The author reconstructs the Romantic concept of imagination, drawing attention to its relations with the esoteric tradition, and then presents the significance of the idea of imagination for pedagogical reflection in the period of Romanticism. What is also undertaken is the motif of the continuity of Romantic ideas in the 20th century, with special regard to the 20th century youth counterculture and the relations between the countercultural concept of imagination and the discourse on education.
Adam Mickiewicz’s Pan Tadeusz (in English: Sir Thaddeus, or The Last Lithuanian Foray ), the national epic poem, was first published in June 1834. It was perceived as a patriotic work, full of very ideal heroes. However, one of the most problem of this poem is love! Pan Tadeusz is the poem about love. There are many kinds of love: erotic love and maritial love, also familiar love (between parents and their children), love for country and others. My article applies not just to love affairs, but the very essence of love. What is love in Mickiewicz’s poem – is it “love that moves the sun and other stars” (Dante)?
Adam Mickiewicz’s Pan Tadeusz (in English: Sir Thaddeus, or the Last Lithuanian Foray), the national epic poem, was first published in June 1834. It was perceived as a idyllic work, full of happiness and very ideal heroes. However, one of the most problem of this poem is treason! It is very important to put a question: what is treason in the strict sense of the word? There are a lot of kinds of treason or only one? Is it possible to betray own country on account of favouriting strange fashion, customs or painting? In Pan Tadeusz Mickiewicz intended to stand up for the Polish tradition. He had a high opinion of loyalty, steadiness and the selfless sense of duty.
The given article is an analysis of Władysław Wężyk’s Travels to the ancient world taking into consideration the most important problems and components of the 19th century Romantic worldview. Particular attention will be paid to the great Romantic themes such as folklore, art, music, spontaneous literary works and concepts of new humanity. Wężyk’s memoir reveals his openness towards the Other and the understanding of foreign cultures which is by far the most important feature of a Romantic intellectual.
The article is devoted to the analysis of the lyrical poetry of Evdokiya Rostopchina, who was considered in the late 1830s – early 1840s as one of the most talented Russian poets. The main object of investigation is her strategy of self-representation. It is shown how Rostopchina builds her individual myth: the poetess treats herself as the heiress, the successor to Pushkin and Lermontov; she creates this myth, relying on the facts of her biography. She creates her own version of the romantic myth about the poet, varying the motives of the lyrics of these authors, as well as of Baratynsky’s poems. In the 1850s, trying to resist the realistic tendencies of the new era, she presents herself as the guardian of a high literary tradition and enters into a conscious confl ict with time, making literary “archaism” her own principle. If earlier she cultivated elegiac poetics, now she turns to satire.
In this article Maurycy Mochnacki’s martyrological and messianic declarations in the Preface to the Uprising of the Polish Nation in 1830–1831 are examined in the context of the martyrological discourse in the literature of the Great Emigration. Such an affirmation may appear puzzling given Mochnacki’s rejection of martyrological interpretations of Poland’s history or messianic readings of his political philosophy, let alone his reputation of being radically opposed to Adam Mickiewicz’s idea of the sacrifi cial victimhood of the Polish nation. In this study the ideological and rhetorical aspects of their statements are compared and analysed. There can be little doubt that in the Preface Mochnacki’s phrasing is steeped in patriotic pathos which seems to be at odds with the tone of his other writings. This article claims that it was a tactical move on his part: he chose the familiar martyrological loci merely as a means to enlist the readers’ support for his own pragmatic programme of restoring Poland’s independence. A general conclusion to be drawn from this apparent inconsistency is that already at that stage (The Uprising was published in Paris in 1834) the logosphere of the Great Emigration had become so dominated by the martyrological discourse that Mochnacki could not afford to ignore it.