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, Footage of images, One other new starting) was a singular 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 also be a form of archaeology of on a regular basis life.
For this writer, the poetic act is at all times a form of reviving the world, but in addition a delicate play of which means and sound, so in his poetic work he has at all times been devoted to the elemental questions of poetry and philosophy. Undoubtedly – a singular phenomenon on the present literary scene.
On the event of the poet’s dying, we’re publishing a number of fragments from a textual content by the well-known Serbian thinker Nenad Daković, which was written for a group 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 referred to as 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” instances through which “fashions”, “copies” and “simulacrums” have lengthy been in circulation with out us being totally conscious of their presence and distinction, simply as there isn’t a reply to the query: Who, actually, was Plato or Sokrat, his instructor, who is claimed to have danced barefoot within the squares of Athens, though this query nonetheless stays open. Occasions cross and this query stays legitimate. (…)
Is it the distinctive privilege of poets at the moment, this “fact” or “lie” on this resistance to modern simulacra and their battle with fashions and copies that had been as soon as the temple of fact? This protection of simulacra and the best to the “noble lie”, which philosophy misplaced in its effort to outlive because the “queen of sciences”.
For postphilosophy is barely a technical time period, or a collective time period for the “chaos” on this simulacrum, or a collection of poetic and philosophical kinds and techniques – which is appropriate as a traditionally contingent syntagm, pointing to the deep and complicated connections between philosophy and poetry, which are not any clearer at the moment than in Plato’s time, if there may be 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 historic Greek feast discussing the query: Do poets lie? And why Plato proposed that poets ought to be banished from the best state, a destiny that has befallen many poets since Plato.
For instance, at this ideally suited feast, this debate is being held between poets, philosophers, theologians, and scientists over the query of “fact,” or quite, the query: Do poets lie?
So this can be a debate concerning the fact. And poetry, as a result of the position of the poet has modified at the moment.
The theologian, as hinted, doesn’t ask this query about fact, as a result of as it’s written within the epistle: “Behold, the ft of him who will deliver him forth are already on the threshold!” In any case, who’s a mortal to hunt a solution to this query about fact 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 facet of his poetry, and I’ll say one thing about that later. Moreover the poet himself, crucial participant on this dialogue – continues to be the thinker, though the modern disaster of illustration testifies to the truth that we’ve got been left with out a clear concept of the place of the thinker on this dialogue.
Who’s a thinker at the moment and the way far does his competence or legitimacy lengthen, 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 latest 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 latest science and his conclusion that philosophy has entered this postmodern conditionality or instability as a result of its disaster is, actually, firstly, a disaster of the legitimacy of recent science itself. Which means that philosophy has misplaced the facility of legitimation, that’s, justification or basis or, extra merely put, clarification of science. She, who was the “queen of sciences” which implies that philosophy was this information about science – or a “large story” about science and fact. This phantasm, in any case, 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 ideally suited ingredient. From Aristotle do Huserla and modern 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 “fact.” He is aware of the immanent rhythm of ideas, as a result of philosophy is ready to categorical the “personal selfness of the thing.”
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 not synonymous, because the thinker claimed. The post-philosopher is not the topic and customs officer of science. That’s the distinction. Science has been left with out legitimacy. It not exists because of 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 concerning 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. Generally, 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 modern scenario 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 direction of language led to the modern 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 in addition with philosophy itself after Husserl and his failure to clarify science.
So, after faith, science and philosophy, what stays is poetry and the poet’s process of explaining man’s “dwelling” or “home” on this earth. That was the place to begin of my interpretation of Brković’s poetry and poetics. This elegant process that the poet took upon himself at a time when philosophical illustration was in disaster, changing into post-philosophical and poetic, since poetic simulacrums should not lies however the fact about ourselves, as a result of the unique spiritual, scientific or philosophical fashions – don’t exist. What stays are copies and simulacrums.
(…) Actually, at the moment we do not even have ideas, we’ve got screens and their simulacrums which, nevertheless, should not our lie however the fact. And no “quick” as a chronological or temporal dedication encompasses this example which is barely 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 in addition 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 folks 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” through which language and solitude nonetheless dwell in a metaphysical language that 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 a revelation however there may be poetry. That is what I can say.
The writers of this Memorial are various: along with philosophers, literary theorists, literary critics, poets, and essayists have written about Brković’s poetry. There should not lots of them. And there should not be. However from these severely 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 helpful good friend on this monument is interpreted as naturalism and poetic rigor that explores the boundaries of language, a poetic experiment that’s at one stage near signalism and the alerts of language, indicators whose hint or situation is gentle and never voice, and naturally as a metaphysical canon – since folks mistakenly consider that moments can proceed, as he wrote Žarko Đurović.
And if folks consider wrongly, then they lie metaphysically. A lie is a situation of fact right here.
That can also be the reply to Plato’s query. This protection of poetry since in poetry the figures of evil are literally types of Good.
( Nenad Daković )
