Fraternity-Testvériség, 1952 (30. évfolyam, 1-12. szám)

1952-12-01 / 12. szám

10

TESTVÉRISÉG

translations or critical comments by Sir John Bowring, F. Pulszky, Henry Phillips Jr., William N. Loew, Alice Stone Blackwell, A. B. Yolland, Watson Kirkconnell, Eugenie Bayard Pierce and Emil Delmár. Vilmos Tolnai wrote a Hungarian study about Petőfi’s relationship to English letters. His German translators—just to refer to a few—were the following: K. M. Kertbeny, Adolf Dux, J. Schnitzer, M. Hartmann, H. von Meltzl,

L. Aigner, L. Neugebauer, M. Kolbenheyer. Alexander Fischer wrote a German biography of Petőfi; one should also mention Charles Sealsfield (Karl Postl) who acquainted German readers with the Hungarian poet. In French, the following wrote about him or translated his poems: Th. Bernard,

P. E. G. Regnier, S. R. Taillandier, H. Valmore, J. E. Gauthier, I. Kont, J. Dozon, E. Lelkes,

M. de Polignac, E. Ujfalussy, E. Kastner. Jules Michelet, the French historian, planned to write a Petőfi biography; using a part of his material, Charles Louis Chassin wrote a study about the Hungarian poet. In Hungarian, János Hankiss discussed Petőfi’s relationship to French literature. In Italian, I. Helfy and J. Cassone served as interpreters and translators; in Spanish, Albin Körösi. Axel Karlfeldt, the Swedish poet, was an admirer of Petőfi. It should be said here that Petőfi, as a judge of literature, was paramountly subjective in his reactions; he valued among for- eigns creators, Sophocles, Tacitus, Dante, Shakespeare, Shelley, Byron, Béranger, Moreau, Hugo, Dickens, Heine and Lenau. He could not be called a trenchant or bookish critic following certain general principles, but a poet whose evaluative norms mirrored his own impulse and personal beliefs. His critical judgment was uneven. In fairness to him it should be said that he was not a practicing literary critic.

There is only one known dagurreotype of Petőfi, and idealized portraits by Soma Orlay Petries and Miklós Barabás. The daguerreotype shows a long, thin face, dark eyes, a resolute look, small mustache, short beard, hair combed straight back. His poetry is his best portrait. “He had given the nation treasures of poetry, which will be cherished as long as the Hungarian language endures.”23 He wrote in a language which is “one of the most musical languages in the world. Its numerous pure vowel sounds, its laws of vowel harmony, its sibilants (cz, s, sz, z, zs), and its

23 Frederick Riedl, A History of Hungarian Literature, New York, 1906. pp. 201.

24 Watson Kirkconnell, The Magyar Muse. Winnipeg, Manitoba, 1933. pp. 15-16.

25 János Horváth, Magyar Versek Könyve. Budapest, 1937. pp. XIII.

26 Carl Gustav Jung, Psychology and Religion. Yale University Press, New Haven, 1938. pp. 63.

frequent soft consonants (cs, gy, ly, ny, ty), all help to give it a gently caressing quality that is very effective in poetry. Of these resources, the poets of the nation have been well aware.” 24

Petőfi was a master of this language. He maintained that creative imagination must feed upon reality, believing that verbal imagination must be nurtured by the vernacular of the people. As the dolce stil nuovo of the early Italian Renaissance popularized the people’s idiom, Petőfi popularized the idiom of the Hungarian people. “The eighteenth century was the dividing line between old and new Hungarian literature. Old Hungarian literature used Latin as a medium of expression; it considered itself to be scholarly as it derived from theological culture. This was even then evident when from its sources and parallel with it there developed a secular literature written in the national language.” 25 In the first half of the nineteenth century a Hungarian literature developed which freed itself from cumbersome schol- arliness. Petőfi enlivened the Hungarian language in the sphere of imaginative literature; this was one of the healthiest manifestations of a nation’s linguistic instinct for self-preservation.

Besides this verbal enrichment, his other contributions must be mentioned. One claims no more for him than he is entitled to, and while the spell of Petőfi lies in his poetry written in Hungarian, it should be repeated that his place is also superior in world literature. Jung remarked that “no one else will have the same dreams, although many have the same problems.” 26 Petőfi, who was the symbol of a nation’s desire to be considered an equal of progressive nations, of course, had his individual dreams, but his problems were not his alone. His political poems, his passion for freedom (utterly different from the shrill, raucous voice of demagogues), have a universal perspective in spite or perhaps because of their national intonation. It is logical to assume that Petőfi would never have acquiesced to tyranny. His understanding of man’s rights and of the plight of social pariahs, his ability to find words for the fomenting discontent of the ignored and exploited, his fight against prejudices, were the manifestations of a humanitarian. He heart functioned like the daylight of humane judgment. While his judgment was not always right, his intent was right.

Petőfi was not only a political and social poet and leader, but a pure poet, an artist of the word. As a lyrist he had to express himself about his most personal feelings. His poetry was not spoiled by concessions to the public, as there were no half-way actions in his public life. Reading his poetry is like breathing fresh air. He