Nicholas G. Newton and Professor Walter Whipple, Germanic and Slavic Languages
Towards the end of Stanis³aw Wyspianski’s Wesele (The Wedding), “the Poet”, speaking to the newly married bride describes Poland as something that you can only find in your heart. “A to Polska w³asnie”. The turn of the 19th century in Poland, when this wedding took place, was a very turbulent time in Poland’s history. In 1795, only four years after Poland wrote Europe’s first constitution, the final division of Poland was made by Russia, Prussia and Austria leaving nothing of the former Polish republic. Cracow, part of the Austrian province of Galicia, created a unique place where the ideas of artists, the intentions of politicians and the actions of peasants provided Wyspianski with the atmosphere to write Wesele. Wesele not only makes a commentary on various historical events and local figures, it also gives the reader a sense of “Polishness”.
Having a knowledge of Poland’s and especially the city of Crakow’s history is essential to unlocking the many symbols and satire of Wesele. At the turn of the century while many of the Austro-Hungarian cities where fighting against “liberalism in retreat” Cracow’s intellectuals were revolting against a “conservative traditionalism”.1 The conservative voice of the newspaper Czas as well as the ideas of the conservative intellectual group the “Stañczyks” helped to maintain a prevalent conservativism in the late 19th century. During the partions of Poland various insurections attempted to free Poland of its foreign yolk. The two most important insurrections concerning Wesele are the battle at Rac³awice and the rebellion of 1846 which are in direct opposition to each other. The battle at Rac³awice occurred in 1794 and was the last major victory of Tadeusz Kooeciusko against the Russians. Rac³awice represents a victory of the joint efforts of peasants and gentry. The rebellion of 1846 however consisted of peasants slaughtering their gentry masters at the urgings of the Austrian administration. This time Poland fought against itself.
One the main problems in Polish history which Wesele directly addresses is Poland’s inability to unite and work together as one nation. As a side note, on the few occasion they were able to unite — defending Vienna against the Turks, the battle of Rac³awice and the Solidarnooeæ movement – Poles won major battles for all of Europe. An example of Poland’s inability to unite is the conflict between the peasants and the gentry. Wesele brings this issue right to the front with its depiction of a gentry-peasant wedding. Later is the play when the Bride complains that her shoes are too tight, the Groom tells her to simply take them off. She is immediately offended at the idea. Whereas peasants would often often go barefoot to work, there were certain occasions, especially one’s own wedding, when they were required. It is apparent that in the Groom’s excitement to soak in the peasant culture of his new wife, there is still a deep misunderstanding by the gentry of their peasant counterparts.
In a more general sense, Wesele presents the idea that even though gentry and peasants knew how to marry each other, dance together and to some degree live along side each other, but they did not know how to unite against their oppressors. The way in which the gentry speak as opposed the peasants’ uneducated Polish subtly keeps the distance between the peasants and the gentry ever-present. The morning after the wedding party finds the peasants ready for battle and the gentry holding back. During the night Wenyhora, another mythical character from Poland’s past visits the Host and gives him the signal to unite and get ready to rebel. The Host represents W³odzimierz Tetamajer, also a member of the gentry who had married a peasant girl. The Host had been given the symbol of uniting, a golden horn. Because he was in a druken stupor, he gave the horn to his peasant brother-in-law Jasiek, so that he could raise the alarm and gather people to the rebellion. Jasiek ends losing his horn, the symbol of unity, while looking for his fallen peasant hat, the symbol of Polish peasantry.
The appearance of Wernyhora also presents the theme of “Messianism” which is very apparent in Polish literature, art and history. Wernyhora is a somewhat fantastical Ukranian prophet involved the many revolts of Cossak peasants against their Polish lords. Upon his return, Poland will be “resurrected” as a new nation.2 The rebirth is also associated with the old Poland Commonwealth which included the Ukraine and represents a very romantic idea of Poland held by many Poles. Here again is the great paradox of Polish history. When united, Poland has acted as the savior or “messiah” of Europe. However because of its inability to unite, it has been stomped over by its neighbors and erased completely, for a time, from the map.
Wesele is considered the last of four Polish national dramas. Wyspianski wrote a drama based on a simple country wedding and at the same time draw on many symbols from Polish history and comment on the current situation in Poland. This is even more amazing considering Wyspianski wrote the entire drama in only a few months. Wyspianski shocked his viewers during the premier of the play in Cracow and forced them to take a very revealing look at themselves and their current situation. After the first performance, Wyspianski was given a wreath of flowers with the number 44 in the center. This is a number used by Adam Mickiewicz, a polish poet, and represents an unsolvable mystery in Mickiewicz’s poetry. Perhaps some of Wesele is unsolvable or unexplainable. Wyspianski might have intended this to give Wesele its very mysterious and romantic feeling. On the other hand it is very apparent that Wyspianski was making a comment on the nature and being of Poland and the problems that it had dealt with and was still dealing with at the turn of the 19th century.
References
- Kapolka, Gerard, trans. The Wedding Ardis Publishers: Michigan. 1990
- Wolff, Larry. “Dynastic Conservativism and Poetic Violence in Fin de Siecle Cracow: The Hapsburg Matrix of Polish Modernism” American Historical Review 106, 2 June 2001, 735-764