Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 6

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  styl narodowy
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
PL
Niechaj ten partenon sztuki (…) będzie krzepiącym serca dokumentem wielkości nieśmiertelnego, wiekuiście twórczego ducha Polski. Słowa zapisane w akcie erekcyjnym Muzeum Narodowego w Warszawie nie pozostawiają wątpliwości – kultura była postrzegana przez władze II Rzeczypospolitej (1918–1945) jako niezwykle istotny czynnik budujący tożsamość odrodzonego państwa. Niemalże od samego początku niepodległości planowano i realizowano budowę gmachów teatrów i muzeów, a także organizowano nowe placówki. Wystarczy wspomnieć, że w połowie lat 30. XX w. działało w Polsce 135 muzeów publicznych, z czego połowa została powołana do życia po roku 1918. Kulturotwórcza rola budownictwa gmachów publicznych kolejno utrwalała obraz II Rzeczypospolitej jako spadkobierczyni Polski przedrozbiorowej, a następnie – państwa nowoczesnego, o ambicjach sięgających przywództwa w regionie. Pierwsze projekty i realizacje stanowią bezpośrednią kontynuację stylistyki przełomu XIX i XX wieku. Zaprojektowany w 1924 r. teatr narodowy w Warszawie i miejski w Łodzi (niezrealizowany) Czesława Przybylskiego posiadały uproszczone formy klasyczne. Podobnie pierwsze projekty Muzeum Narodowego w Warszawie (Marian Nikodemowicz, 1924) czy Muzeum Ziemi Pomorskiej w Toruniu (Czesław Przybylski, 1926), które kontynuowały XIX-wieczną tradycję „muzeum- -pałacu” i „muzeum-świątyni sztuki”. Przełom nastąpił w końcu lat 20. i na początku 30., kiedy powstawały projekty stanowiące wyraz poszukiwania własnej recepcji nowoczesności połączonej z wyrazem tożsamości narodowej. Architekci siedzib Muzeum Śląskiego (Karol Schayer) czy Muzeum Narodowego w Warszawie (Tadeusz Tołwiński) poszukiwali drogi twórczej łączącej nowoczesność i „państwotwórczy” charakter gmachów.
2
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Kłopotliwa klasyka

100%
PL
Recenzja wystawy zorganizowanej w pięćdziesiątą rocznicę śmierci rzeźbiarza Jana Szczepkowskiego (1878-1964) w Muzeum Rzeźby Współczesnej w Orońsku (28 czerwca – 21 września 2014 r.)   Review of the Jan Szczepkowski’s exhibition in the Contemporary Sculpture Museum in Orońsko (28th of June – 21st of September 2014) on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of sculptor’s death.
EN
In 19th-century Poland - under Russian, Prussian and Austrian rule at the time – the main goal of music was to promote revival and to stimulate patriotic feelings. Patriotic Polishness drawing on the country’s glorious past was to be the essence of music; modernity of the composer’s language was of secondary importance. Karol Szymanowski unceremoniously criticised this patriotic music as turned towards the provincial Polish tradition. According to Szymanowski, the criterion of Polish and at the same time “civilised musical art” was met only by Chopin. With the regaining of independence Polish art should free itself from patriotic didacticism and pay attention to aesthetic qualities, which was to eliminate the discrepancy between Polishness and Europeanness, between what was national and what was international, universal and European. The figure of Karol Szymanowski links our musical present, symbolised by the Warsaw Autumn International Festival of Contemporary Music, with the first years of independent Poland, for Warsaw Autumn realized Karol Szymanowski’s vision of modern Polish music. In this vision Polish music was a rightful element of European culture.
PL
W Polsce XIX wieku, znajdującej się pod zaborami Rosji, Prus i Austrii, zasadniczym celem muzyki było propagowanie odrodzenia oraz pobudzanie uczuć patriotycznych. Istotą muzyki miała być patriotyczna polskość, czerpiąca ze świetnej przeszłości, nowoczesność języka kompozytorskiego była zaś drugorzędna. Karol Szymanowski tę patriotyczną muzykę bezceremonialnie krytykował jako zwróconą ku prowincjonalnej polskiej tradycji. Kryterium polskiej, a równocześnie „cywilizowanej sztuki muzycznej” spełniał wedle Szymanowskiego wyłącznie Chopin. Wraz z odzyskaniem państwowości sztuka polska powinna uwolnić się od patriotycznej dydaktyki i zwrócić uwagę na jakości estetyczne, co miało skutkować znoszeniem podziałów między polskością a europejskością, między tym, co narodowe a tym, co międzynarodowe, uniwersalne, europejskie. Postać Karola Szymanowskiego wiąże naszą muzyczną współczesność, której symbolem jest Międzynarodowy Festiwal Muzyki Współczesnej „Warszawska Jesień”, z pierwszymi latami niepodległej Polski. Bo „Warszawska Jesień” zrealizowała Karola Szymanowskiego wizję nowoczesnej muzyki polskiej. W tej wizji muzyka polska była pełnowartościowym elementem kultury europejskiej.
EN
Henryk Genello was an architect who rendered great service for the Polish railway architecture during the 2nd Polish Republic. Together with engineer and architect Hipolit Hryncewicz, he designed around 50 railway stations in the Eastern borderlands, in the Vilnius Headquarters of the State Railways. In the 20s of the 20th century, he was designing in national style, while at the end of the 20s his designs already bore distinct modernist traits, and in the 30s they became totally functionalist. A valuable realisation of Genello and Hryncewicz was a representative “modernised” railway station on the border in Stołpce, essential for the evolution of Polish railway architecture of the 2nd Polish Republic. At the turn of the 20s and 30s of the 20th century, Genello designed railway stations on the Ustroń – Wisła line. They were realised in national style, partly wooden, inspired by the Polish mountain resort architecture of Zakopane. Another important Genello’s realisation of 1935 was a small building of a railway stop – Zułów, which in the 2nd Polish Republic had a memorative character of Marshall Piłsudski silhouette. It probably was the last “national” realisation in the Polish railway architecture. His works done in this style were characterised by simplicity, pure form, and drew on local types and motives of Polish architecture. Undoubtedly, Henryk Genello was better fulfilled when he designed in the earlier, historicising style, creating his own type inspired by local motives. His later functional realisations are characterised by simplicity, pared-down and austere form of elevations deprived of detail. It is certain that Genello belonged to the most important railway architects of the 2nd Polish Republic, working since 1932 as adviser in the Ministry of Transport, he shaped railway architecture of that time from its administrative and technical side. The same function Genello performed during the first years after the war.
EN
To what extent does the present image of Polish “highland culture” reflect the traditional art and craftsmanship of Podhale from before its institutionalization? This study offers an analysis of methods of creation of regional and national style, conducted at the School of Wood Industry in Zakopane from 1879 to 1939. Art and craft of students and professors and the educational methods demonstrate various attempts of institutionalization and instrumentalization of folklore. Literature on the subject lacks a thorough analysis of those processes. The object of this study was to trace the (ab)uses of folklore that happened on account of the School. Analyzed were the teaching programmes carried out by headmasters: Franciszek Neužil, Edgar Kováts, Stanisław Barabasz, Karol Stryjeński, and Adam Dobrodzicki. Those methods of education reveal an ambivalence: while officially teaching local folklore and craft, they were in fact a form of artistic interference with the regional culture of Podhale, by “strangers” and for “strangers”. The text was based on postcolonial studies and socio-political history.
PL
W jakim stopniu funkcjonujące dzisiaj wyobrażenie „góralszczyzny” odpowiada tradycyjnej twórczości Podhala sprzed prób jej instytucjonalizacji? Tekst stanowi analizę metod konstruowania stylów regionalnego i narodowego, jakie realizowano w programach zakopiańskiej Szkoły Przemysłu Drzewnego z lat 1879–1939. Ówczesna twórczość rzeźbiarska wykładowców i wychowanków placówki oraz prowadzona w jej zakresie edukacja ukazują różnorodność prób instytucjonalizacji oraz instrumentalizacji ludowości. W literaturze przedmiotu brakuje jednak wyczerpującej analizy tych procesów. Celem tekstu jest prześledzenie (nad)użyć folkloru, do jakich dochodziło w obrębie uczelni. Analizie zostały poddane programy edukacji realizowane przez dyrektorów: Franciszka Neužila, Edgara Kovátsa, Stanisława Barabasza, Karola Stryjeńskiego oraz Adama Dobrodzickiego. Genealogia przywołanych koncepcji kształcenia ujawnia pewną ambiwalencję: nauczające wytwórczości ludowej programy były w rzeczywistości formami artystycznej ingerencji w regionalną kulturę Podhala, tworzonymi w większości przez „obcych” i dla „obcych”. Całość rozważań została zrealizowana z perspektywy studiów postkolonialnych oraz historii społeczno-politycznej.
EN
Railway station buildings, with beautiful structures and ornamentation, originating from the age-long tradition of the Polish building engineering, are well-established in our landscape. The architectural form of those railway stations is closely connected with the period of rebuilding the country after the destructions of World War I. The creative solutions of architects at that time, that included forms of so-called country style, now referred to as national or manor house ones, supported the reviving Polish state and were connected with a search for roots of own identity and the elimination of cultural traces of the occupant states. The railways, functioning in the period of partitions of Poland, were destroyed during military activities. The state of railway infrastructure in the reviving Poland was catastrophic. The end of the period of partitions and the turmoil of war was followed by the time of freedom and euphoria. The rebuilding of state structures of the country was undertaken immediately. In order to maintain and use the existing railway lines and build new ones, the Railway Routes Division was established within the Warsaw Railway Directorate. The design works connected with rebuilding the railway stations were performed in the architectural section of the Railway Routes Division and managed by Bronisław Brochwicz-Rogoyski, an experienced architect, whilst his deputies were Romuald Miller and Józef Wołkanowski. The design study, arranged by Rogoyski and Miller within the architectural section, faced various problems regarding reconstruction of railway stations, like a lack of archival technical files of the former railway buildings and, at the same time, due to the poor financial condition of the country after the war, a necessity to use the walls which had survived. Finally, two solutions were adopted at rebuilding railway station buildings: either their previous architectural form was restored with certain functional modifications or completely new buildings were designed, sometimes using the walls which had survived. In the latter case, the structures were reconstructed using the so-called country style. As early as in March 1920, there were reports in the press on first completed investments. At the turn of 1921 and 1922, building works at the 12 railway stations buildings in Pruszków, Żyrardów, Grodzisk, Radziwiłłów, Skierniewice, Teresin, Modlin, Zieleniec, Urle, Biała, Chotyłów and Terespol were completed. The author of most of the designs was the architect Romuald Miller. The head of the architectural section, Bronisław Brochwicz-Rogoyski, died in 1921. His successor was Romuald Miller, who held the post until 1924. The first group of rebuilt railway structures included the railway station buildings in Pruszków, Grodzisk Mazowiecki and Żyrardów. At each of those stations, there was a building before World War I, constructed at the turn of 1870s and 1880s by the Directorate of the Warsaw-Vienna Railway. Like on other stations of that line, they were typical brick buildings. The architectural form given to them during their reconstruction after war destructions was, on the one hand, an outcome of the recommendation in the architectonic section to use the country style and, one the other hand, the “polonization” of their architecture resulted, as it seems, from the political and patriotic obligation felt by the architects personally. The railway station buildings in Pruszków, Grodzisk Mazowiecki and Żyrardów were rebuilt using the relics of their old walls. The twin buildings in Radziwiłłów and Teresin/Szymanów were built anew. The rebuilding was planned for the years 1920-1922. It should be underlined that the principle of making the architectural form of railway station buildings uniform on the Warsaw-Vienna Railway (for example, the buildings in Żyrardów, Grodzisk Mazowiecki) or the Warsaw-Terespol Railway or the Vistula River Railroad (for example, wooden buildings at the railway stations in Gąsocin, Ciechanów) was executed as early as at the beginning of functioning or, in many cases, even during the construction of those lines. At that time, however, the typization of railway station buildings resulted primarily from the intention of maximum simplification and reduction of costs of their construction. On the other hand, making the architectural form of the railway stations uniform, executed in the first years after regaining independence by Poland, was a manifestation of their designers to give their architecture a mark of vernacularity and a Polish character.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.