A comparison between K.P. Kavafis and K.G. Karyotakis

Disclaimer

The article below was originally written in the form of an undergraduate assignment for the Greek Open University in 2006, during a period when the author's academic skills were still under development. Although the quality of this article does not match the quality of later examples of the same author's work, it is written in a thorough manner and contains useful information to nowadays students and other readers with non-specialised knowledge; therefore, it has been proudly included on this website.

The reader needs to be warned that the original assignment, on which this article was based on, was written in Greek and was intended to be read by specialised academics. Despite the author's best intentions to present his essay in the clearest way possible, some points and arguments might still be lost in translation. The author recommends that for any unknown words or specialised vocabulary, the readers should refer to the web for additional information.

The author admits that the bibliography for this article is limited, matching the requirements of an undergraduate assignment of this level. The author did not include any additional bibliography during the translation of his work in English due to time and access limitations. It must also be noted that the original bibliography for this article was studied from translated copies in Greek; therefore, the page numbers suggested in the citations below match the page numbers of the translated copies and not the original volumes.

Introduction

This article discusses two specific compositions of Greek poetry by K.P. Kavafis and K.G. Karyotakis. The poem Trojans (Troes = Τρώες) was written by Konstantinos Kavafis in 1905 and the poem Don Quixote(s), given in plural form (Δον Κιχώτες), was written by Kostas Karyotakis in 1921. The latter belongs to a broader collection under the title Νipenthi (Νηπενθή), which translates as those that feel no sorrow. The article examines the thematic of the two poems and the style differences of the two writers. Emphasis is placed in the employment of images from the poets’ sources of inspiration. More specifically, Kavafis is inspired by the Trojan war and the accounts of Homer, while Karyotakis is inspired by the novel Don Quixote by Miguel de Cervantes. The study identifies possible commonalities and differences between the two poems in relation to the utilisation of each original source, and interprets the general context of their production.

The Trojans (Troes) by K.P. Kavafis

The poem Trojans by Konstantinos Kavafis is written in 1905, and therefore, it belongs to the poet’s ‘transitional phase’. During this phase, Kavafis’ shifts away from French symbolism, which characterises his early creations, and moves towards realism, which characterises his ‘mature phase’. During this transition, his work is defined by his distinct personal style, where the poet actively participates in his compositions by citing his own questions and general concerns (Kostiou 2000, 158). The Trojans belong to the historic circle of Kavafis’ poetry. The composition deals with the concept of failure, which despite any ephemeral success, it appears at the crucial moment to cancel the volition of history’s main protagonists (Kostiou 2000, 160).

The main source of inspiration for Kavafis is Homer’s Iliad. The poem’s main theme is the Trojans’ struggle to survive during the siege of Troy, which Kavafis utilises in a symbolic manner. Kavafis begins his composition with a simile and a question which are intended for his own self. The simile implies the futility of his own endeavours in life: “are our endeavours, the disastrous - are our endeavours like those of the Trojans”? (“Είν’ η προσπάθειές μας, των συφοριασμένων - είν’ η προσπάθειές μας σαν των Τρώων” (veres 1-2). He identifies the drama of the defenders of Troy and parallels this to his own drama of defending his individuality.

Kavafis presents himself as a poet who lives isolated and exiled from the rest of the society, full of negative feelings and guilt for his personal inadequacy to fit in. Such elements remind of the poète maudit, the “cursed poet” of French symbolism. Kavafis probably feels isolated from the rest of the society for two reasons. Firstly, because of his status of expatriate Greek in early 20th century Alexandria, and secondly, due to his admitted homosexuality, for which he expresses guilt in his compositions (Beaton 1996, 131).

The poem’s central theme is the concept of internal struggle, which Kavafis handles with a covered sense of irony in order to stress an unfortunate finale. The poem is divided in six stanzas, through which there is a gradual transition from hope to certain failure. The introductory verses 1-5 carry a hopeful message for the Trojans, who manage to succeed small military victories and therefore, the gain courage and hope. In the following verses 6-8, Achilles appears as an immediate threat on the defensive moat and the Trojans feel doubts for their victory. In verses 9-12, the heroes of Troy, including Kavafis himself, stand outside the city walls, determined to fight in full strength in order to change their destiny. The words used by the poet produce a tragic illusion which is characteristic of his work; here, the passive verb “we think” contrasts with the active verb “we will fight” (Kostiou 2000, 165).

The time of the ‘great judgement’ comes in verses 13-17, where courage is lost, the morale of the Trojans depletes and the warriors scatter. Kavafis produces another ironic statement through the use of contrasting meanings. In verses 16-17, the poet, who is one of the scattered Trojan warriors, concludes that “we run away asking to save ourselves from running away” (“τρέχουμε ζητώντας να γλιτώσουμε από τη φυγή”). Such act is definitely irrational and refers to a state of panic. The fall of the Trojans is finally confirmed in verses 18-21, which describe the sorrow and mourning of Troy’s royal couple, Priam and Hecuba. Here, there is an indirect ironic statement, which relates to Hector, the son of the royal couple. Despite his heroic efforts to save Troy, he is finally killed by Achilles. This contrast between the death of a mortal and the victory of an immortal implies the certainty of failure for the former protagonist. Furthermore, failure is projected as a predefined concept and the result of divine volition; therefore, a condition that cannot be avoided.

The composition is characteristic of Kavafis’ poetic style. It is inspired by historical events or other ancient Greek mythological traditions, which are processed in an ironic manner. The story contains symbolisms that also follow the poet’s ironic intentions, which are used to refer to familiar situations of his everyday reality (Kostiou 2000, 161-2). In relation to its structure, the poem is divided in short stanzas, which include verses of similar thematic content. The stanzas produce a climax not only in relation to the outcome of the story, but also in relation to the poet’s own psychological fluctuations.

Don Quixote(s) by K.G. Karyotakis

The poem Don Quixote(s) was first published in the newspaper Noumas on 11th July 1920 and was intended to be Karyotakis’ response to the poem Don Quixote by Kostas Ouranis (Garantoudis 2000a, 233-4). It is characterised by Karyotakis’ notorious sense of pessimism, his depressive feelings and a distinct tone of boredom noted in his work, conditions that led his final suicide in Preveza, on 21st July 1928 (Beaton 1996, 173).

The poem’s source of inspiration is the homonymous novel by the Spanish writer Miguel de Cervantes. Karyotakis manipulates the story to stress the concept of failure that follows the quest of an imaginary idea, which gradually transforms itself to a living illusion, or to be exact, to a self-deception (Garantoudis 2000b, 212-3). This illusion symbolises all of society’s tricks and deceptions, which puzzle the poet in relation to their final outcome, which is always pessimistic.

The poem’s central theme is Don Quixote’s quest, which represents the concept of internal battle. The poem is divided in four stanzas, where there is gradual climax: it starts with determination to conquest ‘the Idea’ and it ends in disappointment after the loss of a futile battle. In verses 1-4, the Don Quixote(s) are described as society’s shameless, short-sighted visionaries and elitist ideologists. Karyotakis mocks them by saying that such people have no sensitivity (“they do not spare a tear”) to react humanly against society’s vulgar critique (“ένα δεν έχουν δάκρυ για να δεχτούν ανθρώπινα κάθε βρισιά χυδαία”).

Karyotakis distances himself from the rest of the society and adopts the role of the exiled poète maudit; he approaches the Don Quixote(s) form afar and treats them with abhorrence and ridicule. Karyotakis’ view as external observer is due to the influence of French symbolism in his work (Beaton 1996, 171) and also due to his personal experience as a newly-arrived public servant in the small town of Preveza. There, Karyotakis lives an isolated and boring life, while his professional career is challenged by clashes with his colleagues and supervisors (Garantoudis 2000b, 209).

In verses 5-8 the poet carries on mocking the struggles of the so-called elitist visionaries, who stumble on common sense and the reactions of normal everyday people. Even their non-elite supporters, such as Don Quixote’s hostler, Sancho, stress their failures in life; however, the visionaries do not listen to anybody. In verses 9-12 Karyotakis becomes more sarcastic that earlier and differentiates his point of view from that by Cervantes. For him, visionary knights such as Don Quixote, do not live inside their own dreams but instead, they live a humiliated everyday reality full of troubles, which is the same as everybody else’s. As their knighthood is lost, they walk (on foot) their everyday path as scared, bitter and helpless men, ready to retreat when they are to confront their Chimeras, which symbolise the monstrous difficulties of living.

At the end of the poem, in verses 13-16, Karyotakis mocks his Don Quixote(s) again by revealing their vanity. He notes that they point to the red sun and believe that they have cut him through, seeing red blood coming out instead of sunlight. Of course, the sun is eternal and immortal compared to the insane and coward Don Quixote(s); therefore, the nature of the sun contrasts with that of the visionaries and their futile quests.

The poem follows the general characteristics noted in Karyotakis’ work and represents the thoughts and reflections of the so-called 1920s Generation in literature and the arts. Karyotakis is a true pessimist and he is inspired by his own depression. As a follower of French symbolism, he adopts the view of the coursed poet; he desperately blames society for the loss of its ideals and sees that poetry is unable to prevent this loss (Beaton 1996, 171). In relation to its social critique, the work of Karyotakis (and of other representatives of the 1920s Generation) reflects the desperation on the impasse of the ‘Great Idea’ (Μεγάλη Ιδέα), a political venture that failed during the Asia-Minor Catastrophe of 1922. For Karyotakis, in particular, his feeling of desperation is further enhanced by his marginalised and financially insecure career as a public servant, which brings him to confrontation with the existing public and social institutions of his time (Garantoudis 2000b, 210-11).

Conclusions

A comparison between the two poems by Konstantinos Kavafis and Kostas Karyotakis shows that their themes and sources of inspiration derive from older materials. More specifically, Kavafis is inspired by Homer’s Iliad, and although Karyotakis is inspired by Cervantes’ Don Quixote, his work is a response to the homonymous poem by Kostas Ouranis. Both compositions process popular myths and are focused on the idea of internal battle. Furthermore, both poems represent a pessimistic approach, where at the end, every form of battle is proven futile. Kavafis refers his own drama and the futility of his own choices in life, which he personifies as the defeated Trojans. By contrast, Karyotakis’ futile and desperate life is not a matter of personal choice but a problem of public dysfunctionality; it relates to the futile efforts of a short-sighted and dogmatic society on its way to failure.

The influence of French symbolism is evident in both poets. Their primary material is used to symbolise everyday reality and both adopt the distanced view of the ‘coursed poet’. The motives for adopting this view differ in relation to the two. Kavafis consciously accepts his isolation due to his foreign descent and his homosexuality, while Karyotakis is forced in isolation due to his depression and due to his obligatory transfer to the small town of Preveza, where he constantly clashes with his supervisors and colleagues.

Finally, Kavafis and Karyotakis differ in relation to the level of irony employed in their works. The irony by Kavafis is discreet and refined, following verbal, expressive and thematic contrasts. The irony by Karyotakis, however, is based on raw verbal attacks, direct ridicule and a strong intention to reduce the character of his poetic focus.

Bibliography

Beaton, R., 1996, An Introduction to Modern Greek Literature: Poetry and Prose, 1821-1992 , translated by Sgourou, E. and Spanaki, M., Athens: Nepheli.
Garantoudis, E. (ed.), 2000a Lertters II: Modern Greek Philology (19th and 20th century). Anthology of Modern Greek Literature, Patra: Greek Open University
Garantoudis, E., 2000b, ‘The poetry by K.G. Karyotakis’, in Garantoudis, E. (ed.) Lertters II: Modern Greek Philology (19th and 20th century). Modern Greek Literature (19th and 20th century). Study Manual, Patra: Greek Open University, 207-24.
Karyotakis, K.G., 1920, Don Quixote(s) (Δον Κιχώτες) , available at: Garantoudis, E. (ed.), 2000a, Lertters II: Modern Greek Philology (19th and 20th century). Anthology of Modern Greek Literature, Patra: Greek Open University, 233.
Kavafis, K.P., 1905, Trojans (Τρώες), available at: http://www.snhell.gr/kavafis2.asp?id=481&kathgoria=1 , accessed on 12/3/2006.
Kostiou, K., 2000, ‘The poetry by K.P. Kavafis’, in Garantoudis, E. (ed.) Letters II: Modern Greek Philology (19th and 20th century). Modern Greek Literature (19th and 20th century). Study Manual, Patra: Greek Open University, 155-78.
Politis, L., 2003, The History of Modern Greek Literature, 13th edition, Athens: Morphotiko Idryma Ethnikis Trapezis.

Useful links

Καβάφης, Τρώες:
https://www.greek-language.gr/digitalResources/ancient_greek/anthology/mythology/browse.html?text_id=180
Καρυωτάκης, Δον Κιχώτες:
https://www.greek-language.gr/digitalResources/literature/tools/concordance/browse.html?text_id=986&hi=199105&cnd_id=6
Ουράνης, Δον Κιχώτης:
http://users.uoa.gr/~nektar/arts/poetry/kwstas_oyranhs_poems.htm#%CE%94%CE%9F%CE%9D_%CE%9A%CE%99%CE%A7%CE%A9%CE%A4%CE%97%CE%A3