Anykščių šilelis polemikos tarp romantinio ir klasikinio meno kontekste

LTStraipsnyje naujai pažvelgiama į Antano Baranausko poemos Anykščių šilelis meninio metodo klausimą. Atskaitos tašku pasirenkama poemos parašymo laiku gyvavusi romantizmo ir klasicizmo samprata, polemikoje dėl naujojo ir senojo meno Śniadeckio, Mickevičiaus ir Brodzińskio suformuluoti romantinio ir klasikinio meno principai. Žvelgiant iš šio taško Baranausko poema, kaip pabrėžtino daiktiškumo ir šviesios dienos kūrinys, tiksliai atitinka klasikinio meno reikalavimus, ypač proto ir vaizduotės santykio, empirinio tikslumo ir poetinės kalbos atžvilgiu. [Iš leidinio]Reikšminiai žodžiai: Romantizmas; Klasicizmas; Polemika; Protas; Vaizduotė; Romanticism; Classicism; Polemic; Understanding; Imagination.

ENIn the fourth decade of the 20th century the poem "Anykščių Šilelis" (The Forest Grove of Anykščiai) (1858-1859) written by Antanas Baranauskas was put down to the romantic method. No other additional theoretical epithets to express originality of its artistic thinking were used up to then. Baranauskas did not attach himself to any literary school. His "romantic" understanding could develop unconsciously and a few decades later could be "recognized" as romantic. If Baranauskas had consciously referred to theoretical conception of romanticism, we should not forget that understanding of romanticism at the period of time of creation of the poem was quite different from comprehension on the basis of which the poem was named romantic. Friedrich Schlegel, the ideologist of German romanticism, named new art romantic and the old one classical at the end of the 18th century. In Europe this conception was developed by Mrs de Staël and it had determined classification of European art for decades. There was polemic between romantic and classical, i.e. new and old art in all Europe, beginning with Goethe’s categorical statements and ending with Baudelaire’s aesthetic system. This polemic was going on in Poland and at the same time in Lithuania from about 1818 to 1822. Kazimierz Brodziński, Jan Śniadecki and Adam Mickiewicz, who is considered to be the inspirer of Baranauskas, took an active part in it. The features of romantic and classical art defined in the polemic let us come to a conclusion that Baranauskas’s contemporaries looked upon "Anykščių Šilelis" as a piece of art created keeping to the rules of classical art.If we believed that Baranauskas had consciously chosen artistic method, more conservative pole of this opposition – classicism – attracted his attention being closer to poet’s cultural nature. Assessment which occurred later was influenced by changes in comprehension of romanticism and classicism during the last century and the fact that romanticism with its status of values in Lithuania satisfied the spirit of the Lithuanian nation. [From the publication]