No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Exploring the generic character of the modern Greek short story(διήγημα): the case of Palamas and Xenopoulos (c.1880–1930)*
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 22 January 2016
Extract
This article examines how two prominent Greek critics of the period 1880–1930 — Palamas and Xenopoulos — perceived the generic character and the narrative demands of the modern Greek short story (διήγημα). It explores the degree that two cardinal aspects in the theory of the genre — the relation of the short story with the novel and the division into two separate short-story traditions — influenced both critics in their definition of the διήγημα and in their evaluation of the work of specific short story writers. The contrast and comparison of Palamas’ and Xenopoulos’ views pinpoints the standards, contradictions and restrictions that formed the critical perspectives on the διήγημα and thus highlights its neglected critical history during the period 1880–1930, which coincided with its prevalence in mainstream Greek prose fiction.
- Type
- Articles
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Centre for Byzantine, Ottoman and Modern Greek Studies, University of Birmingham 2009
Footnotes
*
An earlier draft of this article was presented in the Byzantine and Modern Greek Seminar organized by the Centre for Hellenic Studies at King’s College London.
References
1 Valetas, Y. (To νεοελληνικό διήγημα: η θεωρία кш η ιστορία του, 2nd edn [Athens 1983]Google Scholar) focuses mainly on the origins of the διήγημα and its history during the Romantic period. Milionis, C. (7Ό διήγημα [Athens 2002]Google Scholar) is rather a brief approach to the international and Greek history of the genre. Perspicacious comments on the generic character of the διήγημα are scattered in Moullas’, P. essays (‘To διήγημα, αυτοβιογραφία του Παπαδιαμάντη’, in A. Παπαδιαμάντης αυτοβιογραφούμενος (Athens 1974) xv–lxv Google Scholar; ‘To νεοελληνικό δνήγημα και о Г. M. Βιζυηνός’, in Г. M. Βιζοηνός, Νεοελληνικά διηγήματα (Athens 1980) xxiii–lii; Έισαγωγή’, in H παλαιότερη πεζογραφίοί μας, από τις αρχες της ως τον πρώτο παγκόσμιο πόλεμο, I (Athens 1998) 17–223). The conference To διήγημν. στην ελληνική кал τις ξενες λσγοτεχνίες: θεωρία — γραφή — πρόσληψη organized by the Greek Comparative Literature Association (December 2005) attempted to explore this neglected critical area.
2 For the state of the short story during the preceding period of Greek Romanticism, see Karaiskou, M., The Formation of the Modern Greek Short Story (Αιήγημα): Critical Perspectives and Narrative Practice (1880-1920), unpublished PhD thesis (King’s College London 2002) 24–32 Google Scholar; Denisi, S., ‘Θέματα ορισμού του νεοελληνικού διηγήματος της περιόδου του ρομαντισμού, με αφορμή ένα ερευνητικό πρόγραμμα’, in O ρομαντισμός στην Ελλάδα. (Athens 2001) 60-5Google Scholar; Loudi, A., To νεοελληνικό διήγημα στην «Ευτερπη» και την «Πανδώρα». Συμβολή στη μελέτη της ιστορίας, της ορολογίας και της θεματικής του είδους κατά την περίοδο 1830-1880, unpublished PhD thesis (Thessaloniki 2005)Google Scholar.
3 Moullas, P., Έισαγωγή’, in H μεσoπoL•μıκή πεζογραφία, οιπό τον πρώτο ως τον δεύτερο παγκόσμιο πόλεμο (1914-1939), I (Athens 1993) 109-24Google Scholar.
4 Agras, T., ‘О Παλαμάς κριτικός’, in Stergiopoulos, K. (ed.), Κριτικά, I (Athens 1980) 184 Google Scholar; Chourmouzios, E., О Παλαμάς кш η εποχή του, I (Athens 1944) 248 Google Scholar; Sachinis, A., О Παλαμάς кш η κριτική (Athens 1994) 197–201 Google Scholar and ‘Δυο κριτικοί της γενιάς του 1880’, Επιστημονική Επετηρίς της Φιλοσοφικής Σχολής του Πανεπιστημίου Θεσσαλονίκης 14 (1975) 43-1; Apostolidou, V., О Κωστής Παλαμάς ιστορικός της νεοελληνικής λογοτεχνίας (Athens 1992) 15–16 Google Scholar; Dimaras, K. T., ‘О τεχνικός της κριτικής’, Νεα Εστία 587 (1951) 147-9Google Scholar.
5 Cf. Apostolidou, О Κωστής Παλαμάς, 118.
6 Apostolidou, О Κωστής Παλαμάς, 226. Palamas’ stories are gathered in Άπα.ντα, IV (Athens [n. d.]) 11–172. Henceforth in my references to Palamas’ Άπαντα, I will use the volume and page numbers and the date of initial publication of each text (when indicated).
7 M. Karaiskou, Άναζητώντας τον ειδολογικό χαρακτήρα του διηγήματος: η σύγκριση με το μυθιστόρημα σε κριτικά κείμενα δημοτικιστών (1903–1928)’, in To διήγημα στην ελληνική кои τις ξενες λογοτεχνίες: θεωρία — γραφή — πρόσληψη, Conference Proceedings (forthcoming).
8 Gullason, T. A., ‘The short story: an underrated art’, in May, C. E. (ed.), Short Story Theories (Athens, OH 1976) 13–31 Google Scholar; Pratt, M. L., ‘The short story: the long and the short of it’, in May, C. E. (ed.), The New Short Story Theories (Athens, OH 1994) 91–113 Google Scholar.
9 The confusion arising from the Εστία competitions of the 1880s is characteristic (see Karaiskou, The Formation, 50–8).
10 Both early and recent critics have used this distinction as a starting point in their discussions (see E. Bowen, ‘The Faber Book of Modern Short Stories’, in May, Short Story Theories, 152; Bates, H. E., The Modern Short Story: a Critical Survey (London/Edinburgh/Paris 1945) 73 Google Scholar; Gullason, ‘The short story’, 21–2; Evans, W., ‘Nineteenth century American theory of the short story, the dual tradition’, Orbis Litterarum 34 (1979) 314-30CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Friedman, N., ‘Recent short story theories: problems in definition’, in Lohafer, S. and Clarey, J. E. (eds), Short Story Theory at a Crossroads (Baton Rouge, LA/London 1989) 20 Google Scholar; S. C. Ferguson, ‘Defining the short story: impressionism and form’, in May, The New Short Story Theories, 219–20.
11 Characteristically, Chekhov was one of the most translated authors in the periodical Παναθήναια (1900–15) (see Karaiskou, The Formation, 72).
12 Apostolidou, O Κωστής Παλαμάς, 226.
13 Chourmouzios, O Παλα,μάς, 251–3; Agras, ‘O Παλαμάς’, 178; Sachinis, O Ποίλαμάς, 194–6.
14 Bates, The Modern Short Story, 15–6; M. Rohrberger, ‘The short story: a proposed definition’, in May, Short Story Theories, 80–1; A. M. Wright, ‘On defining the short story: the genre question’, in Lohafer and Clarey, Short Story Theory at a Crossroads, 47.
15 Anavm, II, 175 (1897).
16 Άπαντα, XVI, 187–8 (1900).
17 Άπαντα, II, 189 (1894).
18 Cf.Chryssanthopoulos, M., ‘Anticipating modernism: constructing a genre, a past and a place’, in Tziovas, D. (ed.), Greek Modernism and beyond (Lanham, MD 1997) 62 Google Scholar; Denisi, ‘Θέματα ορισμού’, 60; Tziovas, D., ‘Έισαγωγή’, in Άλεξανδρος Ρίζος Ραγκοφής, Αιηγήματοι, I (Athens 1999) 14 Google Scholar.
19 Apostolidou, О Κωστής Παλαμάς, 229, n. 67.
20 Karaiskou, ‘Άναζητώντας’.
21 According to Palamas, the ‘πραγματολογικόν διήγημα’ mainly focuses on external everyday reality, while the ‘ποιητικό διήγημα’ lies on the threshold between poetry and prose (‘παραστρατισμένα στον πεζό λόγο πονήματα’, Απαντα, IV, 44). Similarly in his article on Episkopopoulos’ Γα διηγήματα τοο δζιλινού, he speaks of the ‘κοινωνικό’ and the ‘ποιητικό διήγημα’ (παντα, VI, 409–10 [1899]).
22 Άπχντα, IV, 44.
23 Άπαντ, IV, 45.
24 Pratt, ‘The short story’, 96, 99–101.
25 Matthews, B., The Philosophy of the Short-Story (New York 1901) 17 Google Scholar; Ejxenbaum, B. M., O. Henry and the Theory of the Short Story, trans. Titunic, I. R. (Ann Arbor, MI 1968) 4 Google Scholar.
26 О Νουμίς 211 (3 September 1906) 9.
27 Άπχντοί, XVI, 447–51.
28 О Νουμάς 111 (3 September 1906), 9.
29 Poe, E. A., ‘Nathaniel Hawthorne’, in The Works of Edgar Allan Poe, IV, ed. Ingram, J. H. (London 1901) 214-21Google Scholar.
30 Apostolidou, О Κωστής Παλαμόίς, 278.
31 О Νουμάς 211 (3 September 1906), 9.
32 Απαντα, XVI, 450.
33 This metaphor has been frequently used in short-story criticism (see Shaw, V., The Short Story: a Critical Introduction (London/New York 1983) 46)Google Scholar.
34 See his remark on Papantoniou’s stories: ‘μας ενθυμίζουν … ότι το ευ δεν ευρίσκεται απαροατήτως εις το πολύ’ (Ляаута, XVI, 450).
35 Λπαντα, XVI, 447, 450.
36 Sachinis, O Πθίλαμάς, 107–9.
37 This idea has also marked the international history of the short story (see S. Ferguson ‘The rise of the short story in the hierarchy of genres’, in Lohafer and Clarey, Short Story Theory at a Crossroads, 178).
38 Shaw, The Short Story, 23; Gullason, ‘The short story’, 20.
39 Άπαντοί, XVI, 426–32. The other members of the committee were Politis and Drosinis, who were also involved in the Εστία competitions of the 1880s.
40 See the announcement of the first Εστια competition in Δελτίον της Εστίας (15 May 1883) 1.
41 E. Roidis’ prologue to I. Metaxas Vosporitis’ Σκψαί της ερήμου is a characteristic case (Άπαντα, V (1894–1904), ed. A. Angelou (Athens 1978) 287-9).
42 Änavm, XVI, 431. For the symmetry of design, see Reid, I., The Short Story (London 1991) 59 Google Scholar; Shaw, The Short Story, 53–5.
43 Λπαντα, XVI, 427, 428, 429.
44 Απαντα, XVI, 432.
45 Apostolidou, О Κωστής Παλαμάς, 135–6; Tziovas, D., The Nationism of the Demoticists and its Impact on their Literary Theory (1888-1930) (Amsterdam 1986) 228-45Google Scholar.
46 Wain, J., ‘Remarks on the short story’, journal of the Short Story in English 2-3 (1984) 52-3, 56Google Scholar.
47 It is noteworthy that he had great respect for Maupassant, who ‘ανεκαίνισε και κατέστησεν ίδιον εαυτού το διήγημα’ (Άπαντα, XV, 265 [1893]).
48 Απαντα, II, 157. Cf. his reference to the διηγήματα as ‘γοργάς και ζωηράς … διηγήσεις’ in his 1893 text on Maupassant (Άπαντα, XV, 265).
49 Απαντοί, II, 159.
50 The term is also used in the same sense in the Smyrna competition report (Άποίντα, XVI, 427).
51 Karaiskou, The Formation, 45, 66, n. 129. For the use of the term in the Romantic period, see Denisi, ‘Θέματα ορισμού’, 61.
52 Άπαντα, II, 158.
53 Published in £сгп’а 1891, II, 261–2, 276–7, 310–1, 325–6. Eftaliotis’ sonnets were submitted to the 1891 Philadelpheios competition and were negatively received mainly due to their demotic language. However, Palamas, as well as Polylas, immediately reacted against this criticism by praising the collection (see Valetas, Y., ‘Έισαγωγή’ in Εφταλιώτης, Άπαντα, I (Athens 1952), xii)Google Scholar.
54 Cf. Palamas’ comment on Eftaliotis’ Νησιώτικες ιστορίες, which ‘υποβάλλουν μία ποιητική συγκίνηση’ (/Ιπαντα, XVI, 187 [1900]).
55 Άπαντα, II, 158.
56 Απαντα, II, 159. The same view is also traced in his later article on Vizyinos (Palamas, Лπαvτα, VIII, 492).
57 See Απαντα, II, 168, Ляаута, XII, 310 and Απαντοί, II, 181, where he explains that ‘ως ποίησιν δε εννοούμεν ενταύθα πάσαν δημιουργικήν εργασίαν εις πεζόν ή εις έμμετρον λόγον’.
58 Άπαντα, II, 160.
59 C. E. May, ‘Metaphoric motivation in short fiction’, in Lohafer and Clarey, Short Story Theory at a Crossroads, 65 and ‘The nature of knowledge in short fiction’, in The New Short Story Theories, 133.
60 παντα, II, 188 (1894). For the speculation of criticism on Mitsakis’ texts, see Gotsi, G., ‘Μιχαήλ Μητσάκης’, in H παλαιότερη πεζογραφία μιχς, από τις αρχες της ως τον πρώτο παγκόσμιο πόλεμο, VI (1880-1900) (Athens 1997) 271-3Google Scholar.
61 Λπαντα, II, 189.
62 Ãnavm, II, 190.
63 Shaw, The Short Story, 5–6.
64 G. Gotsi, ‘Μιχαήλ Μητσάκης’, 267–8 and H ζωή εν τη πρωτευούση. Θέματα α,στικής πεζογραφίιχς από το τέλος του 19”‘ αιώνα (Athens 2004) 286–9.
65 On the points of convergence between the short story and the essay, see D. Hesse, ‘A boundary zone: first-person short stories and narrative essays’, in Lohafer and Clarey, Short Story Theory at a Crossroads, 85–105.
66 Gotsi, ‘Μιχαήλ Μητσάκης’, 278–9.
67 Λπαντα, X, 310–23 (1898, 1911).
68 Änoívm, X, 315, 321–2.
69 Άπαντα, X, 315–6. Cf. his comment a few lines earlier: ‘H τέχνη του είναι να μη δείχνει καμμιά τέχνη’ (p. 315).
70 Απαντα, X, 322.
71 Xenopoulos, G., Άπαννχ, XI (Athens 1971), 285-8Google Scholar. Henceforth in my references to Xenopoulos’ Άπαντα, I will use the volume and page number and the date of initial publication (when indicated).
72 ‘Λπαντα, X, 311.
73 Άπαντα, XI, 304–18. In this text, Xenopoulos attempts a review of the Greek novel from ancient times up to his era. However, as he chooses to include only dead novelists, the main body of the speech focuses on authors of the period 1850–1920.
74 ‘Λπαντα, XI, 305–6.
75 Cf. N. G. Politis’ laconic definition of the διήγημα as an ‘αυτοτελές καλλιτεχνημα εντός στενών διαγεγραμμενων ορίων’ in the report of the first Εστία competition (‘Παράρτημα της Εστίας’, Εστι’α 1883, II, 1).
76 Friedman, ‘Recent’, 29; Wright, ‘On defining’, 46–53; A. H. Pasco, ‘On defining short stories’, in May, The New Short Story Theories, 114–30.
77 Απαντοί, X, 312.
78 His uncertainty about the generic classification of specific works in the rest of the speech is characteristic (e.g., Kondylakis’ О Πατούχς is ‘μάλλον μυθιστόρημα παρά διήγημα’, Λπαντα, XI, 314).
79 ϊπαντα, X, 312.
80 The text has been recently discovered by Papakostas, Y. (see ‘Δεσμίς διηγημάτων. Ένα τελικώς ανευρεθέν έργο της Αλεξάνδρας Παπαδοπούλου’, in H ερευνα кш ог ερμηνευτικές της εκδοχες: μελέτες γΐΛ συγγραφείς кои κείμενα (Athens 2002) 150-67)Google Scholar.
81 Papakostas, ‘Δεσμίς διηγημάτων’, 161–2.
82 Papakostas, ‘Δεσμίς διηγημάτων’, 162.
83 Papakostas, ‘Δεσμίς διηγημάτων’, 161.
84 Papakostas, ‘Δεσμίς διηγημάτων’, 162.
85 Farinou-Malamatari, G., ‘О θεωρητικός και κριτικός Ξενόπουλος’, in Γρηγόριος Ξενόπουλος: επιλογή κριτικών κειμενων (Athens 2002) 49, 78Google Scholar.
86 Farinou-Malamatari, ‘О θεωρητικός και κριτικός Ηενόπουλος’, 136–55.
87 Episkopopoulos is also singled out by Palamas as the representative of the ‘ποιητικό διήγημα’ {Άπαντα, VI, 409–10).
88 Γρηγόριος Ξενόπουλος: επιλογή, 137. For the use of the term lyric in relation to the modern type of short story, see Evans, ‘Nineteenth century’, 315; E. Baldeshwiler, ‘The lyric short story: the sketch of a history’, in May, The New Short Story Theories, 231–41.
89 Γρηγόριος Ξενόπουλος: επιλογή, 137–8. Cf. the reference to the epic in ‘To μυθιστόρημα’ (quotation on p. 12).
90 Γρηγόριος Ξενόποολος: επιλο-γή, 139–40, 144–6.
91 ΆπαντΆ, XI, 152 (1916); ‘О Μητσάκης’, in Γρηγόριος Ξενόπουλος: επιλογή, 221–3 (1922).
92 Απαντα, XI, 128–39. Xenopoulos’ critical stance towards Papadiamantis has been analytically examined in Farinou-Malamatari, G., ‘O Ξενόπουλος κριτικός του Παπαδιαμάντη’, in Γρηγόριος Ξενόποολος, Πενήντα. Xpóvitx. ano το οάνατοενός αθανάτου (1951-2001) (Athens 2003) 247-79Google Scholar.
93 Άπαντα, XI, 129, 138.
94 Cf. Farinou-Malamatari, ‘О Ξενόπουλος κριτικός’, 267–70.
95 παντα, XI, 133.
96 Λπαντα, XI, 156–79.
97 Cf. Farinou-Malamatari, ‘О Ξενόπουλος κριτικός’, 260, n. 28.
98 For the ‘πρόβλημα Βουτυρά’, see Baskozos, Y., ‘H περίπτωση Δ. Βουτυρά: η κρίση της κριτικής’, Αιαβάζω 298 (1992) 46 Google Scholar.
99 Άπαντα., XI, 156.
100 Απχντα, XI, 165.
101 The most characteristic and influential case is Matthews, The Philosophy, 30.
102 Άπαντα, XI, 168.
103 Άπαντα, XI, 170, 172.
104 Shaw, The Short Story, 58–77.
105 παντα, XI, 166–7.
106 See Farinou-Malamatari, ‘О θεωρητικός’, 44–9.
107 Άπαντα, XI, 167–8.
108 Σκίτσο and its derivatives are mentioned three times in the first three pages (Άπαντα, XI, 156, 158).
109 Άπαπα, XI, 166.
110 Άπό τον διαγωνισμόν της “Νέας Εστίας”, εντυπώσεις του εισηγητου’, Néa Εστία 37 (1928) 604–6, 38 (1928) 665–7, 39 (1928) 707–8. For the origins of the related terms διήγημα and αφήγησις and their use in modern Greek criticism, see Tziovas, D., Μετά την αισθητική. Θεωρητικες δοκιμες кои ερμηνευτικες αναγνώσεις της νεοελληνικής λογοτεχνίιχς (Athens 1987), 93-5Google Scholar.
111 Paraschos, K., ‘П. Παπαχριστοπούλου: Θρακικες ηθογραφίες. Μερος Δ’, Νεα Εστία. 27 (1928) 140 Google Scholar, ‘Μια ματιά στη λογοτεχνική μας κίνηση του 1927’, Né a Εστία 25 (1928) 6.
112 Αφήγημοί is also used for stories that diverge from the standard poetics of the διήγημα (see Petridis, M. G., ‘Άλεξανδρος Παπαδιαμάντης’, Νεα Εστία 12 (1927) 732 Google Scholar; Charis, P., ‘Θέμου Ποταμιάνου: “Τόπον εις τους τρελλούς και άλλα διηγήματα’”, Né a Εστία 47 (1928) 1096)Google Scholar.
113 ‘Άπό τον διαγωνισμόν’, 665–6.
114 ‘Άπό τον διαγωνισμόν’, 666. The term εικών went back to the Romantic period and had been used for narratives less strictly organized than a proper διήγημα, which often combine fictional with factual elements (see Dimitrakopoulos, F., ‘«Εικόνες» κοη πρωτότυπα διηγήματα: «Τα Φώτα» του Αλεξ. Μωραϊτίδη’, Παπαδιαμαντικά Τετράδια 3 (1995) 27–40)Google Scholar.
115 Ejxenbaum, O. Henry, 81–2.
116 May, C. E., The Short Story: the Reality of Artifice (New York 1995) 16 Google Scholar. Poe distinguished the incident-orientated tale from a plotless type of short fiction for which he used the term ‘essay’. Matthews made a distinction between the short story, which displays action, and the sketch, which might be ‘a still life’ (see Evans, ‘Nineteenth century’, 317–23).
117 Evans, ‘Nineteenth century’, 323–5.