HUNGARIAN STUDIES 11. No. 1. Nemzetközi Magyar ... - EPA

HELP ME, PASTORAL MUSE:THE VIRGELIAN INTERTEXTIN MIKLÓS RADNÓTTS ECLOGUESLÁSZLÓ K. GÉFINLiberal Arts College, Concordia University, Montreal,CanadaIt has become a commonplace in literary history that by the mid-1930s eventhe most committed avant-garde poets belonging to the so-called "thirdgeneration" of writers grouped around the periodical Nyugat turned increasinglyto closed form. Already in 1925 Mihály Babits had called for a "newclassicism,** by which he meant much more than just a return to traditionalversification. Rather, he advocated a return to the "natural totality of eternalart" ["visszatéréssel az örök Művészet ... természetes teljességéhez" Babits II,139]. In addition, there was the Hungarian literary past stretching back at leastto romanticism according to which the poet is supposed to take on the role ofnational spokesman and unacknowledged legislator. Thus the poets abandonedexperimentation as somehow foreign and "un-Hungarian"; one afterthe other like prodigal, errant sons they dutifully returned to the alma materthat refused to tolerate the puerile foolishness and lack of seriousness of anyforeign "ism*' because it was incompatible with the traditional role of the poet.Radnóti's own "turn*' in renouncing earlier expressionist and surrealistexperimentation in favour of more traditional writing conforms to the generaltrend, although the decision to reterritorialize is not without a certain ambivalence.As he wrote in his journals in 1942, "'költőiségem' (mit mondjakhelyette) nagy veszélye az izmusokra való hajlam" [a grave threat to my poeticidentity is the penchant for various isms], and when recalling his having beenunder the spell of surrealism for a time, he tries to pass it off as if it were littlemore than an adventure of youth and a near-fatal disease (267). In spite ofhaving received a solid grounding in the Hungarian classics as a major inHungarian literature, he writes that he knew the poetry of Jean Cocteau"thoroughly" before he knew that of János Arany, adding revealingly that "azAranyhoz fordulás is a lélek védekezése volt" (ibid.) [my turn to Arany wasalso the self-defense of the soul]. At the same time he regrets the taming of hisvisionary powers, and notes with a tinge of ruefulness that "az azzal járt nyelvibátorságot kellene visszaszereznem újra" [I should recover the linguisticaudacity that went with that]. Despite such scattered traces of nostalgia for anHungarian Studies 11 j I (1996)0236-6568/96/$ 5.00 © 96 Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest