Show Less
Open access

Musicality of a Literary Work


Andrzej Hejmej

This book represents an attempt to capture different links between modern literature and music. The author examines strict intertextual correlations, the phenomena of musicality and musicality of literary works, the musical structure in literature, so-called musical literary texts. He focuses on the novel Le Cœur absolu by Philippe Sollers, the poem Todesfuge by Paul Celan, the Preludio e Fughe by Umberto Saba and the drama Judasz z Kariothu [Judas Iscariot] by Karol Hubert Rostworowski. The analysis also includes Stanisław Barańczak’s cycle of poems Podróż zimowa: Wiersze do muzyki Franza Schuberta [Winter Journey: Poems to the Music of Franz Schubert] and a fragment of Scène from Hérodiade by Stéphane Mallarmé in Paul Hindemith’s composition «Hérodiade» de Stéphane Mallarmé.

Show Summary Details
Open access

6 Score – Judasz z Kariothu [Judas Iscariot] by Karol Hubert Rostworowski[[I159]]

6Score – Judasz z Kariothu [Judas Iscariot] by Karol Hubert Rostworowski

Louis Spohr, the German violinist, composer and conductor, used the conductor’s baton for the first time in 1820. Felix Mendelssohn, the author of the theatre music to William Shakespeare’s A Midsummer Night’s Dream later brought it to wider circulation. Contrary to how it may seem today in the context of musical dictionary definitions, the baton has not always been restricted to the conductor in the concert hall. At the beginning of the next century Karol Hubert Rostworowski shows its specific literary usefulness in Scene 2 of Act IV of Judasz z Kariothu [Judas Iscariot]450, not as a prop, but as a tool decisive for the organisation of simultaneity and dramatic text (mentally), and its theatrically adapted form. Proper understanding of the meaning of verbal issues that arise in the literary space, and which, according to the playwright’s intention “should be practiced under the baton”, so in a strictly musical manner, finally happens beyond the frameworks of traditional reading of the text. In similar situations, when explaining literary structures requires interdisciplinary optics (in this case it is about accepting the perspective of musical-literary research), the risks of legitimacy of the analytical process is immeasurably increased. The moment of real close-up, as Paul Ricoeur suggests on another occasion: “the reader” and “the orchestra conductor”451, reveals the problem of open interdisciplinary interpretation.

The conductor with the baton in Rostworowski will be a director and reader; in Jean Tardieu in Conversation-sinfonietta452 (1952) he is a silent figure who throughout the course of the entirety of the theatre play precedes the word with the appropriate movement of the baton, in accordance with the author’s intentions453. Rostworowski’s potential conductor leads a maximum of eleven ←159 | 160→voices; Tardieu’s shown conductor – six (two basses: B1, B2; two contraltos: C1, C2; tenor: T and soprano: S). Rostworowski’s drama, considered a variant of poetic drama with an ontological-epistemological sphere in the centre454, seems extremely tragic; Tardieu’s play, placed on the edge of theatre of the absurd455 – is extremely comical.

From the very beginning, this extremely risky juxtaposition raises a fundamental question: is it possible to construct further parallels in a meaningful way not only between the theatrical thinking of both playwrights, and also is it possible to indicate the kind of relationship between the sources of both texts? Any hypothesis about mutual influences would, of course, be an unjustifiable step too far; rather, it would be necessary to formulate a thesis that some similar creative impulses cause convergent artistic effects. Further proposed analysis of the avant-garde solution in Scene 2 of Act IV, also an attempt to interpret the drama’s text and complementary theatrical presentation of Judasz z Kariothu, focuses on showing the effects of Rostworowski’s non-literary or non-linguistic inspirations. In order to sharpen the contours of the experiment and at the same time to outline the perspective of the research view, the figure of Jean Tardieu will be recalled several times and – as a comparative context – Conversation-sinfonietta.

Between dramatic text and stage text

The original structural concept, which Rostworowski uses in the fragment of Scene 2 Act IV of Judasz z Kariothu, and the fundamental operation that brings the whole of the drama together boil down in the aesthetic plane to the correspondence of literature and music456. Potential relationships between the subjects of both fields are immediately worth specifying because the concept itself of “correspondence”, which belongs to one of the most ambiguous generalisations in contemporary literary studies merely indicates the kinds of mutual entanglements of various arts. Musical-literary relations in literature stem either from constructional filiations, where this is about literary interpretation for example of musical technique (the rarest and perhaps the most sophisticated manifestation of intersemioticity and intermediality), or from a deliberate similarity in mood-forming (most frequently through thematisation of music), or exploration of the so-called sound layer and the search for a kind of effect of sound imitation. The first solution, emerging particularly from among the experimental manifestations of twentieth-century literature, is combined with musical schematism; the next two – with a romantic and symbolist apogee – with musical expressiveness. The musical score and, consequently, multiple efforts to prepare a literary score457 become ideal on the one hand, on the other – appropriation of the musical type of perception in literature through mimetic presentation of music. Both aspects find a rather complicated expression from Rostworowski’s perspective: they spread immanently between the dramatic text and the stage text and cannot be reduced to only one area. The hierarchy of seeing them applies here because the main goal is to achieve the effect in theatrical space, where music can function either as an autonomous element (“in language silence”), as equal to the words, or as a background458. The phenomenon that interests us is located very peripherally within the second group, and concerns the interaction between elements of language and music, schematically outlined in the dramatic text, and realised at the level of stage text.

In connection with simultaneous consideration of the text of the drama and the stage text, there is a serious methodological complication which results from understanding the complexity of an artistic work existing in two different spheres. This complication defines the mutual reference system is probably the most important in the context of Rostworowski and demonstrates the extreme effect of the transposition of drama to a theatrical work. There is no doubt about the theoretical approach to intersemiotic modulations, that the subjectivised, space-time theatrical revision becomes a dynamic medium and compared with the “staticness” of the drama: “does not consist simply of language; language is ←161 | 162→only one–though the most important–of its means of saying things. […] Some of them, evidently, can be realised only in performance, where they are conjecturally restored by the producer and the actors […]”459. However, this trope leads indirectly to the conclusion that the theatrical projection of the text (a stage text) is reminiscent of reading the score of a musical work. The illusion is even double, because the polyphonic nature of the expression, as a possible variant of stage simultaneity, can also be presented conventionally by means of a graphic layout in text notation, or – it would seem – analogous to musical notation. In fact, a critical look makes it possible to deduce far from simply identifying a musical work in actio with a theatrical performance, namely, those that accentuate the similarity in the plane of individual and unique performances460 (in both cases, the artistic events follow a schematic notation). A similar type of dialectical tension exists between the text and its implementation, between that which is objectively “written”, and what is subjectively “read”461.

Stefania Skwarczyńska detects an analogy in this light and states that, “dramatic text is just a record that preserves the project and is to the fully staged drama more or less what a musical text is to a musical work […]”462. There is no need to explain that this kind of theoretical argument, regardless of the source of analytical-interpretative strategy463, is formulated in a purely metaphorical sense (hence the term “more or less”). In certain circumstances, however, the integral coexistence of a dramatic text with musical text acquires a real dimension, and eliminates a priori the burden of scientific metaphorisation. The problem then ←162 | 163→is not limited only to the language of the description of hermeneutic difficulty (reading the code of both texts) which is similar in both the theatrical space, and in the musical space, where previously certain aspects are precisely interpreted, while some are realised in passing as the inevitable outcome of playing or of improvisation. In Rostworowski’s experiment464 using the score ontological analogy occurs between the notation of the added simultaneity of the verbal text and the notation of the musical text. As a result, the dramatic text immanently (co-)exists with the musical text that organises it, but the scale of their artistic interference can be discovered only at the level of perception of the stage work.

It is a truism today to state that some elements of the drama are not visible in the theatrical space, and that many elements belonging to the stage text are merely implied by the verbal notation. But here this reservation has an exceptional character: for there is a special need to update the verbal issues that fill the whole quarrel in Annas’ palace. Well, only at the moment of going beyond their schematic “score-ness”465 – firstly, the text of the drama transforms into a subtle verbal polyphony, secondly, and above all, it shows its lexical meaninglessness (caused by the possibility of improvisation, but not only). In other words, there is a radical difference between the meaning of a given word in the dramatic text and the same word in the stage text – reading the drama in this place is not synonymous with linear following, or even with interpreting particular issues. The act of the most meticulous reading becomes merely a preliminary procedure leading to an understanding of the sense of structure, otherwise in the vein of Rostworowski’s quite characteristic comment that: “A stage work without an actor can be compared to a symphonic score without an orchestra. Anyone who has learned harmony, counterpoint and instrumentation can read it, but to really understand and feel it, that is to really ‘hear’ its whole, maybe only a specialist, called a talented conductor can do this. I predict the accusation in advance: ‘Not true! Reading scores requires etc. while reading stage works etc.’ I dare to use twenty-three years of practice and assure the Honorable Reader that if this is what you think, you are wrong”466.

Rostworowski’s musical experiences – Judas

In the creative work of the author of Niespodzianka [Surprise] there are numerous signs of adaptation of conventions alien to literature, which are very difficult to explain without referring to his complicated artistic experience. The fundamental problem with Rostworowski as a playwright is that he, in a sense, never ceases to be in the sphere of thinking of a composer467, that in his dramas he revives the reminiscences associated with his general knowledge – acquired during his studies in Germany – in the field of composition (also piano468). In the fragment of Scene 2 Act IV, he places a real score in front of the reader, adding a short commentary to the development of events in Annas’ palace in the didascalia: “The quarrel should be practiced under the baton”469. In the sense of purely musical use, the baton very much complicates the understanding of the dramatic text (as if in absurd agreement with the etymology of the word; Italian battuta – to strike), but it is supposed to facilitate the preparation and effective conduct of the stage situation. This detail would not have been treated with such great attention from the beginning if it did not show the strict dependence of Rostworowski-the playwright on Rostworowski-the composer and did not decide on the nature of the experiment. The baton as a tool borrowed from the area of another art indirectly indicates the type of organisation of the material, its musical determinants. Hence, the biographical context, which concerns the period 1901–1907, when Rostworowski stayed in Leipzig and studied with Hugo Riemann470 among others, becomes important for interpretation of Judasz z ←164 | 165→Kariothu. The future playwright then found himself in the hometown of Richard Wagner, in the immediate reach of the influence of the idea of a synthetic work of art. The figure of the creator of the Ring of the Nibelungs, just to signal a coincidence, much later will influence the person of Jean Tardieu and undoubtedly (starting with the form of essay from 1931 about Hölderlin’s The Archipelago) is involved in the existence of a specific musical obsession471 in his literary creativity. Regarding Rostworowski, it is difficult to unequivocally ascertain to what extent (or if at all?) the Wagnerian concept of art is close to him. However, in Judasz z Kariothu a characteristic and meticulously applied procedure bringing coherence to the whole appears. The title character clearly integrates the structure of the drama, using – in the literal sense of the word – a verbal leitmotiv, for the first time spoken in Scene 5 Act I: “Jam tu sklepik miał” [“I had a shop here”] (line 248), and its “sklepikarskimi” [“merchant”]472 variants in later scenes. It is in this light, and perhaps not without reason, that one would like to think of an attempt to realise Wagner’s postulate (Gesamtkunstwerk) as an artistic interpretation of musical concepts473 and about a thought out case of the musicality of a literary work in the plane of construction.

Critics in the inter-war period repeatedly signalled a very complicated problem of the so-called musicality of Rostworowski’s dramas while at the same time dodging thorough analytical insights. This was not because of the lack of an acceptable and satisfactory research method, as one might suspect today, but on account of the tendency towards a positive perception concerning the relationships between literature and music474. “Already in Rostworowski’s first plays theatrical critics and literary historians found musical values. However, if for the works from 1909 to 1911 only some reviewers were inclined to indicate ←165 | 166→musical associations, in the case of Judasz z Kariothu and the following dramas writing about musicality became fashionable. Unfortunately, they did not go beyond the sphere of general remarks”475. The scene from Annas’ palace, as is known, was immediately recognised as the best moment of the performance; Tadeusz Boy-Żeleński476 did not hide his fascination with the musical idea after renewing the play in the year 1935 in the Teatr Polski. Nevertheless, the experiment, realised in the language material, did not meet with the studies in which it was possible to go beyond the common ideas of criticism and at the same time bring the matter in an orderly manner to the level of text-stage relations. In the meantime, it is perhaps no coincidence that conditions conducive to the experimental treatment of language arose when he took to writing exactly Judasz z Kariothu: as far as Rostworowski’s chronologically first three plays from the years 1909 to 1911 (Żeglarze [Sailors], Pod górę [Uphill] and Echo [Echo]) are written in prose, with a significant caesura between 1911 and 1912 – from Judasz z Kariothu (first half of 1912477) his dramas in verse appear. As a result of using verse as a basis for dialogue, the structural cohesion of new works is grounded a priori with metric schematisation, amongst others with which the rules of the period linked the so-called phenomenon of musicality. The possibility of rhythmicising the speech arises478 in accordance with literary convention, though to the playwright it will seem apparently insufficient in the case of the quarrel scene (!), since he will also use a convention of ordering taken from music.

Musical elements, particularly related to the rhythm of the quarrel scene in Annas’ palace, essentially concern the language plane; to say metaphorically: “x-ray” words, embed them in a non-verbal context. Looking more closely at the exceptional scene in Judasz z Kariothu, “with a buffo part and a ←166 | 167→tragic part”479, first, it would be necessary to signal the specific earlier growth of intensity of the quarrel, both in time and in space. It grows gradually and before it is organised by the values of musical rhythm in the second part of the quarrel, it is modeled at the beginning, in the first part, by differentiation of dynamics: from a general pause (semantic silence), through pianissimo, piano… to the final fortissimo. This fragment will not remain a single realisation, for a very similar idea returns in a more developed form in Kaligula [Caligula]. In the year 1938, recalling the words of his own report on the art in 1917, Zdzisław Jachimecki wrote “Rostworowski operates with the whole scale of dynamic shades, with groups of pianissimo and fortissimo of solos, he simply seems to orchestrate his drama, often making use of cacophony, distortion of sounds”480. All of the listed elements are thoughtfully cumulated in Scene 2 Act IV of Judasz z Kariothu along with precise argumentation in the didascalia481. In accordance with the metatheatrical idea of the playwright, the Pharisees led by Ananel, “enter in silence” and they create a type of dramatic situation without words (pause). Next the Sadducees, and also Pharisees “whisper among themselves” (pianissimo). They are ultimately trying to change their anxiety into words, hence the conversation is waving (piano forte). Ananel consciously provokes irony: he shows interest in whether the fish are in the pool…, which quickly drives Caiaphas mad (forte). Only now does the strongest statement fall from Ananel’s side, which paralyses his adversaries: Uczymy, a wy ucztujecie… [We teach and you feast…]. After a while, everyone closes the first phase of the discussion with the culmination: Sadducees “jumping up”, and shouting Milczeć! [Silence!] and it is not difficult to predict the answer from Pharisees – To milczeć wam! [You be silent!] (fortissimo). Then the leaders of both camps soften the emotions spokojnie [calmly], spoken simultaneously by Annas and Ananel (piano). As a result, the dramatic turning point culminates in an important pause, in this case, a significant structural element of the stage that fulfils two functions at the same time: retardation in relation to the discussed part and in anticipation as an announcement of the next part of the dispute. They are realising – so far – the first two commandments of Rostworowski’s “decalogue” from the thirties: “Close the protagonist’s mouth, since he starts to talk, although he stops ‘happening’ in it” and no less important – “Never talk from ←167 | 168→yourself, but from the hero of the play”482. The concept, so to say, of thrift or economy of words in the nuances presents a notation of language constructions, through which the importance of the entire technical sphere can be seen: an abundance of pauses, ellipsis, exclamation marks. Behind all of this, the drama’s text hides the masterful limitation of the immanent expressiveness of language and the unusual way of modeling the individuality of particular characters.

Towards the Theatre of the Absurd: “The words disappear…”

The second and fundamental part of the quarrel, the basic subject of the analysis, comes about as a result of layering fixed rhythmics of statements according to the rules of musical polyphony, which the playwright indicates in “graphic architecture” with the musical sign of the accolade483. A score ←168 | 169→appears484 in the text of the drama which is supposed to help facilitate the stage performance (although considering previous realisations, it is possible to paradoxically reach a completely different conclusion), and a laconic, very important tip for the director/reader: “a new voice appears every two bars (every two lines) […]”485.

In fact, the fragment of interest to us in theatrical realities is prepared very carefully beforehand, and begins at the moment of pronounced stage intensification with Caiaphas’ firm command: Milczeć! [Silence!] meets with Ananel’s perfect retort: Nie będę! Nie! [I won’t! No!], opening the whole quarrel. The tempo, and above all, the type of articulation in the initial phase – amongst others on account of the characteristic, “explosive” male rhymes (rigorously maintained) – is imposed by Ananel, cantus firmus486. He himself speaks the first two lines in a 4/4 rhythmic meter (a verse corresponds to a bar), closed with a scheme of double anapaest:

U was rząd?! U was trąd! [You have a government?! You have leprosy!]

U was błąd! Każdy wie! [You have a mistake! Everyone knows!]

(lines 330–331)

but those that follow with a different metrical scheme for particular characters (for example the repeating scheme: amphibrach + trochee in the construction of Caiaphas’ expression and paeon III for Szikmi), already correspond with the remaining sentences in a polyphonic way:

AnanelByło iść między lud! [It was to go among the people!]
(lines 332 ff)
KaiphaszA u was chytrość! A u was pycha! [But there is cunning among you! But there is pride among you!]
(lines 352 ff)


AnanelByło dać, a nie brać [It was to give, and not to take]
(lines 334 ff)
KaiphaszCzynicie gwałty nad jednym słowem [You are committing rape over one word]
(lines 354 ff)
SzikmiKto usycha? co usycha? Lud usycha przy szkarłacie! [Who withers away? What withers away? The people witer away from the crimson!]
(lines 372 ff) etc.

The effect of simulated polyphony is increased by up to eleven voices (five from each camp), to which the “Rest” (“Reszta”) additionally join on the principles closing the choir scene. At this point, the theatrical performance shows quite clearly how unusual the stage text is in the plane of simultaneity, being reduced to the idea of polyrhythmicisation in the sphere of the superimposed rhythmicisation of expression, and to a lesser extent also in the plane of colouristics. Knowing otherwise that polyphony allows independent voice leading, it is possible to assume in advance (without insight into the score, so as in the first edition of the text in 1913487), that the scene realised a cappella will turn into choral tutti entangled with complicated melodic-harmonic relations. Meanwhile, Rostworowski not only resigned from questions concerning melic matters488, but does not even seem interested in musical harmonic thinking, impossible to use within traditionally functioning spoken language, but nevertheless was able to construct a certain type of stage language. Relatively little use is made of the other possibility: from the beginning all questions are consistently placed on a strictly defined pitch – g1, creating a musical unison, and only at the end of the quarrel goes beyond the current pattern (the last two ←170 | 171→lines). From this arises the effect of shifting almost all questions by a major third (from the pitch g1 to b1), and consequently a two-note chord based on the interval of a third. Not without reason do Ananel and Kizai alone, for whom a special status is reserved, remain on the generally dominant first sound. One is distinguished as the leading voice, the other – thickening the texture with characteristic sixteenth note quintuplets – as an “instrument” taking on the accompaniment. The equilibristic result of their pronouncement on the background of the others can be predicted, since the length of both of their statements are written in terms of the metrical structure in separate, even polarly opposite, patterns.

Rostworowski, despite the fact that to a limited extent he allows the harmonisation of language structures in theatrical space, is clearly leading in the direction of a rhythmic experiment489, to perform a sophisticated semantic test on language. In this context, we find the exact expression of the sense of his next commandment: “Realise that the spoken word – or rather the beauty of the spoken word – and the written word are two opposite poles”490. The dramaturgy of the quarrel foggily presenting itself in the linear course of the play reaches its apogee when all the characters speak with their own rhythmic pattern and appropriate tempo, respecting the difference between the verses ranging from six syllables to twenty syllables:

Ananeltoby lud nam Go dał [Then the people gave Him to us]
(line 342 ff)
KizaiNie ugoszczeni! Nauczający! Pomagający! Rozkazujący! [Not welcomed!
Preaching! Helping! Ordering!]
(lines 432 ff)

and when the characteristic musical outline is perpetuated through articulation – staccato (ultimately, this decides about the entire burden of theatralisation). Most important in theatre conditions, all verbal issues are gradually deconstructed and broken down to the level of noise information: admittedly they are audible to the ear, however, the ability to predict them in the perception process is severely limited. From the perspective of the recipient-listener, the referential function of the language ceases to exist in the final phase of the situation, there now only remains expression in the phonic dimension and it is now best to understand ←171 | 172→the essence of performance of the scene and the idea of using “contrapuntal technique of constructing expression”491 or “stage counterpoint”492. Determined within a fixed tempo, individual parts are subject to semantic annihilation with the inevitable blurring of the intonation contour, despite the rigour of delimitation and clausula and caesura. In this way, the vision of the whole gains its intended character in the stage space; in the drama Rostworowski could only instructionally explain in the following paragraphs that: “The words disappear. Therefore, other voices can say whatever they like, as long as it is in rhythm and counting on their fingers, how many verses are to be said. The ideal is, of course, learning the full text. The quarrel should be practiced under the baton”493.

A realised stage performance does not need such details, but is validated in an unusual dimension only in their light, with consent it assumes (or may take) the form of linguistic improvisation. The next words, falling with mathematical accuracy “on their fingers”, pile up as if infinitely into one big phrase, and because they remain to a large degree on a particular sound – form a kind of musical parlando. It is said to be similar in Tardieu’s Conversation-sinfonietta, where the musical context and the musical way of organising linguistic material494 in the rhythm plane, is indicated paratextually through the title and initial commentary, defining in particular the role of the conductor (Chef d’orchestre)495. The coexistence of subsequent parts of the text (signalled by the term: ensemble) is obtained in accordance with the rule of parallel juxtaposition of the properties of the voices: starting from their similarities (B1+B2; C1+C2), to the contrasting tutti (B1+B2+C1+C2+T+S)496, and also – and above all – about exploiting the language rhythm. Tardieu conceptually denudes the semanticity of a specific language by frequently repeating colloquial language structures (hence among others the difficulties of Colin Duckworth as a translator keeping rhythmic transformations in the specifics of the English language497). There the rhythm outlines the basic dimension of semantics, perhaps even the only ←172 | 173→dimension, if we recognised the legitimacy of Paul Vernois’s opinion, that in this case, with the full acceptance of the playwright, the text becomes “anti-text”498.

The effect of pyramidal semantic dissipation is much more complicated in Rostworowski’s proposition so the rhythmical deconstruction of the language in the stage space is on the same formal level, as well as other, purely theatrical non-verbal or quasi-verbal tricks, resulting in a reduction of predictability. In the quarrel scene linguistic paradigmatic-syntagmatic clarity disappears, the participants of the argument retain no words at the end (since they “can say whatever they like, as long as it is in rhythm”499), but only accent stresses within individual systems, which is reminiscent of imitation (or rather parodying?) of a foreign language, based on its delimitation components. On one side, the musical expression intensifies, caused by a rhythmic scream and leading to the musical fortissimo, on the other side – in a directly proportional relationship – it blurs the semantic layer of the words. What remains is a syllable butchery reminiscent of both futuristic linguistic tricks, and certainly the linguistic incapacity to embrace reality within the aesthetics of the theatre of the absurd, a few decades later. In essence, Rostworowski takes one of two possibilities of annihilation of language: not by diving into silence, but through the next stages of loud desemanticising500. First, it seems to exclude the semantic function of the sentence, then the meaning of the word, to reach the point of even completely random sequences of syllables of any text that existed earlier in the notation of the drama or thought up ad hoc. It is a fascinating matter, that the reverse process, re-semanticisation, is achieved in an identical manner – the words finally emerge from chaos and the primary tendency of language to show meaning is partly restored. In the quarrel scene it is possible to hear the closing, single words of the ←173 | 174→choir: Gwałt! Kłam! [Rape! Lie!], which indicates a return to the clarity of semantic word-keys. The clarity and expressiveness of the verbal issues provoke in the end, a matter served again by the use of male rhymes and the choice of a metrical scheme based on the double spondee. This is why “the last two verses of the quarrel” should be treated in the sense of interpreting the musical closure: on account of the distribution of voices in intervals of a third (g1 – b1), breaking the system in unison, to the significant words of the choir and their direct context, and finally the choral tutti.

Rhythmical worldview

Reconstructing the act of creating the scene in Annas’ palace as far as possible, it becomes feasible to apply the considered linguistic-musical relations to the perspective of composing a vocal work. In the playwright’s field of attention two potential strategies have appeared, just as in the case of an operatic work, when the composer either puts one word opposite another, to gain a kind of dialogue of replicas (respecting semantics), or he layers words only with the intent to create the final effect of chaos and establish a certain mood (desemanticisation). Rostworowski – with a perfect sense of theatrical reality – he uses the second technique in the scene of the quarrel, which is at first glance more expressionist501. This makes it possible to achieve a musical result in accordance with the playwright’s beliefs about the existence of an analogy between the elements of a stage work and a musical work: “Every stage work is a symphonic work, written for a larger or smaller orchestra, composed of living instruments. Every role is equally important, equally dignified and equally responsible without any consideration of its size”502. Witnesses of the events, actually equal, are brought onto the stage, “soloists”503, who, stating colloquially, “cannot put up with it” join in one after the other to the senseless discussion (starting from the verbal exchange between Ananel and Caiaphas, which initiated the quarrel), devoid of sober arguments and counterarguments. Everyone at the same time convinces themselves. In this absurd speech, the characters are talking to themselves or telling themselves – conceptually Rostworowski moved a great distance, because he does not resolve the key situation, but only deftly sustains it in time. The fragment of the quarrel exemplifies the line of the dispersed ←174 | 175→action of Judasz z Kariothu perhaps in the most condensed form. However it does not lead to a climax and solution, but constitutes a permanent continuation of the moment of breakthrough in its entirety: from Scene 1 Act I (“after sunset”), where Judas “is sitting at the lake with his back to the audience”504, to the final scene of Act V (“before sunset”) where we are shown the person of Jesus and Judas between the Apostles on the stage for the first time.

From the point of view of the semantics, Scene 2 Act IV, the eristicity of the characters is not important, for in the hustle and bustle they gradually lose – along with the dictionary dimension of words – individuality of meaningful speech, more important is the sophisticated manipulation of language structures. Technical automatisation of various statements leads to the emergence of an atypical medium: since they mean not the verbal issues themselves, but their arrangement, then the language scheme is the deciding factor in the meaning of the dramatic text (individual metrical patterns for the character) and musical scheme (individual rhythmic patterns). In the stage text, like in the dramatic text, the central point of reference is the immanent rhythm of language, fortified with the metric scheme of the verse, additionally strengthened by a still more rigorous musical rhythm, which organises the material inclusively (in a strictly mathematical sense). The final result of this type of operation can be paradoxically assessed completely differently: according to some, it creates an “amazing vocal orgy”505, to others – it does not allow “a real ‘vocal orgy’”506. And within this dialectical trap, each character realises himself in their own rhythm, furthermore, determined by them a priori. It can be said without fear that having a rhythm represents pars pro toto the unique features present on the stage, that it blurs the remaining characteristics of individuality. In the quarrel scene, Rostworowski’s characters have their rhythm507 above all else with all the consequences of that – through “rhythm and rhyme the nature of the characters of the drama is emphasised: their stupidity, exaggerated elegance, coarseness, and additionally all seven deadly sins […]508.

Upper system: Last two lines of the quarrelBottom system: Rhythms of the quarrel between the Sadducees and the Pharisees

A special dimension of reflection is implied by the fact that the musical manner of ordering the verbal issues reduces the action to a situation which is extremely difficult for the reader to absorb, but which is evident for the viewer-listener. Realised rhythm becomes both a basic component and the essence of the passage of time; on the one side it is a condition for the functioning of a complex structure, from the other – it is primarily this which constructs the meaning of the whole. In Rostworowski, quite absurdly, as the rhythmical ordering becomes increasingly rigorous, so the effectiveness of the communication becomes ever more borderline. The words do not simultaneously follow the events placed together in the planes of sacrum and profanum, they devalue themselves through themselves, they lose individual meanings and the primary power of communication. In a state of disintegration, they refer to the sphere of ontology, reveal an indefinable order beyond words, order available to man in a small degree through “a rhythmical worldview”509, to call upon Leśmian’s term. Rhythm revealed through the language medium functions as an interpretation of temporality, not so much however as a substitute for physical time, as – escaping all categorisations – a universal element of “happening” of the world. In the final quarrel, the proper semantic field disappears (explicite expressions), instead however, a hidden meaning, beyond the code, of a symbolic-archetypical character is revealed. In this light, the rhythm of the quarrel between Pharisees and the Sadducees – blurring the contour of the specific and epistemological referentiality of language – expresses “inexpressible” senses, gives the possibility of a special interpretation or reinterpretation of what was previously encompassed by the act of cultural perception510. Rostworowski is following a historiosophic trail towards philosophical interpretation and history, and tradition, and above all in the final consequence – himself511. “For me everything ←177 | 178→is rhythm”512 – he states apparently enigmatically, a little like his contemporaries, although he is really treating the meaning of rhythm in an extremely ontological dimension.


For all observations formulated so far in various aspects, sometimes very distant from each other, there is a synthetic argumentation to be found. Finally, we should distinguish three, connected not only by the coincidence of randomness – temptations, that up to now have been intersecting: biographical, structural and analitycal-interpretative. The first relates directly to Karol Hubert Rostworowski’s intellectual development and explains the source of his musical thinking in theatrical space513, through which paradoxical connections with Jean Tardieu’s theatre and aesthetic awareness are made, and undoubtedly many other surprising relationships of this type can be found. The second temptation, structural, as a direct result of the first, leads Rostworowski perhaps to attempt interpretation in the drama of the musical scheme (Judas’ verbal leitmotif), and with full certainty determines the use of reduced musical notation. The scene of the quarrel between Pharisees and the Sadducees, captured schematically with the aid of the score remains a great testimony to this and presents a peripheral case of the coexistence of dramatic text with musical text. Analytical temptation, in turn, through the prism of the first two, leads to the sphere of complex research on the relationships between literature and music, and reveals a vast problem in the field of contemporary comparative literature. If, in the perspective of literature research, it also refers to literary text, not just to the question of aesthetic awareness, this provokes a thorough redefinition of the whole range of the term “musicality” in relation to a literary work. Within such reflection, the structure of the analysed fragment of the scene of Judasz z Kariothu is a rare structural type amongst the manifestations of musicality of a literary work, and it is possible that even due to the stage specifics it is closest to musical convention.

Rostworowski, under the influence of his struggle with the first two temptations, is looking for an adequate interpretation of the instrumentally perceived and interpreted cultural tradition on his own account. In an obvious manner he situates Judasz z Kariothu in relation to the problem of explanation ←178 | 179→of biblical events in the era, it presents a subsequent historiosophical project, apocryphalising the word of the Gospel. His proposal, preceded by “three years of study of the Jewish issue”514, in the thematic sense is a reinterpretation of biblical exegesis, extremely negatively oriented in the assessment of Judas515. The adopted point of view is further clarified by the playwright in a few words, responding to professor Sinko’s allegations concerning historical interpretation of Caligula – “I did not defend Judas”516. And no matter how we look at it, self-commentary can be considered in multiple ways, it is necessary to signal just one of the consequences, namely connected to the type of creation of the title character. The stage concept seems in fact both very simple and very sophisticated – the presence of Judas is necessary, but he does not evolve at all during the drama. As a result, his monothematic and easily recognisable clarity condition the situation (on account of structural similarity) and the lines barely accentuate the existence of the character. It is from here that we get the earlier hypothesis about verbal leitmotifs and creation of coherence by the playwright of the inertial action of the drama, in accordance with the literary interpretation of musical technique. But even if this matter seems to be highly controversial on the scale of the entire drama, then the existence of a strictly musical context is guided by unambiguous indicators (in the form of a musical score), suggested for precise undertaking of the dramatic text. The scene in Annas’ palace, the quintessence of the presented situation, does not so much bear traces of thinking in musical ←179 | 180→categories, as much as it creates an intermedial construction, fully revealing all the subtleties of meaning only at the level of the stage text. Stagings to date show how difficult it is to extract all its nuances, and the first staging by Ludwik Solski (it is well known how long and meticulously he prepared the quarrel scene) remains an unattainable model of skilful, musical conducting.

It is necessary to briefly summarise the problem of capturing the relationship between dramatic text and stage text, which specially preceded the analysis of Judasz z Kariothu, to create a context also for revealing the third temptation in Rostworowski’s thinking. Well, the playwright’s theoretical discourse, easily recognisable on account of frequent definition of a stage work through the prism of a musical piece aided by characteristic terminology, directly indicates the source of the original solutions in the field of material517. Terminological borrowings appearing in the description of the dramatic text and the stage text, reveal once again the aesthetic rooting from another angle. In an artistically modified form, the reminiscences of a dreamed of and unfulfilled career as a virtuoso return, indirectly as an unsuccessful poetic adventure (Tandeta: Poezje [Trash: Poetry], Kraków 1901). The future author of Niespodzianka [Surprise] will critically assess not only Rostworowski-the poet, but also Rostworowski-the composer even before finding the right form of artistic expression – but will never fail to go beyond the realm of experience. If, concluding like Wagner518, the poet aims to concentrate the point, the composer aims at its dissipation; if the poet is interested in the meaning of the word, space, which he is able to potentially update, for the composer only time is needed, some duration in variability. In Rostworowski’s understanding the playwright’s place is somewhere between them – he must find a common key for dialogue valid for both perspectives at the same time.

450I have taken the text of Judasz z Kariothu after the edition: K. H. Rostworowski, Wybór dramatów, introduction and editing J. Popiel, BN I 281, Wrocław: Zakład Narodowy im. Ossolińskich, 1992, pp. 3–236.

451P. Ricoeur, “Explanation and Understanding,” in: idem, Interpretation Theory: Discourse and the Surplus of Meaning, Fort Worth: Texas Christian University Press, 1976, p. 75.

452J. Tardieu, Conversation-sinfonietta, in: idem, Théâtre de chambre, Paris: Gallimard, 1966, pp. 237–258.

453Ibidem, p. 239. See G. Kapuscinski, “La Théâtralisation des arts dans l’oeuvre dramatique de Jean Tardieu,” in: The French Review, 3, Vol. 60 (1987): pp. 321–322. See also M. Schwarz, “Conversation-sinfonietta,” in: eadem, Musikanaloge Idee und Struktur im französischen Theater: Untersuchungen zu Jean Tardieu und Eugène Ionesco, München: Wilhelm Fink Verlag, 1981, pp. 33–58.

454See M. Podraza-Kwiatkowska, Literatura Młodej Polski, Warsaw: PWN, 1992, pp. 162–163 i 170–171.

455See M. Esslin, The Theatre of the Absurd, New York: Anchor Books, 1961, p. 172.

456The problem of the relations between literature and music in general classifications is traditionally placed among the issues of “correspondence of arts”, as evidenced by the titles of collective publications: Pogranicza i korespondencje sztuk (“Z dziejów form artystycznych w literaturze polskiej”, vol. 56, ed. T. Cieślikowska, J. Sławiński, Wrocław: Ossolineum, 1980) and Z pogranicza literatury i sztuk (ed. Z. Mocarska-Tycowa, Toruń: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Mikołaja Kopernika, 1996).

457This is about the idealistic intention to argue the existence of a literary score in the artistic dimension (for example Jean Onimus recognises such a project by Tardieu in reference to Conversation-sinfonietta; see J. Onimus, Jean Tardieu: un rire inquiet, Seyssel: Éditions du Champ Vallon, 1985, p. 119), and not purely theoretical, as for example in the case of the proposals of Roland Barthes (see R. Barthes, “La partition,” in: idem, S/Z, Paris: Éd. du Seuil, 1970, pp. 35–37; see R. Barthes, “The Full Score,” in: idem, S/Z: An Essay, trans. R. Miller, New York: Hill and Wang, 1975, pp. 28–30).

458See J. Popiel, Sztuka dramatyczna Karola Huberta Rostworowskiego, Wrocław: Wiedza o Kulturze, 1990, p. 140.

459H. D. F. Kitto, Form and Meaning in Drama: A Study of Six Greek Plays and of “Hamlet”, London: Methuen & Co, 1971, pp. V, VI.

460Compare T. Kowzan, “Le spectacle théâtral, lieu de rencontre privilégié entre la littérature, les arts plastiques et la musique,” in: Semiotica, 3/4 (1983): p. 300.

461Pierre Larthomas captures this basic problem in theatre theory through dichotomousness (in fact, complementarity) expressed with help from the concepts: “le dit” – “l’écrit” (P. Larthomas, Le langage dramatique: Sa nature, ses procédés, 2nd edition, Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1980, pp. 175–214), Tadeusz Kowzan through opposition: “le texte écrit” – “le texte orale”/“la représentation théâtrale” (T. Kowzan, “Texte écrit et représentation théâtrale,” in: Poétique, 75 (1988): pp. 363–372), Bernard Dort in turn, through the relation of the exclusive pre-textuality of the notation with respect to the performance: “le texte didascalique” – “le texte parlé” (B. Dort, Le Spectateur en dialogue, Paris: P.O.L., 1995, pp. 257–261).

462S. Skwarczyńska, “Zagadnienie dramatu,” in: eadem, Studia i szkice literackie, Warsaw: Wydawnictwo PAX, 1953, p. 98. Compare J. L. Styan, “The Dramatic Score,” in: idem, The Elements of Drama, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1960, pp. 9–117.

463See R. Węgrzyniak, “Partytura ‘Dziadów’ Swinarskiego,” in: Dialog, 8 (1999): p. 166.

464I understand the score in a purely musical sense, starting from the assumption, amongst others, like Zbigniew Raszewski that: “There are no theatrical scores in the strict sense of the word […]”. Z. Raszewski, “Partytura teatralna,” in: Pamiętnik Teatralny, 3/4 (1958): p. 393.

465Hence Tadeusz Boy-Żeleński’s conclusion, that the book edition of Judasz z Kariothu is “rather a libretto”. T. Boy-Żeleński, “Rostworowski ‘Judasz z Kariothu’,” in: idem, Pisma, vol. 26, Warsaw: PIW, 1969, p. 105 (first edition: T. Boy-Żeleński, “Premiera w Teatrze Polskim,” in: Kurier Poranny, 106 (1935): pp. 3–4).

466K. H. Rostworowski, “O kryzysie teatralnym,” in: Gazeta Literacka, 7 (1932): p. 108.

467In fact, he remained the author of several compositions, amongst others: six songs to words by Heinrich Heine in the original – “Der Schmetterling ist in die Rose verliebt” (Krakau: Verlag des Jasienski Museum, [1908]) and musical illustrations, it should be said, to texts by Franciszek-Xawery Pusłowski: Carmen Saeculare. Dożynki. Poezja i muzyka (Kraków: Gebethner i Spółka, 1910; see P. R. [Rytel], “K. H. Rostworowski – muzykiem,” in: Gazeta Warszawska, 100 (1932): p. 4) and Castrum Doloris: Threny (Kraków: Drukarnia “Czasu”, 1909).

468Memories about his music making are extremely enthusiastic (see J. Młodziejowski, “Rostworowski przy fortepianie,” in: Kultura, 11/12 (1938): p. 6; see also Z. Jachimecki, “K. H. Rostworowski i muzyka,” in: Kurier Literacko-Naukowy, 7 (1938): pp. 3–5), although Rostworowski’s opinions about it remain very critical: see A. D., “Karol Hubert Rostworowski o sobie (W 25-lecie pracy literackiej),” in: Kurier Warszawski, 104 (1935), p. 11; see also K. H. Rostworowski, “Cześć,” in: Pamięci Wilhelma Feldmana, Kraków: Drukarnia Narodowa, 1922, p. 155.

469K. H. Rostworowski, Wybór dramatów, p. 235.

470See A. D., op. cit., p. 11. See also Z. Jachimecki, op. cit., p. 3.

471See P. Vernois, La dramaturgie poétique de Jean Tardieu, Paris: Klincksieck, 1981 (chapter 4: L’obsession musicale, pp. 226–240). Compare N. Viossat, “Comment parler musique,” in: Europe, 688/689 (1986): pp. 144 and 145.

472Compare J. Popiel, op. cit., pp. 162–165.

473Zdzisław Jachimecki’s opinion for example seems unambiguous: “this first of Rostworowski’s great dramas convinced us that the form of his verses and scenes took their beginnings with examples of musical structure” (Z. Jachimecki, op. cit., p. 5). The title of one of the sub-sections in the book by Jacek Popiel is striking, even though the author emphasises the lack of any relationship between Rostworowski and Wagner several times – “Kompozycja muzyczna jako model konstrukcyjny dramatu” [“Musical Composition as a Constructional Model of Drama”]. See J. Popiel, op. cit., p. 157.

474See chapter 1: Around Tadeusz Szulc’s “Muzyka w dziele literackim” [“Music in a Literary Work”], pp. 27–44.

475From Jacek Popiel’s Wstęp [Introduction] to: K. H. Rostworowski, Wybór dramatów, pp. CVII–CVIII. Emphasis – A. H.

476“And the whole picture, the triumph of Solski’s production at the time, the drawing out of the effects of order and rhythm from the collective scene in turmoil and dialect, the almost musical arrangement of this quarrel in the Sanhedrin – these were very new things then. […] Rostworowski – a musician from preference and preparation – had all the counterpoint of the stage in his head when he was writing”. T. Boy-Żeleński, op. cit., p. 103.

477The piece was completed – and probably after Rostworowski’s custom read to the Pusłowski family – 22 April 1912. See E. M. Rostworowski, “Muzyka do ‘Judasza’ (z listów Marii i Zygmunta Pusłowskich),” in: Twórczość, 1 (1988): p. 93.

478According to Irena Sławińska: “The verse not only imposes a peculiar rhythm on the theatrical work, but also affects the temporal and spatial construction, it becomes a measure, a unit of time and space”. I. Sławińska, “Struktura dzieła teatralnego,” in: Problemy teorii literatury, vol. 1, ed. H. Markiewicz, Wrocław: Ossolineum, 1987, p. 260.

479J. Goślicki, “Rostworowski: Portret autora dramatycznego,” in: Z problemów literatury polskiej XX wieku, vol. 1: Młoda Polska, ed. J. Kwiatkowski, Z. Żabicki, Warsaw: PIW, 1965, p. 442.

480Z. Jachimecki, op. cit., p. 5.

481K. H. Rostworowski, Wybór dramatów, pp. 166–182.

482S. Essmanowski, “Z dramaturgiem o dramaturgii: Rozmowa z K. H. Rostworowskim,” in: Teatr, 7 (1935): pp. 10–11.

483Completely differently, very ironically, the sign of the accolade functions in Jean Tardieu’s piece, where various culinary terms – to emphasise the comic effect of the situation – fall not at the same time but in succession:

J. Tardieu, Conversation-sinfonietta, pp. 255–256. Under these circumstances, the accolade covering the fragment of the text, which because of the musical term “accelerando” should be delivered at a particular “accelerating” tempo, do not have a strictly musical meaning (graphically drawn even in mirror image). However, Tardieu, as can be easily shown with the aid of musical notation, here organises the text of the play based on a rigorously reproduced rhythmic pattern, hidden score (nota bene Paul Vernois proposes a musical notation of a different fragment of Conversation-sinfonietta. P. Vernois, op. cit., p. 244).

484K. H. Rostworowski, Wybór dramatów, pp. 235–236.

485Ibidem, p. 235.

486Rostworowski-the playwright thinks in musical terms when he gives indications of the nature: “The pace of the whole is set by Ananel, and it must be taken into account that Kizai must say in one bar (as quickly as possible) a twenty-syllabic verse (four fives linked twice)”. Ibidem.

487The score, interestingly, was not included in the first edition of Judasz z Kariothu, but only in later editions, for the first time in 1936 (see K. H. Rostworowski, Judasz z Kariothu, in: idem, Pisma, Kraków: Druk W. L. Anczyca i Spółki, 1936, pp. 177–178).

488Subsequent voices, as Jacek Popiel would like, are not differentiated in “rhythmic-melodic” terms, but only rhythmic (as a result of reading the score) and sonoric (as a result of the existence, using Rostworowski’s theoretical discourse, of an “orchestra, composed of living instruments”). Therefore, two explications become possible, if I understand this formula correctly: naive (highly unlikely) or critical. In other words, this is either an oversight or a kind of conscious – at the same time quite dangerous today – attempt to speak about “melody” or “melodiousness” of language in a version well known even just in the field of Ohrenphilologie, where musical notation of language expressions is permissible (E. Sievers, F. Saran), and in Polish studies from Kazimierz Wóycicki’s proposal, amongst others (K. Wóycicki, Forma dźwiękowa prozy polskiej i wiersza polskiego [1912], Warsaw: PWN, 1960; see particularly chapter 3: Melodia mowy, pp. 36–41). See J. Popiel, op. cit., p. 153.

489It should be added that Rostworowski’s interest or even fascination with rhythm has a deeply musical source. Zdzisław Jachimecki emphasised this fact in connection, amongst others, with the title song of the cycle “Der Schmetterling ist in die Rose verliebt”, characterised by incredible variation in rhythm – “from bar to bar”. Z. Jachimecki, op. cit., p. 4.

490S. Essmanowski, op. cit., p. 11.

491J. Popiel, op. cit., p. 149.

492T. Boy-Żeleński, op. cit., p. 103.

493K. H. Rostworowski, Wybór dramatów, p. 235. Emphasis – A. H.

494See P. Vernois, op. cit., p. 234 ff.

495See J. Tardieu, Conversation-sinfonietta, p. 239.

496Possible voice schemes, their mutual relations and functions in the work of Tardieu were examined in detail by Claude Séjourné, La facture sonore et musicale de l’oeuvre dramatique de Jean Tardieu [doctoral thesis; Université des Sciences Humaines de Strasbourg, 1988]. Microfilm, Bibliothèque de la Sorbonne, pp. 46–48, 172–180.

497On the same occasion Colin Duckworth negates the existence of so-called musicality in both Tardieu’s plays and literature (C. Duckworth, “Table ronde. Transpositions: musique et parole, traduction et représentation,” in: Sud, 50/51 (1984): pp. 224–225 and 238). Jacques Bens on the contrary, who defines Conversation-sinfonietta as a “real cantata” (J. Bens, “Des poèmes à jouer à quatre mains,” in: La Nouvelle Revue Française, 291 (1977): p. 87), and Paul Vernois, in whose belief Conversation-sinfonietta is the result of the transposition of a symphony (P. Vernois, op. cit., p. 234 ff).

498P. Vernois, op. cit., p. 236.

499In this dimension, the sense of speaking in Rostworowski (omitting the practices of simultaneity) is quite similar to the situation in the theatre of the absurd, where: “He talks only to kill time, to prove his existence […]”. A. Brillant-Annequin, “Teatr absurdu: narodziny współczesnej estetyki. Na przykładzie dramaturgii Ionesco i Becketta”, trans. M. Sugiera, in: Ruch Literacki, 4 (1995): p. 486.

500This variant of the proceeding is also chosen by Tardieu, conducting specific experiments on language, with the basic text-creating mechanism being the repetition of words until they lose their meaning. See L. Flieder, “Entretien avec Jean Tardieu,” in: La Sape, 32 (1993): p. 82.

501Maria Czanerle extends the field of a similar conclusion to Rostworowski’s writing technique in general: “he composed dialogues like an orchestral score – and probably this was what the individual nature of his expressionistic style mainly depended on […]”. M. Czanerle, “O Karolu Hubercie Rostworowskim,” in: Dialog, 10 (1960): p. 86.

502K. H. Rostworowski, “O kryzysie teatralnym,” p. 109.

503J. Goślicki, op. cit., p. 442.

504K. H. Rostworowski, Wybór dramatów, p. 5.

505W. Gorecki, “Muzyka w teatrze Rostworowskiego,” in: Listy z Teatru, 20 (1948): p. 9.

506J. Skarbowski, Literacki koncert polski, Rzeszów: FOSZE, 1997, p. 16.

507The rhythmic structures, in direct correlation with linguistic accentuation, arises through the selection and juxtaposition of different note values for subsequent characters: Ananel has eighths and quarter notes, Caiaphas – triplet eighths and eighths, Szikmi – sixteenths, Arystobul – eighths, Nifki – triplet eighths, eighths and quarter notes, Izmael – triplet eighths and sixteenths, Kizai – sixteenths quintuplets, Szymon – eighths and sixteenths, Szammai – sixteenths and triplet eighths, Roboam – triplet eighths, Choir – quarter notes.

508S. Essmanowski, op. cit., p. 11.

509B. Leśmian, “Rytm jako światopogląd,” in: idem, Szkice literackie, ed. J. Trznadel, Warsaw: PIW, 1959, p. 67.

510Rostworowski expresses a characteristic opinion about stage function in 1919: “The magnetic power and popularity of the theatre is probably based on the fact that viewing stage works is nothing more than a glance at oneself”. Quotation after: K. Czachowski, “Twórczość dramatyczna Rostworowskiego,” in: Gazeta Literacka, 7 (1932): p. 102.

511Judasz z Kariothu, as is known, is a literary document of the author’s spiritual breakthrough, an artistic confessio fidei. In the light of the testimonies of the epoch, the judgement made by Adam Grzymała-Siedlecki remains characteristic (A. Grzymała-Siedlecki, “Z Teatru,” [Judas Iscariot] in: Czas, 90 (1913): p. 1; 91 (1913): p. 1; 93 (1913): pp. 1–2). Róża Rostworowska mentions this fact (R. Rostworowska, “Zapiski o Karolu: Rok 1938 i rok 1948,” in: Tygodnik Powszechny, 45 (1977): [p. 5]; see also E. M. Rostworowski, Popioły i korzenie, Kraków: Znak, 1985, p. 436).

512Z. Starowieyska-Morstinowa, “W laboratorium wielkiej twórczości: Wywiad z K. H. Rostworowskim,” in: Kultura (Poznań), 2 (1936): p. 1.

513Paul Vernois indicates expressis verbis the existence of the same type of temptation, amongst others, in Tardieu’s thinking. P. Vernois, op. cit., p. 241.

514A. D., op. cit., p. 11.

515Rostworowski wrote about many sources of inspiration in response to Witold Noskowski’s letter (K. H. Rostworowski, “Skąd wpadłem na ‘Judasza z Kariothu’?,” in: Kurier Poznański, 222 (1935): p. 5), and also in an interview with Zofia Starowieyska-Morstinowa: “I read a lot of dramas about Judas, especially German. One depicted him as a Jewish national hero. It made me angry. I wanted to show him what he is – a vile, poor coward and a liar” (op. cit., p. 2). Compare J. Goślicki, op. cit., p. 439. Compare also M. Czanerle, op. cit., p. 91 ff.

516K. H. Rostworowski, “Pro domo mea,” in: Głos Narodu, 97 (1917): p. 2. Stanisław Pigoń’s wording, amongst others that: “Judas is weak, he allows Caiaphas to intimidate him, he is simply a coward” (S. Pigoń, “Tragizm ‘Judasza z Kariothu’,” in: Głos, 11 (1936): p. 1), seemed very accurate to Rostworowski. See Z. Starowieyska-Morstinowa, op. cit., p. 2. Like Pigoń, Kazimierz Czachowski wrote at that time (see K. Czachowski, “Karol Hubert Rostworowski jako twórca dramatyczny,” in: Kurier Literacko-Naukowy, 7 (1938): p. 1), slightly differently Edward Leszczyński (see E. Leszczyński, “Problem etyczny w ‘Judaszu z Kariothu’ Karola Huberta Rostworowskiego,” in: Museion, 3 (1913): p. 40) and Stanisław Miłaszewski (see S. Miłaszewski, “Pra-wzór Judasza w dramacie Rostworowskiego,” in: Polonia, 5097 (1938): p. 18).

517As for theoretical discourse, and here are parallels between Rostworowski and Tardieu, to recall – by way of example – the Frenchman’s wording from the Foreword to L’A.B.C. de notre vie: “The ‘protagonist’ plays the role of a concerto soloist, while the remaining characters […] present the orchestral whole”. J. Tardieu, L’A.B.C. de notre vie, in: idem, Poèmes à jouer, Paris: Gallimard, 1969, p. 63.

518See R. Wagner, “Oper und Drama: Dichtkunst und Tonkunst im Drama der Zukunft,” in: idem, Sämtliche Schriften und Dichtungen, vol. 4, Leipzig: Breitkopf & Härtel, [1912], p. 138 (see R. Wagner, “The Arts of Poetry and Tone in the Drama of the Future,” in: idem, Opera and Drama, trans. W. A. Ellis, Lincoln–London: University of Nebraska Press, 1995, p. 277).