Kristijono Donelaičio "Metų" rišlumas

ENThe present monograph analyses the coherence and composition of Metai by Kristijonas Donelaitis, and seeks to find answers to a series of questions. Do the four parts of Metai compose a coherent whole? Does each separate part of the poem have inner coherence? What creates the impression of the coherence or incoherence of Metai? Does the narrative have a strict composition, or is it organised without a clear plan? The research is based on three methodological presumptions: 1) In the analysis of Metai, we separately discuss macro-composition and micro-composition. In the first case, we are interested in the interrelationship of the four parts of Metai and the systemic features of the whole that they constitute. In the second case, the inner structure of each part of Metai and issues of coherence in small episodes is addressed. (2) In the analysis of Metai we oppose the syntagmatics and the para- digmatics of the narrative. In the discussion of the syntagmatic relations we ask how an episode is attached to another episode, why it is attached in a particular way, and what semantic effect this specific order of attachment produces. While analysing the paradigmatic relations we inquire if an episode has systemic equivalents in other parts of Metai, and explore the thematics of the narrative and the semantic structure of separate episodes. (3) Metai is a work meant for reading aloud and listening. Therefore, we consider Metai an oral narrative, and call its recipient a listener. [...] Metai can be perceived in three ways: a) as a single work or four independent works; b) as a strictly organised whole or as an improvisation; c) as a fixed syntagmatic chain with a clear beginning and end or as a cyclic structure without a fixed beginning and end. [...] On the macro-compositional level Metai is a coherent whole rather than four independent works.The key features of the coherence of this whole are: (i) the genre, (ii) the uniform structure of the poetic world, and (iii) the relations of the paradigmatic and syntagmatic planes. (i) Metai is a specific “Donelaitian” epic - four descriptions of the seasons of the year are parts of a larger epic picture rather than independent poems or idylls, as the Nesselmannians are inclined to think. (ii) All the four parts of Metai have the same structure of the poetic world. It is based on the vertical tension between virtue and vice. (iii) On the paradigmatic level of the narrative, Metai is related by the basic isotopies - piety, modesty, industriousness, moderation, and righteousness. [...] One of the main conclusions that we have reached while analysing the micro-composition of the poem is the principle of a spiral vector, according to which the narrative of Metai is developed. A relatively small number of classemic semes is repeated on the surface of the text in different combinations. This creates the typical impression of Metai - the work appears to be motley and heterogeneous and at the same time paradoxically uniform and coherent. As another result of our analysis, in each part of Metai (hereinafter referred to as “Spring Joys” - SJ, “Summer Toils” - ST, “Autumn Wealth” - AW, “Winter Cares” - WC) several narrative blocks of larger scale have been identified. In SJ we can distinguish an allegoric narrative about birds (SJ 1-244), a narrative about social class and virtue (SJ 80-335), a narrative about hardship and work (SJ 336-533), and a narrative about moderation (SJ 534-660). In ST we can identify a narrative about health (ST 1-95), a narrative about people swearing (ST 96-135), two narratives about the relations between the social classes (ST 136-433, 649-714), a narrative about Plaučiūnas (ST 434-542), and a narrative about unfinished works (ST 543-648).In AW we can distinguish an introductory landscape (AW 1-81), a narrative about a wedding (AW 82-650), a narrative about Dočys (AW 651-772), and a narrative about the end of the world (AW 773-912). In WC we can discern an introductory landscape (WC 1-107), a narrative about peasant deceits (WC 108-207), a narrative about fire (WC 182-378), a narrative about (in)justice (WC 357-527), and Selmas’s closing speech (WC 468-682). [...] The narrative of Metai is moved forward by the ethical aims of the narrative and the tension on the axiological level of the narrative rather than parallels with nature and work. [...] the micro-compositional analysis offers us a new interpretation. Nature and works do not constitute the composition of the seasons, but form its pragmatic background. Each season has a potential variety of phenomena of nature and work, but it is only those elements of nature and work that are necessary for Donelaitis to talk about the moral problems of people that find their way into the narrative of Metai. [...] The key results of our analysis can be summarised in the following way: Metai is a coherent whole, and Donelaitis did not strictly plan its macro- compositional parameters. The coherence of this work is based on the stability of the paradigmatic plane. The syntagmatic coherence of the narrative is relatively weak. Donelaitis precisely composes the narrative on the minimal compositional scale (micro-semantics, the inner composition of narrative blocks), but this control grows weaker on higher compositional levels (the interrelations of narrative blocks and the macro-composition of Metai). The basic feature of the narrative of Metai is its cyclic dynamics. Metai is a repetition of the basic issues in different versions, a never-ending story about the things that Donelaitis considered the most important. [From the publication]