The author focuses on the periods of Aleksander Wat’s poetic silence. He states that although after 1926 Wat – perhaps “out of disgust for language” and perhaps he felt that literature in a traditional sense is unnecessary – he becomes silent as a poet, he does not lose a great linguistic sensibility (a “bird” language of one of fellow-prisoners in 1931). An important event in the context of Wat’s thinking of the lanaguge, word, was his acquaintance with Evgeni Dunajewski in 1941 in a cell in Łubianka in Moscow who became Wat’s linguistic “mentor”. When returning to poetry (1940) Wat encounters difficulties: the poet obstinately searches for a language suitable for the description of the world plunged into communism, he was convinced that everything was already said and simultaneously that a lot of truths were not touched upon, the poet wavered between love and hate for words. And besides words there was silence, holy silence which for Wat had a metaphysical dimension, and it was the silence (and not speech) that he enumerated as one of the instruments of cognition (Trzy starości. Trzecia [Three ages. The third one]).
The paper focuses on the editorial history of the volume of poetry by Borys Pasternak entitled Siedem wierszy [Seven poems], which was published in Warsaw in 1940, that is during the German occupation of the city.
The article discusses Maria Dabrowska’s and Stanislaw Stempowski’s contacts with a Russian critic Dmitry Filosofov in the period of Filosofov’s stay in Poland in 1920s and 1930s. Minor figures of the relations are Jerzy Stempowski and Filosofov’s close collaborators. The main source are Filosofov’s letters to Dabrowska and to Stanislaw Stempowski, which offer a testimony to their profound friendship and deep ideological and mental disparities. An important thread of the research is the process of composing of Night and Days which Filosofov greatly appreciated, keeping a distance from Dabrowska’s journalistic commentaties. However they were open, tolerant, and their views on their home cultures proved to be far from radically nationalistic, there were also misunderstandings between them following from the traditional Polish-Russian controversies. In the final analysis, the misunderstandings failed to conceal their true friendship and intellectual conformity.
The lecture is devoted to a multifaceted analysis of Jaroslaw Iwaszkiewicz’s short story Panny z Wilka (The Maids of Wilko). It deals with its genesis and thematic connections with other works of the writer. Crucial here are issues of time and mechanisms of recollection. An additional context is the film adaptation of The Maids of Wilko made by Andrzej Wajda.
PL
Wykład poświęcony jest wieloaspektowej analizie opowiadania Jarosława Iwaszkiewicza Panny z Wilka. Dotyczy on jego genezy i związków tematycznych z innymi utworami pisarza. Zasadniczą są tu kwestie czasu i mechanizmy wspominania. Dodatkowym kontekstem jest adaptacja filmowa Panien z Wilka dokonana przez Andrzeja Wajdę.
Artykuł jest pierwszą prezentacją, zarówno na gruncie polskim, jak i rosyjskim, sylwetki Jewgienii Wiebier-Hiriakowej (1895–1939). Była ona dziennikarką i krytykiem literackim, znakomitym analitykiem kultury sowieckiej. Po rewolucji w Rosji wyjechała na emigrację. W Polsce w latach trzydziestych XX wieku współpracowała z rosyjskimi gazetami emigracyjnymi, redagowanymi przez Dmitrija Fiłosofowa. Publikowała również artykuły w prasie polskiej. Była współzałożycielką rosyjsko-polskiego klubu dyskusyjnego „Domik w Kołomnie”, działającego w Warszawie w latach 1934–1936. Podtrzymywała bliskie kontakty z polską elitą intelektualną, była bliską przyjaciółką Marii Dąbrowskiej. Aneksem do artykułu jest nie wygłoszony i nie opublikowany odczyt Jewgienii Wiebier-Hiriakowej o „Nocach i dniach”.
EN
The article is the first on both Polish and Russian ground presentation of the figure of Yevgeniya Veber-Hiryakova (1895–1939), who was a journalist, literary critic, and an outstanding analyst of Soviet culture. After the revolution in Russia she emigrated. In Poland in the 30s last century she collaborated with Russian newspapers in exile edited by Dmitry Filosofov and also published articles in the Polish press. Veber-Hiryakova was a co-founder of the Polish-Russian discussion club “Domik w Kołomnie” (“A House at Kolomna”) which worked in Warsaw from 1934 to 1936. She also maintained regular contact with Polish intellectual elite and remained Maria Dąbrowska’s close friend. Annexed to the article is an undelivered and unpublished Veber-Hiryakova’s speech on Dąbrowska’s “Noce i dnie (Nights and Days).”
Julian Tuwim was an accomplished translator of Russian poetry. Until recently, hiscontacts with the Russian emigrants in Poland in the interwar period had been scarcely known. The article expands on the topic of the influence of Tuwim’s poetry on the members of the Russian emigration and attempts to describe his role in the life of the Russian diaspora. What is even more interesting, Tuwim maintained his Russian relations also int he communist Poland, helping and supporting those who were forced to hide their past. Members of the Russian emigration (especially a distinguished critic Dymitr Fiłosofow) held Tuwim’s poetry in hight esteem, and they also appreciated him as a gifted translator. The article builds its critical argument on rare texts published in Russian emigration periodicals, archives and the post-war writings of Leon Gomolicki.
The article applies to Józef Czapski’s – a Polish painter and essayist – personal literary choices; ones that often were contrary to the tastes of his generation. In 1942, after leaving the Soviet bloc, Czapski developed the anthology Polskie wiersze wojenne for Russian readers, and the events of the war caused him to change his opinion about the modern poetry. Poems by the Skamandrites, whom he had disregarded for a long time, now became the core of his collection. Having been found a few years back, the anthology was published in 2019.
The author focuses on the periods of Aleksander Wat’s poetic silence. He states that although after 1926 Wat – perhaps “out of disgust for language” and perhaps he felt that literature in a traditional sense is unnecessary – he becomes silent as a poet, he does not lose a great linguistic sensibility (a “bird” language of one of fellow-prisoners in 1931). An important event in the context of Wat’s thinking of the lanaguge, word, was his acquaintance with Evgeni Dunajewski in 1941 in a cell in Łubianka in Moscow who became Wat’s linguistic “mentor”. When returning to poetry (1940) Wat encounters difficulties: the poet obstinately searches for a language suitable for the description of the world plunged into communism, he was convinced that everything was already said and simultaneously that a lot of truths were not touched upon, the poet wavered between love and hate for words. And besides words there was silence, holy silence which for Wat had a metaphysical dimension, and it was the silence (and not speech) that he enumerated as one of the instruments of cognition (Trzy starości. Trzecia [Three ages. The third one]).
The aim of this paper is to try and outline the activities of Hanna Szumańska-Wertheim in Warsaw during the 1943–1944 period. It provides information about the arrest of her husband, Stanisław Wertheim, and about her underground cultural undertakings (the “Wisła” publishing house). The author also draws the readers’ attention to Szumańska-Wertheim’s activities as a courier in the resistance movement.
Publication of a lecture given by Wiktor Woroszylski in the 1978/79 academic year as part of the Flying University of the Scientific Courses Society. Itwas an opposition initiative that the Security Service was fighting against. Woroszylski’s lectures concerned the history of Russian and Soviet literature, and the text published here is devoted not only to the labor camps (hence the reference to the work of Michał Heller), but also to broadly understood communist terror.
The publication presents the polemic that started in the Paris ‘Kultura’ in 1975 and in private correspondence after the publication of the article“Laur i Ciemność” by Maciej Broński (Wojciech Skalmowski) about Cyprian Norwid. Józef Czapski and Witold Wirpsza took part in the dispute. Skalmowski, following the trail of former critics of Norwid, accused him of incomprehensibility, Czapski and Wirpsza strongly rejected his arguments.