PROF DOMENICO PISANA TALKS ABOUT POETRY, MAN, LIFE, DEATH.......
BIODATA OF DOMENICO PISANA
DOMENICO PISANA was born in Modica in1958, is the Founding President of the Caffè Letterario Quasimodo, a literary circle, which has been promoting forten years the cultural, poetical and literary valorization of the Iblean territory.
After having finished his degree in Theology, he obtained a Ph.d in Moral Theology at the Accademia Alfonsiana dell’Università Lateranense and the II level Master in School Leadership. He has been a journalist since 1985 and is the Director of the online newspaper www.radiortm.it.
He published: 10 poetry books, 11 volumes about literary criticism, among which there is the essay on Quasimodo Quel Nobel venuto dal Sud – Salvatore Quasimodo tra gloria ed oblio (2006), 11
theological and ethical texts, among which the book Sulla tua parola getterò le reti (1999), published by Edizioni San
Paolo, stands out and were fully translated in Polish and Spanish language, historical and political volumes.
Domenico Pisana’s poetry is a matter of international interest. “Il Giornale Italiano de España” wrote about him; the online London newspaper “L’ItaloEuropeo Independent” interviewed him as the “personalityof the month”, and the French literary review “La Voce”published his interviewwith Daniela Cecchini. His poems, articles, and prefaces to books by Italian authors were translated in English, Greek, French, Macedonian, Arab, Spanish, Polish, and Romanian language.
DOMENICO PISANA
PUBLISHED ON 9TH July 2022
RTMNEWS MODICA
POETRY,MAN,LIFE,DEATH, ...."POETS", "POETS" AND "POETS" .
I read several books by contemporary poets and I see that what they have in common is the centrality of man, and then a question arises: who makes poetry, why do they do it?
Does he do it for fun, for pleasure, to communicate, to express feelings, to give messages, to stand out, to win a prize, to experiment linguistic research, for himself? We could say for all of this but also for none of these things, but one thing remains certain: that within the poetic word there is always life, man; man "reasonable animal", man "shapeless monster", man "absurdity", man "too much" , man "useless passion", man - as the Bible says - breath and abyss that only God can fill. Every poem, beyond its stylistic, metric and formal resolutions, beyond the fact that it was - as someone says - a poet, a poet or a poet, each poem is still a look at life, the man who extremely complex reality about man tangle of problems, on man spirit but also matter, time but also eternity, individual but also member of a society, on man magnanimous but also cowardly, on man transcendent and diabolical reality, on man who loves and hates, on man who is at ngelo and it's a beast. It is true that philosophy, ethics, psychology and pedagogy, religion and theology have tried to tell us what man is, but the poetic word is the privileged place where this "poet" searches with images, metaphors, symbols, visions appear Very incomprehensible and insights to decipher what man is.
If poetry has to embark on one direction, it is that of a structural and formal re-foundation of its extrication in the folds of a lost humanity, giving reasons why it is done; if it is the Muse looking for the poet, poetry will also be there with new languages, forms, neologisms, and words that can help the man of our time to ask questions, to re-design, to self-transcend, to look for an "other" and to re-understand the life-death relationship.
In the field of contemporary poetry there are critics who still sentence with the classic distinction "this is poetry, this is not poetry", almost MRI technicians establishing a scientific diagnosis. This dialect doesn't fascinate me anymore, because at the end of much history of literature, poetry is, in the end, always remained a "mystery of the soul" not being caged in almost-axiomatic definitions, expecting that poetry is not understood nor is it defined as a theorem to explain, as they tried to Critics of the caliber of Benedetto Croce, Francesco De Sanctis, Natalino Sapegno and other authoritative figures. Today everything is becoming subjective, and even in the scientific field some scientists say that vaccines are good and others are not; let's imagine if in the world of poetry, where every poet considers his poetry perfect, they can take themselves and for good the definitions of certain critics, which also show The audacity to ass the Nobel Prize for Literature, when they say that in contemporaryity there are no poets, only "poets", "poets" and "poets".
These considerations, at least to me, do not interest me, not necessarily because they are devoid of meaning and possible truths, but because I am convinced that when you enter the world of literature, “our judgments – as Alexander would say.” Pope - they're like our watches, which we don't they never agree, but each of us believes in his own”. Alfieri, for example, for one critic was a real poet, for another critic a "poet".
A confirmation, in this sense, comes from Natalino Sapegno and Francesco De Sanctis, who, speaking of Alfieri, track critical judgments that move in opposite directions. Il Sapegno writes: "Pure poet, outside and above all literary reasons and concerns was Alfieri: the most outspoken poetic voice and the greatest of all the century." De Sanctis, on the other hand, judges Alfieri’s tragic poetry “cold and monotonous, because in so much fictitious exaltation of the speech you feel yourself in the void and because among so many memorable words and sentences you don’t remember a single character... Not one remained alive.. , their heroic qualities, religion, homeland, freedom, love, are expressed in generic phrases, and you can never take them in their intimacy and activity.. , in the expressed expression you feel the poverty of the content. "
So it is not to be excluded that the History of Contemporary Italian Literature consecrates not only poets, but also "poets", "poets" and "poetucs". Friendship will probably be a relevant factor, especially on a political level, courts and aristocratic setting. It is known, for example, that for the critic Giulio Ferroni, Quasimodo, Nobel Prize for Literature, was not only a "poetast" if it is true that he dedicates only 17 lines in his volume of history of literature; for Montale, Rebora at first was a “poet”, even if he changed afterwards idea, and the examples could multiply. So no effort for poets, poets and poets: there is room for everyone in the dreamy house of the Muse. Today, then, the problem, at least for me, is not to determine who is a poet and who is a poet; the questions that make sense to me are others, and at least five: 1) "who is the poet today and what is his function"; 2) "which poetry demands this time of ours" ”; 3) “a what is poetry for, suppose that even today it is useful for something, so the major media and the big publishing houses should be interested in poetry” 4) “where does contemporary poetry go” 5)”What new formal and linguistic research should express poetry Let’s continue with classic humanism and with a linguistic renewal unfolded on "the signs of the times"
Domenico Pisana
Comments
Post a Comment