20.500.12556/RUL-191065 Stanko Vraz i romantičarski kulturni sveci Stanko Vraz and romantic cultural saints Stavljajući književni opus Stanka Vraza u kontekst slavenskog i europskog romantizma, u članku se raspravlja koliko je on pogodan kao hrvatski kulturni svetac. „Kulturna svetost“ posebna je vrsta građanske kulturne kanonizacije na nacionalnoj razini, koja se u perifernoj srednjoj i istočnoj Europi nakon 1848. materijalizirala kao posthumno divljenje lirskim pjesnicima često iz prve polovine 19. stoljeća. Zašto se dakle u hrvatskom nacionalnom pokretu nije razvilo takvo jedinstveno dugotrajno slavljenje Vraza ili nekog drugog pojedinačnog ilirskog pjesnika kao što se u slovenskom razvilo do Prešerna, u češkom do Máche, a poljskom do Mickiewicza? u članku se hrvatski periferni romantizam stavlja u opreku s ranijim romantizmom engleskog centra te se zaključuje kako nijedan nije mogao iznjedriti romantičarskog pisca koji bi nakon smrti postao kulturni svetac. Pokazuje se specifična uloga koju je Vraz imao u ranoj hrvatskoj javnoj sferi u kojoj, u odnosu prema većini drugih slavenskih političkih pokreta, romantičarski ilirizam postiže vidljive uspjehe čak i prije 1848. godine. izuzetan uspjeh iliraca čak i prije 1848. može se zahvaliti kolektivnom poduhvatu koji nijednog aktera – pa ni često lirskog Vraza – nije ekskomunicirao, što bi se kasnije moglo prevesti u njegovu dalekovidnost. The article discusses how suitable Stanko Vraz is as a Croatian cultural saint and puts Stanko Vraz’s literary work in the context of Slavic and European romanticism. “Cultural sanctity” is aspecific type of civic cultural canonisation at the national level. in peripheral Central and Eastern Europe after 1848, this phenomenon often materialised as a posthumous veneration of lyrical poets of the first half of the 19thcentury. Why, then, did such a unique longlasting celebration of Vraz or any other singular illyrian poet not emerge in the Croatian national movement as it did in the Slovenian with Prešeren, the Czech with Mácha or the Polish with Mickiewicz? the article contrasts the Croatian peripheral romanticism with the earlier romanticism of the English centre and concludes that none of them could produce a romantic writer who would become a cultural saint after his death. the English public sphere had already been developed and recognised Shakespeare as a national literary figure, while the English romantic geniuses rejected the public sphere celebrating individual imagination. those rare Central and Eastern European poets on the feudal periphery who had already articulated the dissenting individualism of the English romantic genius were considered eccentric in their contemporary context, which still had to create a public sphere. therefore, they distanced themselves from a certain public sphere before it was fully formed. Accordingly, the reaction of the burgeoning civil society, which had no solid political binding before the organised national movements after 1848, was also negative. Posthumous canonisation from 1848 onwards, in conditions increasingly close to those in England during the first industrial revolution, often translated precisely this lack of understanding of the poet by his environment into the poet’s unique clairvoyance, which stood as an allegory for his literary genius (which the poet himself, with his bold individualism, already vividly hinted at). this applies to Prešeren as well as to Mácha and to some other poets – but not to the same extent to Vraz, because he played a significantly different role in the comparatively early emerging Croatian public sphere. in comparison to most other Slavic political movements, romantic illyrianism achieved visible successes even before 1848. these successes were due to the collective performance that did not place any key actor – including frequently lyrical Vraz – in a unique position of excessive deviation from the rest of the illyrianaffiliating Croats, a deviation which would, after the actor's death, gradually be translated into his or her brilliant clairvoyance in comparison to the rest. ilirski pokret romantizam panslavizam hrvatski nacionalizam Stanko Vraz Karel Hynek Mácha France Prešeren Illyrian movement Romantic genius Panslavism Croatian nationalism Stanko Vraz Karel Hynek Mácha France Prešeren true false true Hrvaški jezik Angleški jezik Neznano 2026-11-11 14:04:14 2026-11-11 14:04:16 2026-11-12 04:12:35 0000-00-00 00:00:00 2025 0 0 Str. 262-294 0000-00-00 Zaloznikova Objavljeno NiDoloceno 0000-00-00 0000-00-00 0000-00-00 821.163.42.02:821.111.02 0.17234/9789533792958.13 286968835 281362947 13-Jez.pdf 13-Jez.pdf 1 D583EEAD5B5F6DA30AB32463BDB1327D e945fdefb240b909ed3ce7be14215b95d269090ab300d1901d11d343ff41d346 7000a268-ddd9-11f1-aea2-0050569b8976 https://repozitorij.uni-lj.si/Dokument.php?lang=slv&id=252975 https://openbooks.ffzg.unizg.hr/index.php/FFpress/catalog/book/222 0 a6475e5e-ddd9-11f1-aea2-0050569b8976 https://repozitorij.uni-lj.si/Dokument.php?lang=slv&id=252976 Filozofska fakulteta 0 0 0