Niniejszy artykuł jest krytyczną edycją zbioru „Maszkary mięsopustne i powszechne, przy tym Kłoda popielcowa” Stanisława Serafina Jagodyńskiego, którego druk uznawany był dotąd za bezpowrotnie zaginiony. Unikat druku faktycznie zaginął jeszcze przed drugą wojną światową, ale jego staranny odpis przetrwał w materiałach Karola Badeckiego przechowywanych w Bibliotece Jagiellońskiej (sygn. 7777 III, s. 310‒318). Wydany tekst opatrzony został komentarzem historycznoliterackim i językowym.
EN
The paper contains a critical edition of “Maszkary mięsopustne i powszechne, przy tym Kłoda popielcowa z Parnasu” (“Shrove Tuesday Masks and Common Masks, and also Ash Wednesday Wood Log from Parnassus”) by Stanisław Serafin Jagodyński, text of which has been considered irretrievably lost until now. In fact, unique print disappeared even before World War II, however, its faithful copy survived in Karol Badecki’s manuscript stored in the Jagiellonian Library (Ms 7777 III, pp. 310–318). The published text is accompanied by a literary historical and linguistic commentary.
Artykuł stara się odtworzyć – na podstawie źródeł drukowanych i archiwalnych – świadomość tekstologiczną i metodę edytorską twórców dwóch wydań zbiorowych dzieł Orzeszkowej: „Pism” z lat 1937–1939 w opracowaniu Aurelego Drogoszewskiego i Ludwika Brunona Świderskiego oraz „Pism zebranych” z lat 1947–1953 w opracowaniu Juliana Krzyżanowskiego i Edmunda Jankowskiego, które są do dzisiaj podstawą naszej znajomości dorobku pisarki. Rozważania skupiają się wokół pojęć używanych przez edytorów: „wydanie krytyczne”, „przekaz autentyczny”, „cenzura redakcyjna”. Celem badania jest planowana konfrontacja koncepcji edytorskiej z pierwszej połowy XX wieku z najnowszymi teoriami tekstologii i edytorstwa (skupiającymi się nie na intencjach autora, ale na dziejach i zmienności tekstu) – na potrzeby rozpoczętej w tym roku nowej edycji dzieł zebranych Elizy Orzeszkowej.
EN
The paper is trying to reconstruct, as based on printed and archive documents, the textological awareness and the editors’ method applied to Orzeszkowa’s collected works, namely “Pisma” (“Writings”) from the years 1937–1939 prepared by Aureli Drogoszewski and Ludwik Brunon Świderski, and “Pisma zebrane” (“Collected Writings”) published between 1947 and 1953, prepared by Julian Krzyżanowski and Edmund Jankowski, the latter of which until now is a basis of our knowledge in the writer’s creativity. Considerations focus on the terms used by the editors: “critical edition,” “authentic source,” “editorial censorship.” The aim of the research is a planned confrontation of the first half of the 20th century editorial ideas with the latest textological and editorial conceptions (concentrating not on the author’s intention but on the text history and changeability) for the needs of a new edition of Orzeszkowa’s collected writings that started this year.
Franciszek Dionizy Kniaźnin has created manuscript for a few years. It was a kind of his poetica will. In this collection, titled Poezje Franciszka Dionizego Kniaźnina ręką własną pisane, author included works published in three previous collections volumes of verse as well as completely new poems. Reused works had many editorial alterations compared to original ones. First time published works had been totally unknown before. Poezje Franciszka Dionizego Kniaźnina ręką własną pisane was not published as printed, scientific edition yet. This article describes today’s editor dilemmas about making a critical edition of four first book contained in the first volume of autograph. Mainly it is focused on the problem of comparasion variants of particular texts, which often are very different.
Artykuł stanowi polemikę z tezami Marii Prussak oraz Pawła Bema dotyczącymi podstaw metodologicznych uprawiania edytorstwa naukowego. Autor stawia tezę, że możliwa jest edycja krytyczna tekstu utworu literackiego. Swój wywód prowadzi przy użyciu kategorii dzieła literackiego i autoryzacji.
EN
The paper polemises with Maria Prussak’s and Paweł Bem’s theses referring to the methodological assumptions of practising scholarly editing. The author formulates a thesis that a critical edition of a literary work is possible, and his line of reasoning employs the categories of a literary work and authorisation.
Pierwszy tom edycji krytycznej pism Stanisława Przybyszewskiego, zawierający jego prozę poetycką, stanowi wybitne osiągnięcie polskiego edytorstwa naukowego. Tom opracowała Gabriela Matuszek-Stec. Recenzja podkreśla merytoryczne i tekstologiczne wartości edycji. Na treść tomu składa się pięć poematów Przybyszewskiego: „Requiem aeternam”, „Z cyklu Wigilii”, „De profundis”, „Androgyne” i „Nad morzem”. Edycja zawiera teksty wersji polskojęzycznych oraz fragmenty wersji w języku niemieckim. Matuszek-Stec opatrzyła tom obszernym wstępem historycznoliterackim oraz licznymi komentarzami, uwzględniła też i szczegółowo zrekonstruowała warianty tekstu wszystkich poematów. Poematy prozą Przybyszewskiego ukazują się tutaj w postaci kompleksowej jako dzieła o wielkich walorach poznawczych i niemałej wartości artystycznej.
EN
The first volume of critical edition of Stanisław Przybyszewski’s writings, which includes poetic prose, is an exceptional achievement of Polish scientific editorship prepared by Gabriela Matuszek-Stec. The review highlights the content matter and textological significance of the edition. The book contains Przybyszewski’s five epic poems: “Requiem aeternam”, “Z cyklu Wigilii” (“Vigils”), “De profundis”, “Androgyne”, and “Nad morzem” (“At the Seaside”), and is composed of Polish language texts and fragments of their versions in German. Matuszek-Stec foreworded the text with a comprehensive introduction and authored numerous commentaries, as well as considered and carefully reconstructed textual variants of the poems. Przybyszewski’s pieces are presented here in their full complexity as pieces of great cognitive valour and high artistic values.
The article is a discussion of Volumes Three and Four of Complete Works by Cyprian Norwid, containing the poems by the author of Vade-mecum, edited by Stefan Sawicki, Adam Cedro and Piotr Chlebowski. The arrangement and the contents of the edition, the contents of individual parts of the critical apparatus (the editor’s notes, variations of the texts, explanations) were subjected to analysis. Moreover, the lessons and emendations suggested by the editors were analyzed in a wide range.
This paper presents the second critical edition of the poem “Rozbój duchowny” (“Spiritual warfare”) written by Polish poet from 17th century Wacław Potocki. The first edition, published in 1980, prepared by Jan Malicki, has some editorial mistakes, hence the poem was edited again. The commentaries explain biblical and mythological references, the meaning of Old-Polish words as well as the proverbs. The author also points out to the relationship between the text of the poem and work “Spirituale Christiani militis certamen” by Antwerp engraver Hieronymus Wierix and describes the theme of the knight of Christ as a leitmotiv in Potocki’s poems.
The subject of the editio critica are two wedding speeches, written anonymously together with the diary of Michał Leon Obuchowicz (the manuscript from the Library of the Polish Academy of Sciences in Kórnik). The first speech is from the wedding of Prudencja Gosiewska and the second one is the exemplary speech made while giving the bride to the groom. There is a hypothesis that Michał Leon Obuchowicz is actually the author of both speeches. Even though the diaries were edited twice (in 1859, Vilnus and 2003, Warsaw), the texts have never been published. The author of the article postulates for including the editio critica in the editions of old diaries.
This article presents critical edition of enlightenment period’s epithalamium of Antoni Marcin Sienkiewicz (1690–1752) titled “Konstelacyja pierwszych koronnego nieba planet” (“A constellation of the most brilliant planets of the crown sky”). The epithalamium was written in 1724 on the occasion of Maria Zofia Sieniawska’s wedding with Stanislaw Ernest Denhoff. Since some references in the text might be difficult for today’s readers, this article includes the necessary clarifications on mythological characters and the overview of Sieniawski’s and Lubomirski’s families. Moreover, the article presents a short historical note about the author’s biography (he was considered as the most prolific panegyrist of Polish nobility), as well as about Maria Zofia Sieniawska, to whom the work was originally dedicated.
The article presents a critical edition of two funeral speeches made by Wojciech Miaskowski, yet not printed before. The first one was made while the body of Wojciech Gajewski was carried through Poznan, the latter one – during the funeral. Both oratory pieces, which were widely appreciated among the researches of old Polish oratory, provide us with new information on the life of the soldier who died in battle at the walls of Smolensk. The author of the article prepared a transcription of the speeches, followed by an introduction including the most important details on Miaskowski and Gajewski’s lives, as well as the discussion on the hereditary issues concerning the speeches. The first one made during the body’s passage is an example of oratio ab hospitibus, that is a speech for the guests, whereas the latter is oratio gratiarum actoria, that is the family’s thanksgiving. Edition of the oratory pieces was accompanied by a family tree, critical apparatus and explanations given to the works.
The article is a review of the first volume of the critical edition of Norwid’s prose developed by Rościsław Skręt. The review focuses on the choice of works for editing and print, on establishing the status of source texts, determining the form of the texts for print, performing language modernization and associating the textual material with iconography. Examining the actions undertaken by the editor in all these dimensions, one can put forward a claim that his work tries to follow two contradictory editorial directions. The editor developed an innovative canon of Norwid’s prose and managed to avoid mistakes made by his predecessors. At the same time, one can observe that the editor restrained himself from departing too far from the solutions adopted by the previous editors. This latter tendency is particularly evident on the linguistic plane. Hence, one can describe the reviewed edition of the text as a half-way revolution.
The article is a discussion of Volumes Three and Four of Complete Works by Cyprian Norwid, containing the poems by the author of Vade-mecum, edited by Stefan Sawicki, Adam Cedro and Piotr Chlebowski. The arrangement and the contents of the edition, the contents of individual parts of the critical apparatus (the editor’s notes, variations of the texts, explanations) were subjected to analysis. Moreover, the lessons and emendations suggested by the editors were analyzed in a wide range.
The article is a review of the first volume of the critical edition of Norwid’s prose developed by Rościsław Skręt. The review focuses on the choice of works for editing and print, on establishing the status of source texts, determining the form of the texts for print, performing language modernization and associating the textual material with iconography. Examining the actions undertaken by the editor in all these dimensions, one can put forward a claim that his work tries to follow two contradictory editorial directions. The editor developed an innovative canon of Norwid’s prose and managed to avoid mistakes made by his predecessors. At the same time, one can observe that the editor restrained himself from departing too far from the solutions adopted by the previous editors. This latter tendency is particularly evident on the linguistic plane. Hence, one can describe the reviewed edition of the text as a half-way revolution.
Franciszek Dionizy Kniaźnin has created manuscript for a few years. It was a kind of his poetica will. In this collection, titled Poezje Franciszka Dionizego Kniaźnina ręką własną pisane, author included works published in three previous collections volumes of verse as well as completely new poems. Reused works had many editorial alterations compared to original ones. First time published works had been totally unknown before. Poezje Franciszka Dionizego Kniaźnina ręką własną pisane was not published as printed, scientific edition yet. This article describes today’s editor dilemmas about making a critical edition of four first book contained in the first volume of autograph. Mainly it is focused on the problem of comparasion variants of particular texts, which often are very different.
Artykuł omawia problemy i możliwości współczesnej edycji naukowej. Ukształtowane w Polsce zasady opracowania tekstów nieżyjących autorów w ciągu XX wieku podlegały coraz ściślejszej normatywizacji. Toczone w Polsce dyskusje dotyczyły na ogół konkretnych rozwiązań, natomiast niezbyt często podejmowały zagadnienia teorii i krytyki tekstu, bardzo szeroko rozwijane i dyskutowane zarówno w literaturoznawstwie zachodnim, jak i rosyjskim. W efekcie sztywniejących zasad w ramach edycji nie mieszczą się istotne informacje o tekście i niemal zupełnie nie uwzględnia się problematyki procesu twórczego. Wiedza o przekształceniach konkretnego dzieła może poszerzyć możliwości jego interpretacji. Rozwiązaniem zagadnień podejmowanych w ramach krytyki tekstu, wbrew pierwotnym oczekiwaniom, nie będzie edycja cyfrowa, jeśli nie powstaną koncepcje cyfryzacji dostosowane do każdego dzieła oddzielnie.
EN
The article discusses the problems and possibilities of the contemporary academic edition. Editorial preparations of texts by late authors throughout the 20th century underwent more and more rigid normalisation. Discussions in Poland mainly referred to specific solutions, though they rather seldom raised the issues of text theory and criticism, broadly developed and examined both in Western and in Russian literary studies. In effect of the stiffening rules, the crucial pieces of information about the text failed to be included within an edition, and it almost completely neglected the text-forming issues. The knowledge about the transformations of a given work may extend its interpretive potential. Solution to the problems addressed within the framework of text criticism, against its initial assumptions, will not be worked out on the ground of text criticism unless concepts of digitisation designed to individual works separately are developed.
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.