INTERPRETÁCIA BÁSNICKÉHO TEXTU – MEDZI TEÓRIOU, KRITIKOU A LITERATÚROU
Interpretation of poetry – between theory, criticism and literature
Languages of publication
Poetry interpretation, its constitution in Slovak literary theory and criticism is usually associated with the 1960s, namely with M. Hamada, S. Šmatlák, V. Turčány, A. Bagin, F. Miko and his theoretical initiative as well as the circle of the authors involved in Nitra projects and collections devoted to "the interpretation of a piece of writing". The present article reviews briefly the tradition within the current poetry analysis. The fundamental inspiration is considered to be Czech and Slovak structuralism of the 1930s and the 1940 - updated in the 1960s - structure as an analysis tool used on a particular piece of writing as well as a means to understanding changes in literature. A non-standard, however key moment to date, is poetic exposition of liberating imaginative play in the modern, avant-garde and contemporary poetry. The emancipation of poetry and criticism from the guardianship of ideology at the turn of the 1950s and the 1960s accented – in association with the philosophy and literature of existence – the concept and the phenomenon of situation: a contemporary man´s situation, a situation as a premise of a literary work and the art as an appeal to the man in his situation. Writing about poetry was at the same time a politically progressive syncretic reflexion, and so oscillated between structure and situation. The changed 1970s pushed most of the inspirations and outcomes into anonymity or urged their cryptic forms. The present-day productive areas of poetry analysis may be summarized into key words: corporeality as a writing base, tropology and inter-mediality. The substantial part of poetry analysis, interpretational as well as potentially historiographical, is nowadays formed by the dismantling of its preserved image from the times before 1989 and the identification of those „symbolic“ ideological codes, which it was confronted or contaminated with. In conclusion the present article raises a question what can be obtained from the differentiations between the „imaginary“, the „symbolic“ and the „real“ (in J. Lacan´s sense).
409 – 416
Publication order reference