"ROMANIAN POSTMODERN POETRY" by Prof. Nadia Cela Pop , Romania

ROMANIAN POSTMODERN POETRY

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Nadia Cela Pop , Romania

E mban kumtin Aleksandra Shabani, Vicepresidente e I.W.P.W.A “PEGASI” ALBANIA, W.P.S, UP.L.I

In the cultural section of every journal , there we can find a sharp rise of the use of the use of “postmodernism”. Let’s remember that the very who used this term, in the United States, were the poets Randali Jarrell, John Berryman and Charles Olson, in their references about the anti -modernistic poetry which was written after the Second World War. At the same time, the English historian Arnold Toynbee announced the emergence of a new age (inside intellectual life of the Western World) the postmodern “age” whose attraction has limited, at least in the beginning, to the poets, artists and literary critics, contouring their adhesion to the post-war period, an exultant time, that came over the wildest destruction left behind by the World War 2.

During the 60’s the fate of postmodernism seemed to be connected to the “junk culture” (counter- culture) but, during the “meltdown period’ of the 70’s and 80’s, it was more plausible for the literary and art critics. This way, it vas able to reach the international level after it was used almost exclusively in the States. Its strange aura has produced many passionate charges against its moral and artistic parts. For example, Gerald Graff denounces literary postmodernism as one of the main mythologies of counter- culture, which is fated to unleash an anti - intelectual celebration of vital rough energy and an ethos of the reckless snobbishness. Many artists think the modern world is passing through a strong and severe identity crisis and even the validity of postmodernism is not a sure one, after all. In his work ‘Five Faces of postmodernism is not a sure one, after all. In his work “Five Paces of Modernity”, the Romanian literary critic Matei Calinescu associated postmodernism vith avantgarde, decadence and kitsch.

We cam speak now about a narrative postmodern experimental prose. But in postmodern poetry, there’s a game played with impossible, impotence of the words, failure. This postmodern poetry claims: you must write, because writing is an impossible thing. So, instead of a poetical language, the postmodern poets bring us obscurity, nonsense, platitude, a digression without any lyrical style that can the esthetic emotions.

A row of words remains to pretend convulsions, reflections, the making of nothing. Perhaps the existence of postmodernism is an error, and suicide could be a possible remedy for this.

The poverty and weakness of this theoretical thinking is transposed into lexical outbreaks... and, in the end; all these make the reader to amaze and wonder. The nature of postmodern poetry itself is an hypothetical one, therefore the selection of elements and their remake lead to a unit that could be a brother of avant- garde and kitsch, it could look partly like the, modernity wherein some contemporary poets can identify themselves. The postmodern disorder increases the value of a part at the expense of unit, in an inconsistent way. Those poets who find themselves in the credits of this so – called literary trend, are exactly what they are writing about, or, as George Buffon said: Le style est l’ homme meme”.

Reading its “products”we shall find only a delirious” show of the senses, a mess in notions which has a “splendid sterility”.

The postmodern poets undertake some risks, due to the promotion of an “anti- poetry” phenomenon of strained speech, wherein they “direct” a world of “the boredom itself; not only a restless or rebel one, but cruel and with a poor stage property. This so-called class finds no roots in form or contents.

The significance, symbolic projections, lyric fantasy, all these are delayed or purely absent, but the obsessions, hallucinations and the barren words remain: “Postmodernism” means, in my opinion a cynic and aggressive ”stream” or phenomenon. It erases, parodies, denies and turns to dust all the recognized literary values, replacing them with some pieces of rough reality, even a cheap and shocking ones. I don’t think it has something to do with poetry, because poetry means to impress, not to make sick. At least in Romania, due to the postmodern poets, the readers do not want to buy read any contemporary poetry anymore.

The literary critic and historian Ugen Simion said:” They (the postmodern poets) have a juvenile defiant spirit, they are the shy, violent and pent- up ones”.

Of course, we cant’ t generalize this, Because there are a few other poets in Romania and I am one of these. We have a different path in poetry, a point of interference which is seated somewhere between the spirit of expressionism and classicism. We all have in common the interest for ancient mythology and legends, the promotion of traditions, and we deny the disorder of this century of technical and electronic know- how. Our final goal is to turn the man in the street back to his own image, to his nature... the message is (according with “A History of Literature” by Ion Rotaru): “let the arts, the poetry to do their task by speaking, to the souls. Do not throw the poetry in a fight against the machine. It is too noble for that... just help poetry to use its personal weapons...”

The voices of the contemporary poets can be new, real, original, it can keep the rhythm of the verse, the natural and musical one, even the impetuous one, but only if it stays on the stave of what the real and concrete poetry is. Experiences, dreams, fantasy, discovery of the effects that the “mantle of imagery” can have on the readers from different social ranks, all these add to the flavour and I could say, they make the poetry lasts forever.

Many marks of the history of modernity are subordinate of the social and human environment. It is said, we are living, in a miscellaneous world, wherein everything is generally allowed.

Without “to usurp” the estethics of the previous historic ages. With much respect for all the classics and their literary masterpieces, we can have our own place in the history of literature, outside of “the hysteria of modern development; on a proud pedestal of contemporary culture.

We have the power to do that, we need only the linguistic means that are meant to promote the beauty and convolution of the world and like. We must give the readers “the key” of understanding and identification of these.

‘They all bear a message and a key,

Without them we remain just

The raiders of the hidden wonders”.