Poet Svetislav N. Brković (1940-2025) handed away on Tuesday, Could sixth in Belgrade.
Svetislav Brković (poetry books – Home, Front room, Two days with out a day, Invention, Photos of images, One other new starting) was a novel creator, devoted to the deepest layers of language, for him poetry is at all times and above all an exploration of language itself and the essential human energy – the facility of expression. Katdad finds crucial meanings in these forgotten backwaters of language, which is why poetry can be a sort of archaeology of on a regular basis life.
For this writer, the poetic act is at all times a sort of reviving the world, but additionally a delicate play of that means and sound, so in his poetic work he has at all times been devoted to the basic questions of poetry and philosophy. Undoubtedly – a novel phenomenon on the present literary scene.
On the event of the poet’s loss of life, we’re publishing a number of fragments from a textual content by the well-known Serbian thinker Nenad Daković, which was written for a set devoted to the literary work of S. Brković. The textual content was additionally revealed in ART in 2018.
Do poets lie?
That’s recognized. Platonovo query from the doc often called Nation which has lasted for hundreds of years as a result of it’s true and I’ve the impression – much more true in these “non-modern” occasions by which “fashions”, “copies” and “simulacrums” have lengthy been in circulation with out us being absolutely conscious of their presence and distinction, simply as there isn’t any reply to the query: Who, in truth, was Plato or Sokrat, his instructor, who is alleged to have danced barefoot within the squares of Athens, though this query nonetheless stays open. Instances move and this query stays legitimate. (…)
Is it the distinctive privilege of poets as we speak, this “reality” or “lie” on this resistance to up to date simulacra and their wrestle with fashions and copies that had been as soon as the temple of reality? This protection of simulacra and the appropriate to the “noble lie”, which philosophy misplaced in its effort to outlive because the “queen of sciences”.
For postphilosophy is simply a technical time period, or a collective time period for the “chaos” on this simulacrum, or a collection of poetic and philosophical kinds and methods – which is appropriate as a traditionally contingent syntagm, pointing to the deep and complicated connections between philosophy and poetry, which are not any clearer as we speak than in Plato’s time, if there’s a solution to the query: Who was Plato? Within the time of these “outdated” and “new barbarians”, about whom he wrote Area of interest.
For instance this essay is conceived as an historical Greek feast discussing the query: Do poets lie? And why Plato proposed that poets needs to be banished from the best state, a destiny that has befallen many poets since Plato.
For instance, at this perfect feast, this debate is being held between poets, philosophers, theologians, and scientists over the query of “reality,” or slightly, the query: Do poets lie?
So it is a debate in regards to the reality. And poetry, as a result of the function of the poet has modified as we speak.
The theologian, as hinted, doesn’t ask this query about reality, as a result of as it’s written within the epistle: “Behold, the ft of him who will carry him forth are already on the threshold!” In spite of everything, who’s a mortal to hunt a solution to this query about reality to which solely God is aware of the reply. It’s attention-grabbing that on this assortment – a monument devoted to the poetry of Svetislav Brković – the least consideration is paid to the spiritual side of his poetry, and I’ll say one thing about that later. Apart from the poet himself, crucial participant on this dialogue – continues to be the thinker, though the up to date disaster of illustration testifies to the truth that we have now been left with out a clear thought of the place of the thinker on this dialogue.
Who’s a thinker as we speak and the way far does his competence or legitimacy prolong, about which, for instance, he writes Liter in “The Postmodern Situation” or “Conditionality”, which is the extra applicable title of his well-known essay on the standing of up to date science. It’s typically forgotten that Lyotard’s essay, which turned the progenitor of postmodernism in philosophy, is nothing greater than a dialogue of the situation or standing of up to date science and his conclusion that philosophy has entered this postmodern conditionality or instability as a result of its disaster is, in truth, before everything, a disaster of the legitimacy of contemporary science itself. Because of this philosophy has misplaced the facility of legitimation, that’s, justification or basis or, extra merely put, rationalization of science. She, who was the “queen of sciences” which signifies that philosophy was this information about science – or a “huge story” about science and reality. This phantasm, in spite of everything, gave authority to Plato’s accusation or query, for the reason that thinker was the one who knew what was true and who was telling the reality or mendacity, as Plato himself put it. It has been like this for hundreds of years. The thinker was on the throne, he knew the character of the scientific methodology and science itself. He was, so to talk, the topic of this perfect aspect. From Aristotle do Huserla and up to date crises of legitimacy. So that is the distinction between a thinker and a post-philosopher.
The thinker continues to be the topic or customs officer of “reality.” He is aware of the immanent rhythm of ideas, as a result of philosophy is ready to specific the “personal selfness of the article.”
Then again, the post-philosopher is a witness to the truth that the idea of philosophical proof has been misplaced, as a result of science and philosophy are now not synonymous, because the thinker claimed. The post-philosopher is now not the topic and customs officer of science. That’s the distinction. Science has been left with out legitimacy. It now not exists due to the self-movement of the idea and the rhythm of the natural complete. Neither is it a direct “logically decided being”.
I just lately wrote in regards to the idea of illustration in philosophy, and it was a possibility to remind myself of the extent to which the idea of science was dominant in philosophy till Husserl. Lace was a metaphysician of science. Normally, German idealism and phenomenology had been nothing greater than “philosophy of science”. However, a failed philosophy. Science remained with out philosophy and philosophy with out science. That is the up to date state of affairs that led to the so-called hermeneutic flip in thought, which I wrote about in reference to Brković’s poetry, as a result of this flip in the direction of language led to the up to date dominance of poetry over philosophy, which is able to culminate in Heidegger’s dialogue with Clear Ilnom in two of his well-known statements. “Language is the home of being” and “Poetically man dwells on this earth.” So, not religiously or scientifically, however exactly poetically. That was the epilogue of Heidegger’s dialogue not solely with Hölderlin but additionally with philosophy itself after Husserl and his failure to elucidate science.
So, after faith, science and philosophy, what stays is poetry and the poet’s activity of explaining man’s “dwelling” or “home” on this earth. That was the start line of my interpretation of Brković’s poetry and poetics. This chic activity that the poet took upon himself at a time when philosophical illustration was in disaster, changing into post-philosophical and poetic, since poetic simulacrums are usually not lies however the reality about ourselves, as a result of the unique spiritual, scientific or philosophical fashions – don’t exist. What stays are copies and simulacrums.
(…) The truth is, as we speak we do not even have ideas, we have now screens and their simulacrums which, nonetheless, are usually not our lie however the reality. And no “quick” as a chronological or temporal dedication encompasses this case which is simply conditionally philosophical or poetic. As a result of screens or expertise write neither philosophy nor poetry. Nor can they.
That’s the reason not solely poetry but additionally Plato’s query is a mimetic or museum query. A time is coming when Plato is not going to exist. A time when there can be no poetry and maybe no individuals within the posthuman backyard the place I already see a commotion of posthuman creatures like robots, cyborgs, androids… a time with out the reminiscence of the “Home” by which language and solitude nonetheless dwell in a metaphysical language that now not has a reputation. A time with out God, philosophy, science and poetry. How is that? Is that the epilogue of this dialogue?
Do poets lie? How that?
Sure, I wished to say one thing about Brković’s religiosity. His faith is throughout the bounds of a pure poetic thoughts. On this faith there isn’t any revelation however there’s poetry. That is what I can say.
The writers of this Memorial are numerous: along with philosophers, literary theorists, literary critics, poets, and essayists have written about Brković’s poetry. There are usually not lots of them. And there should not be. However from these critically written texts, one can glimpse the outlines of a poetics. There are poets who write a poetic canon and poets with out this canon.
The poetic canon of my worthwhile pal on this monument is interpreted as naturalism and poetic rigor that explores the bounds of language, a poetic experiment that’s at one stage near signalism and the alerts of language, indicators whose hint or situation is mild and never voice, and naturally as a metaphysical canon – since individuals mistakenly imagine that moments can proceed, as he wrote Žarko Đurović.
And if individuals imagine wrongly, then they lie metaphysically. A lie is a situation of reality right here.
That can be the reply to Plato’s query. This protection of poetry since in poetry the figures of evil are literally types of Good.
Information
