For there is no thought so unclear
that someone with a clear mind
would not be able to see through it
and understand it.
(Act II, Konrad to Mask 8th)
Waging a struggle with his own thoughts
To see them clearly as he ought.
(Act II, The Other Decoration)
With that testimony (confession), Wyspiański gives us explanation of „what this Liberation in fact is”.
“What is it?” and not “What is it about?”.
It is a thicket of “blurry thoughts, forest full of mysteries and puzzles”.
Only the Author, the Sphinx, can decipher their meaning.
The reverse of his split personality, Konrad, wants to persuade us that the Liberation is an Aenigma (Puzzle).
Only few can enter this labyrinth of mysteries, and unraveling them demands Oedipus’ acuity.
It is a game.
The courage to enter the game is supposed to ennoble the one who enters (the director, the philosopher, the literary scholar).
To explain Oedipus’ puzzles, to be the Sphinx – these are the real tests with which Wyspiański confronts his acolytes.
Many get carried away by this game – and approach the Liberation with such seriousness as if it were a mortal combat.
As if the dramatic intricacies and charades were hiding the Danteyan depths; as if it was a cosmic essay on Poland and Polishness, on the Promethean Hero, History, Art, Faith, Femininity, Revolution, Historic Justice, Death.
I cannot find a more accurate hint or reflexion on the Liberation than the following (delivered by an expert on Wyspiański):
“There is no storyline in Wyspiański’s writings, no beautiful thoughts, no psychological explanations. There are only images, constructed and mixed with the rhythm and the galloping verse (…). One needs to seek for what is beyond the common dialogue, beyond words: rhythmicality, dynamics, and energy that traverses the chatter”.
Is the Liberation a glossolalia then?
And is the theatrical gamble its main theme?
If so, then it is a truly marvellous mirror, reflecting the messy entanglement of contemporary articulations.
The Liberation isn’t very suitable for the revision of Polish thought and our national attitudes.
Hopelessly difficult readability of the Liberation should not motivate an intellectual hubris in promoting the over-interpretations of this thicket of blurry thoughts.
Indeed, lack of hygiene should rather be a reason for embarrassment.
„Liberation” is a seducing and captivating term.
As the reference books say, this title is ironic and self-ridiculing.
„Liberation” begs to be performed ironically and ridiculously.
The text had been ruthlessly laughed at both following the premiere and in the subsequent decades.
We did not want to follow this trait. It is too comfortable, even though it’s easy.
Instead, we wanted to bite into Wyspiański’s phrases with zeal of a neophyte.
There is no liberation in the Liberation.
But may there be something more?
Maybe it is all about attaining the level of tension which would lead us to purification, this holy sensation of pity and fear?
Maybe, maybe, maybe…
One can, of course, speculate whether the Liberation was the first step towards the theatre of the absurd; whether Konrad is the Kierkegaardian tragic hero of a comic play of appearance and existence.
But this is a tale for another time.
Włodzimierz Staniewski
