Problematic (Post)Sarmatism: On the Possibility of Adapting Sarmatian Heritage in a Demo-liberal Culture

T. Nakoneczny
{"title":"Problematic (Post)Sarmatism: On the Possibility of Adapting Sarmatian Heritage in a Demo-liberal Culture","authors":"T. Nakoneczny","doi":"10.35757/CIV.2020.27.04","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article shows (post)Sarmatism as an element of the Polish identity discourse in its community dimension, which mainly takes account of its civilisation and cultural aspect, defined by relations with (post)modernity. Although this discourse includes (post)Sarmatism in reflection on the key determinants of collective identity, such as community, Polishness and so on, it generally does so in a simplified manner, not free from prejudices and excessive bias. Liberal thought, which should have the greatest share in shaping the sphere of self-ideas of (post)modern society, shows a clear reluctance towards Sarmatian heritage, which is hardly surprising given its Enlightenment origin. However, one should understand the reasons for this reluctance, taking into account its stricter context, which is determined by the mechanism of programming Polish cultural projects in essentialist codes. Meanwhile, according to the author, the ‘post-mortem’ history of Sarmatism (nineteenth–twenty–first centuries) is part of the pan-European struggle of Tradition and modernity. When set on this plane, (post)Sarmatism can be considered in terms of lack (discontinuation of a specific tradition) and compensation (attempts to work through modernising deficits). The Sarmatian heritage, torn out of the vicious circle of stereotypes, myths and silences, should now be included in the debate on the foundations of Polish civic culture, because it belongs to the contingent (in the liberal sense) history of the Polish habitus, and it is also characterised by the syndrome of un-working (not being discussed in contexts important from the point of view of the struggle of Polish consciousness with what is broadly understood as modernity). It also needs to be made real by being located in the circle of geopolitical discourse. The perspective of the recontextualisation of Sarmatism, which neo-Sarmatism with its essentialist-nostalgic poetics has created in contemporary identity discourse and postcolonial thought with its binary schemas, seems insufficient.","PeriodicalId":350409,"journal":{"name":"Civitas. Studia z Filozofii Polityki","volume":"10 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Civitas. Studia z Filozofii Polityki","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.35757/CIV.2020.27.04","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The article shows (post)Sarmatism as an element of the Polish identity discourse in its community dimension, which mainly takes account of its civilisation and cultural aspect, defined by relations with (post)modernity. Although this discourse includes (post)Sarmatism in reflection on the key determinants of collective identity, such as community, Polishness and so on, it generally does so in a simplified manner, not free from prejudices and excessive bias. Liberal thought, which should have the greatest share in shaping the sphere of self-ideas of (post)modern society, shows a clear reluctance towards Sarmatian heritage, which is hardly surprising given its Enlightenment origin. However, one should understand the reasons for this reluctance, taking into account its stricter context, which is determined by the mechanism of programming Polish cultural projects in essentialist codes. Meanwhile, according to the author, the ‘post-mortem’ history of Sarmatism (nineteenth–twenty–first centuries) is part of the pan-European struggle of Tradition and modernity. When set on this plane, (post)Sarmatism can be considered in terms of lack (discontinuation of a specific tradition) and compensation (attempts to work through modernising deficits). The Sarmatian heritage, torn out of the vicious circle of stereotypes, myths and silences, should now be included in the debate on the foundations of Polish civic culture, because it belongs to the contingent (in the liberal sense) history of the Polish habitus, and it is also characterised by the syndrome of un-working (not being discussed in contexts important from the point of view of the struggle of Polish consciousness with what is broadly understood as modernity). It also needs to be made real by being located in the circle of geopolitical discourse. The perspective of the recontextualisation of Sarmatism, which neo-Sarmatism with its essentialist-nostalgic poetics has created in contemporary identity discourse and postcolonial thought with its binary schemas, seems insufficient.
问题(后)萨尔马提亚主义:论在民主自由主义文化中适应萨尔马提亚遗产的可能性
本文将(后)萨尔马主义作为波兰身份话语的一个元素,在其社区维度中进行展示,主要考虑到其文明和文化方面,由与(后)现代性的关系所定义。虽然这种论述包括(后)萨尔马主义,反映了集体认同的关键决定因素,如社区、波兰性等,但它通常以一种简化的方式进行,并没有摆脱偏见和过度偏见。自由主义思想本应在塑造(后)现代社会的自我观念领域中占有最大的份额,但它对萨尔马提亚遗产表现出明显的不情愿,考虑到它的启蒙起源,这并不奇怪。然而,人们应该理解这种不情愿的原因,考虑到其更严格的背景,这是由波兰文化项目在本质主义代码中的编程机制决定的。同时,根据作者的观点,萨尔马提亚主义的“后现代”历史(19 - 21世纪)是传统与现代的泛欧洲斗争的一部分。在这个层面上,(后)萨尔马主义可以被认为是缺乏(特定传统的中断)和补偿(试图通过现代化赤字来解决问题)。从刻板印象、神话和沉默的恶性循环中被撕裂出来的萨尔马提亚遗产,现在应该被纳入关于波兰公民文化基础的辩论,因为它属于波兰习惯的偶然(在自由主义意义上)历史,而且它也以不工作综合症为特征(从波兰意识与被广泛理解为现代性的斗争的角度来看,没有在重要的背景下被讨论)。它还需要被置于地缘政治话语的圈子中,从而成为现实。新萨尔马主义以其本质主义-怀旧诗学在当代身份话语和二元图式的后殖民思想中所创造的萨尔马主义的再语境化视角似乎是不够的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信