The Sound of Modern Polish Poetry: Performance and Recording after World War II

Aleksandra Kremer's meticulous scholarly study, The Sound of Modern Polish Poetry: Performance and Recording after World War II, focuses on the material history of something often thought to defy material representation—poetry. The study situates itself historically by hypothesizing that Polish poets born in the first decades of the twentieth century became especially interested in reading their own poetry aloud and recording it, whether or not these recordings were intended for public distribution. This interest spurred them to rethink the relation between modern verse and the sound of poetry (p. 2). The book does not seek to impose consensus but to celebrate variety: each poet's practice, and their implicit or explicit conclusions about orality and voice, are different.Kremer introduces the subject by provocatively suggesting that Polish poetry culture of the twentieth century may not have been as different from the culture of the Anglophone world as is commonly assumed, given the lively interest in oral performances of poetry even before the Second World War. She then proceeds to offer a capsule history of Polish poetic performance that reveals its unique history and the manner in which it intersected with political history to form a “laboratory” for studying poetic performance in the contemporary era. It is easy to see how much material could potentially be brought into this project. Kremer is wise to keep her histories pithy. Those who wish for a more detailed treatment of the Polish Romantic poetic tradition, for example, can easily find material elsewhere, and there are plenty of explanatory footnotes. One term, though, that may have benefitted from further interrogation (especially at the book's outset) is the often-used “Anglophone.” The terms “western,” “Anglo-American,” and “Anglophone” carry different connotations, and such terms may converge more readily for Polish readers than for readers from English-speaking countries, who may protest that American literary culture is rather different from Irish, British, or Caribbean culture, not to mention the English-speaking parts of Africa and Asia.This book unpacks the very concept of oral performance in intriguing ways: for example, a recording by the poet Julian Tuwim and mailed to his sister abroad, here called a “sound postcard,” occupies a different cultural space from recordings made for collective distribution—and within this latter phenomenon, we must also differentiate between authors who record their works abroad for a Polish-speaking audience (such as Czesław Miłosz) and those who both perform and record their works within Poland (such as Miron Białoszewski). Such a book opens our eyes to the importance of particularity even as it continuously situates particulars within their socio-historical context.Readers may reach for this book with the intent to gain information or engage in polemics about orality (Charles Bernstein's provocative work on poetry as performance is often mentioned), but its anecdotes may remain in their memory the longest. Kremer is a talented storyteller, and the stories she has to tell are immensely compelling: for example, she details how a poem by Julian Tuwim, entitled “The Prayer,” circulated orally and clandestinely in Auschwitz, having been memorized by a brave woman in Warsaw (who wisely burned the paper upon which it was originally written). The poem earned its own fame as it was recited and memorized by prisoners in other camps as well (pp. 45–46). This story makes obvious how crucial the oral dimension of poetry can be, and how our assessment of a poem's resonance may change as we gain such information about its career.Kremer recognizes, however, that oral performances of poetry may be banal or disappointing, and that poets themselves may privilege the written text. Indeed, one of the pleasures of this book is that it does not try to sell us on any particular theory or line of interpretation. It is organized by chapters dedicated to specific types of oral performance as illustrated by a handful of major Polish poets (Tuwim, Miłosz, Białoszewski, Szymborska, Wat, Herbert, Kamieńska, Świr, Różewicz, Przyboś), with the exception of the first chapter, whose treatment of Julian Tuwim is situated within a panoramic view of wartime and postwar poetic culture. These types of performance include recordings made in exile yet intended for Polish audiences, literary salons held within writers’ apartments, clubs, and cabarets where poetry was read or sung, and in-person readings. Recorded performances are scrupulously differentiated by means of their location (within the country or outside it), intent (to reach an otherwise unavailable audience, to compose a last testament that would only reach its audience after the poet's death), and style (elegant, resonant, or awkward, old-fashioned, or contemporary in diction and intonation).Within each chapter, Kremer discusses the details of these performances, situating them in a context that is both communal (she is always aware of relevant political events) and personal (she is well attuned to states of mind and tonal details). Readers who are familiar with these poets will find themselves invited to see their work through a new lens, and encouraged to “hear” how individual poems were orally delivered. Non-Polish readers may be surprised to learn that actors frequently recited poetry until the contemporary period and that such recitations may be called traditional, so that the spectacle of a poet reading their own poems in public was rather novel. It is also gratifying to see Kremer pay attention to poets whose voices or delivery styles are not entirely satisfactory; some, indeed, often chose a favorite actor or actress to read their work aloud, as did Wisława Szymborska. The differences between Białoszewski's and Szymborska's home-based literary events also make for fascinating study, and Kremer provides enough texture in these descriptions that readers can truly gain a sense of what these occasions were like, as well as what they were not like (namely, the aristocratic French salons that we may have in mind when imagining a famous poet's soireés). Meanwhile, those poets not blessed with smooth and resonant voices may struggle to accept their own readings or even choose not to provide an elegant performance out of personal conviction. Tadeusz Różewicz is one such case. Kremer posits that Różewicz deliberately provides flat or inelegant readings as part of his strategy to oppose the romantic, inspired model of authorship that is so strong in the Polish tradition, even in mid-century. One wonders, however, whether there is also an idiosyncratic element (or, sometimes, a biological element—one isn't always in full control of one's voice) to his sometimes “incoherent” (p. 258) readings. This possibility becomes even more evident when Kremer discusses Krystyna Miłobędzka in the book's Epilogue, given this poet's insistence that she wrote, and read, the only way she knew how (p. 265). Nonetheless, Kremer's elucidation of the various motivations that underlie “bad” readings provides some of the most thought-provoking material in the book, as readers are encouraged to associate a poet's reading style with conscious self-fashioning.The Sound of Modern Polish Poetry does finally not aim to put forward a grand theory of oral performance. The book excels in its detailed, well-researched treatment of several important poets, and its careful delineation of these poets’ identities, careers, and voices. It offers important insights to scholars of orality and performance studies, and is a must-read book for scholars and students of Polish poetry.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.