση και πράξη (Athens 1988); Η αισθητική του αποσπάσματοζ. Μια κριτική προσἐγγιση στον ‘Λάμπρο’ του Σολωμού (Athens 1997). Lambropoulos, Vassilis in his ‘The Fictions of Criticism: The “Prolegomena” of Iakovos Polylas as Künstlerroman’ (Literature as National Institution [Princeton 1988] 66–84)Google Scholar argues that Polylas aestheticizes Solomos and his Prolegomena take the form of a Künstlerroman.

60. Ibid., 125.

61. Culler, Jonathan, Literary Theory: A Very Short Introduction (Oxford 1997) 78 Google Scholar.

62. Stephanos Rozanis, Η αισθητικἠ του αποσπάσματοζ. Μια κριτικἠ προσέγγιση στον ‘Λάμπρο’ του Σολωμού, 30.

63. Elytis, Odysseas, ‘Ρωμανός ό Μελωδόζ’, Έν λευκῶ (Athens 1992) 33–56 Google Scholar.

64. Elytis, Odysseas, “Η άληθινἠ ϕυσιοννωμία καί λυρικἠ τόλμη τοῦ Άνδρέα Κάλβου’, Άνοιχτά Χαρτιά (Athens 1987) 47–112 Google Scholar. In his ‘Discours à l’Académie de Stockholm’ (1979) he modifies this view by placing Solomos at the one side of the spectrum and Cavafy at the other. He argues there that Solomos, before Mallarmé, outlined the concept of pure poetry and mobilised all the linguistic possibilities (‘Εν λενκῶ, 326-329). Also, in the Axion Esti and in his later poetry, particularly in The Oxopetra Elegies, Elytis makes references to Solomos (see e.g. ‘Solomos: Submission and Awe’).

65. Ibid., 100-101.

66. Dimou, Nikos, Δοκίμια Ι, ‘Ο´νσσέσζ Ελὐτηζ (Athens 1992) 53–54 Google Scholar. See also Belezinis, Andreas, “Ενα λανθάνον σολωμικό όνειρο του Οδυσσέα Ελὐτη’, Σπείρα, third period, 1, (Summer 1990) 150–160 Google Scholar.

67. Lorentzatos, Zisimos, ‘Έναζ όρισμός τοῦ Σολωμοῦ γιά то ὔфоζ (stile)’, Μελέτεζ, vol. 1, 120 Google Scholar.

68. See D.N. Maronitis, ‘Το μέγεθοζ του σολωμικου έργου’, Το Βήμα, 9 November 1997.

69. Garantoudis, Evripidis, ‘Η πρόσληψη тоῦ Σολωμοῦ άπό τή νεότερη ποίηση’, Ή λέξη, 142, (November-December 1997) 844–853 Google Scholar.

70. Patilis, Yannis, Ταξίδια στην ἲδια πόλη (Ποιήματα 1970-1990 (Athens 1993) 260-2Google Scholar.

71. It can be argued that this approach revives Apostolakis’s views on the poet as a moral paradigm to his contemporary moral deprivation.

72. See Mackridge, Peter, Dionysios Solomos (Bristol 1989) xxii, 36-7Google Scholar.

73. Kostis Palamas, Διονύσιοζ Σολωμόζ, 131.

74. Frye, Northrop, Anatomy of Criticism, Four Essays (Princeton 1957) 249 Google Scholar.

75. Rajan, Tilottama, ‘Romanticism and the Death of Lyric Consciousness’ in Lyric Poetry: Beyond New Criticism, ed. Hosek, Chaviva & Parker, Patricia (Ithaca and London 1985) 196 Google Scholar. See also Culler, Jonathan, ‘The Modern Lyric: Generic Continuity and Critical Practice’ in The Comparative Perspective on Literature, ed. Koelb, C. & Noakes, S. (Ithaca and London 1988) 284–299 Google Scholar.

76. Northrop Frye, Anatomy of Criticism, 249.

77. P. Mackridge, ‘Dionisio Salamon/ Διονύσιοζ Σολωμόζ: Poetry as a Dialogue between Languages’, 69. See also his article ‘Ο Σολωμόζ μεταξύ πολυγλωσσίαζ кαι μονογλωοσίαζ’ in Ζητήματα ΙαΤορἰαζ των Νεοελληνικών Γραμμάτων: Αϕιέρωμα στον Κ. Θ. Δημαρά (Thessaloniki 1994) 257-264.

78. R. Beaton argues that ‘Solomos’ fragmentary output and certain of his attitudes seem to belong to the Romantic movement, but his refusal of subjectivity places him outside it’ (Roderick Beaton, ‘Dionysios Solomos: The Tree of Poetry’, 161).

79. It has to be said that today Solomos’s ‘Η Γυναίκα τήζ Ζάκνθοζ is considered as the precursor of modernist narrative texts in Greece, thus opening new avenues for the reputation of the poet.

80. See Yorgos Veloudis’s article on Solomos, ‘Εθνικόζ, Ευρωπαίοζ, οικουμενικόζ’, To Βήμα, 10 May 1998 where the terms are used in an unconvincing way.