|
1901 2012
Prize category:
|
The Nobel Prize in Literature 1959
Salvatore Quasimodo
| English |
| Italian |
Banquet Speech
Salvatore Quasimodo's speech at the Nobel
Banquet at the City Hall in Stockholm, December 10, 1959
(Translation)
I have always thought of Sweden as a
country adopted by the men who received the Nobel Prize, that
unique and brilliant distinction in contemporary civilization. No
other nation, in fact, has succeeded in proposing, much less
realizing, a similar prize. Although it originates in a country
of a few million men, the Nobel Prize is a model of universality,
charged with an active and spiritual significance.
The Prize, an award not easily attainable, arouses the passions
of men of every political faction in every nation - a sign of its
omnipresence and of that gulf which the writer, or poet, or
philosopher finds opening before him. Culture, however, has
always repulsed the recurrent threat of barbarism, even when the
latter was heavily armed and seething with confused ideologies.
Here around me are the representatives of one of the most ancient
Northern civilizations, which in the course of its rugged history
has found itself fighting next to those who have determined the
extent of human liberties. It is a civilization which has
produced humanist kings and queens, great poets and writers.
These poets, both past and contemporary, are known in Italy
today, even if only for the volatile side of their restless
temperaments and their brooding spirits. From an allegorical
presence, inspired by the fabled memories of the Vikings, these
difficult and musical names have come to be honoured by us. They
speak more forcefully to us than do the poets of other
civilizations that are decaying or already buried in the dust of
a Renaissance rhetoric. My purpose is neither to eulogize nor
subtly to congratulate myself, but rather to criticize the
intellectual condition of Europe, when I affirm that Sweden and
her people through their choices have consistently challenged and
influenced the culture of the world. I have already said that the
poet and writer help change the world. This may seem presumptuous
or merely a relative truth, but, in order to justify tumult or
acquiescence, one need only think of the reactions that poets
provoke, both in their own societies and elsewhere. You know that
poetry reveals itself in solitude, and that from this solitude it
moves out in every direction; from the monologue it reaches
society without becoming either sociological or political.
Poetry, even lyrical poetry, is always «speech». The
listener may be the physical or metaphysical interior of the
poet, or a man, or a thousand men. Narcissistic feeling, on the
other hand, turns inward upon itself like a circle; and by means
of alliteration and of evocative sounds it echoes the myths of
other men in forgotten epochs of history.
Today we can talk of a neo-humanism on earth in an absolute sense
- a neo-humanism without equal for man. And if the poet finds
himself at the centre of this temporary physical structure, which
was made in part by his spirit and intelligence, is he still a
dangerous being? The question is not rhetorical but an ellipsis
of the truth. The world today seems allied with the side opposed
to poetry. And for the world, the poet's very presence is an
obstacle to be overcome. He must be annihilated. The force of
poetry, on the other hand, fans out in every direction in
organized societies; and if literary games escape the
sensibilities of men everywhere, a poetic activity that is
inspired by humanism does not.
I have always thought that one of my poems was written for the
men of the North, as well as for those of the Dark Continent or
of the East. The universality of poetry is crucial to its form,
its style, let us say (that is, the concentrated power of its
language). But universality is also what was not there before and
what one man contributes to the other men of his time. Such
universality is not founded on abstract concepts or on a harmful
morality - even worse when moralism is involved - but rather on a
direct concreteness and on a unique spiritual condition.
My idea of beauty is embodied not only in harmony but also in
dissonance, for even dissonance can attain the precision of a
poetic form. Whether we think of painting or sculpture or music,
the aesthetic, moral, and critical problems are the same; and
likes and dislikes are similar. Greek beauty has been imperiled
by contemporary man, who has destroyed form only to seek a new
form for his imitation of life - an imitation, that is, which
will reveal the very workings of nature. I speak of the poet, of
this singular imperfection of nature, who builds his own real
existence piece by piece out of the language of men. This
language, however, is constructed from a sincerely reasoned
syntax, not from a deceptive one. Every experience in life
(whether lived or felt) initially involves an unexpected moral
disintegration, a spiritual imbalance manifesting itself
gradually, and a fear of prolonging a spiritual condition which
has already collapsed under the weight of history. For the man of
letters as for the transitory critic, the poet always keeps an
inaccurate diary, always plays with a terrestrial theology.
Indeed, it is certain that this critic will write that such poems
are but ponderous restatements of an ars nova -
restatements of an art, of a new language which did not exist
before these poems were written (thus the history of poetic form
is overturned). Perhaps the latter is a way of rendering solitude
bearable and of naming the coldest objects that enclose it. The
poet's evil influence? Perhaps, because no one ever fills the
silence of those men who may read just one poem of a new poet,
certainly not the fragile critic, who fears that a sequence of
fifteen or twenty verses may be true. The investigation of the
concept of purity is yet to be done in this century of divisions
which are, in appearance, political; a century in which the lot
of the poet is confused and hardly human. His latest rhapsodies
are always viewed with suspicion for their understanding of the
heart.
I have spoken here not to propose a poetics nor to establish
aesthetic standards but to salute a land for its sturdier men,
who are very precious to our civilization, and who come from the
adopted country of which I spoke before. I now find myself in
this country.
I salute and profoundly thank your Majesties the King and Queen
of Sweden, Your Royal Highnesses, and the Swedish
Academy. Its eighteen members, wise and stern judges, have
decided, in awarding the Nobel Prize to my poetry, to honour
Italy, which has been very rich during this first half century,
up to the most recent generation, in works of literature, art,
and thought fundamental to our civilization.
Prior to the speech, E. Johnson, Member of the Swedish Academy, addressed the Italian poet: «You are, Mr. Salvatore Quasimodo, the winner of this year's Prize in Literature. In you Italy has found a restorer of her modern poetry. Your poetic work bears the mark of a country and basks in the light of a culture both of which have for centuries given much to civilization. You have entitled one of your poems ‹Uomo del mio tempo›. In it the tone and the images evoke the often brutal reality in which we live. You yourself are a man of our time, in the most profound sense of the word. Your work reflects the trials, the miseries, and the hopes of our epoch. You understand the problems of our society, and your heart is compassionate toward the unfortunate, the disinherited. Such is the fundamental quality of your poetry».
From Nobel Lectures, Literature 1901-1967, Editor Horst Frenz, Elsevier Publishing Company, Amsterdam, 1969
Copyright © The Nobel Foundation 1959
MLA style: "Salvatore Quasimodo - Banquet Speech". Nobelprize.org. 25 May 2013 http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/literature/laureates/1959/quasimodo-speech.html
