RANOBAROKNA 'PRODEČTVA' PATRA BELOSTENCA

Autor: Franjo Pajur
Jazyk: chorvatština
Rok vydání: 2012
Předmět:
Zdroj: Kaj : časopis za književnost, umjetnost, kulturu
Volume 45 (220)
Issue 1-2 (314-315)
ISSN: 1848-7920
0453-1116
Popis: Osim obimnog i posthumno izdanog rječnika Gazophylacium, pavlin Ivan Belostenec autor je i deset propovijedi vezanih uz blagdan Tijelovo i nastalih vjerojatno za tijelovski tjedan 1669. godine, a ne između 1662. i 1671. godine. Prvotna, usmena verzija propovijedi razlikovala se zacijelo od one tiskane, jer se ova druga odlikuje obilnošću čakavskih riječi i taj hibridni jezik (kajkavsko-čakavski s primjesama štokavskog) upućuje da su prodečtva objavljena s ciljem da budu razumljiva svima koji „je budu štali ale čuli“, te zacijelo nisu bila namijenjena samo „für eine rein kajkavisch Hörschaft“. Ovim se radom nastoji utvrditi baroknost Belostenčevih prodečtava odnosno jesu li ona „die typischen Früchte des kirchlichen Hochbarocks“ ili su „kao književno djelo jedva interesantne“? Prije svega se razmatra jesu li sermones patra Belostenca strukturirane tipičnom retoričkom shemom barokne propovijedi, koja se još uvijek oslanja na sustav antičke retorike odnosno karakterizira li ih tipični barokni ornatus. Iz raščlambe se nádaje da je Belostenec očevidno imao na umu retorička teorijska načela i njima se na stanovit način rukovodio u strukturiranju partes orationis svojih prodečtava uz iznimku specifičnog exordiuma koji svojom jasnom odijeljenošću od ostatka propovijedi i grafičkom omeđenošću uvodnom i ponovljenom perikopom, te kratkim nacrtom govora (narratio) odstupa od uobičajene sheme. Isto tako, kao posebnost, pater si Ivan dopušta stanovitu licentiu poeticu u prijevodima latinskih biblijskih citata, koji su više njegove parafraze negoli doslovni prijevodi, kao i u stilizaciji pojedinih biblijskih primjera. Glede ornatusa pak, a temeljem u literaturi često navođenog bogatstva kontaktnih sinonima, ne mogu se Belostenčeve propovijedi okarakterizirati kao djelo tzv. zrelog ili visokog baroka: jedna jedina cjelovita pelda, više propovijedi bez ijednog baroknim procedéom strukturiranog exempluma, izočnost razgranatih gomilanja (cumulatio ili amplificatio), bogate alegoričnosti sa simboličnošću odnosno horizontalne ili vertikalne antitetičnosti, najrječitije govore u prilog ovoj tvrdnji. Ovo, dakako, ne znači da je „priroda Belostencu uskratila izrazite oratorske sposobnosti“, nego prije retoričku suzdržanost jednog visokog pavlinskog dužnosnika, njegovu bojazan da barokno obilje dodataka i ukrasa ne preraste pravu propovijed. Iz svega se rečenog nàdaje da su Belostenčeve tijelovske propovijedi ranobarokne, to jest s naznakama bogata baroknog ornatusa, koji se ipak razlikuje od „zlatnog doba“ kajkavskog baroka (Habdelićevih traktata ili Zagrepčevih propovijedi), a što je zacijelo pokazala i usporedba Belostenčeva exordiuma s odgovarajućim Zagrepčevim.
Besides the extensive and posthumous dictionary Gazophylacium, the Pauline Ivan Belostenec is also the author of ten sermons linked with The Body Day holiday, probably created in the week of the holiday in 1669, and not between 1662 and 1671. The initial oral version of the sermon probably differed from the printed one, because the latter is characteristic for the numerous Čakavian words and the hybrid language used (Kajkavian-Čakavian with traces of Štokavian) which show that the prodečtva was published in order to be understood by all. This paper is the effort to determine the baroque characteristics of Belostenec's prodečtvas. Firstly, it is considered whether the sermons of pater Belostenec are structured in the typical rhetoric pattern of a baroque sermon that is still relying on the system of antique rhetoric, i.e. are they characteristic for the typical baroque ornatus. On basis of division it may be assumed that Belostenec evidently had rhetoric theoretical principles in mind and in a certain way he was directed by them in structuring his prodečtva partes orationis, with the exception of a specific exordium that differs from the usual pattern being clearly divided from the rest of the sermon with grafically bound introductory and repeated pericope, and with a short summary of the narratio it differs in respect to the usual pattern. In the same manner, as a particularity, pater Ivan allows himself a certain licentia poetica in the translations of biblical quotes, that are rather more like his own paraphrases than literal translations, as is also the case in respect to the stylization of certain biblical examples. In respect to ornatus, on the other hand, and based on the extention of contact synonims often mentioned in literature, Belostenec's sermons cannot be characterized as work belonging to the mature or high level baroque: by having just one single pelda, several sermons without a single exemplum of baroque structured procédé, the absence of diversified cumulation (cumulatio or amplification), rich allegorical character with symbol quality, i.e. horizontal or vertical anti-ethical value are all characteristics that add to the said assertion. This, of course, does not mean that nature had deprived Belostenec of "pronounced oratorical talents" but rather points to the highly positioned Pavline official, who was restrained in rhetoric and his fear that the baroque richness of attributes and ornaments should outgrow a real sermon. On basis of the elaborated it may be presumed that Belostenec's Body Day sermons belong to early baroque, i.e. with traces of the rich baroque ornatus. However, it is still different in respect to the "golden era" of the Kajkavian baroque (Habdelić's tractates or Zagrebac's sermons), and this was certainly shown by the comparison of Belostenec's exordium with the corresponding Zagrebac's one.
Databáze: OpenAIRE
Externí odkaz: