Naslov
Prosudbe Miroslava Krleže o Albertu Haleru
(Miroslav Krleža’s Comments on Albert Haler)

Autori
Balić, Davor

Izvornik
Prilozi za istraživanje hrvatske filozofske baštine (0350-2791) 44 (2018), 1(87); 143-186

Vrsta, podvrsta i kategorija rada
Radovi u časopisima, članak, znanstveni

Ključne riječi
Miroslav Krleža, Albert Haler, filozofija, estetika, književna kritika, sukob na književnoj ljevici, sukob između književne ljevice i desnice u Hrvatskoj
(Miroslav Krleža, Albert Haler, philosophy, aesthetics, literary criticism, conflict on the literary Left, conflict between the literary Left and Right in Croatia)

Sažetak
Miroslav Krleža (1893–1981) često se očitovao o stavovima hrvatskih filozofa, što potvrđuju i prosudbe koje je iznio o gledištima Alberta Halera (1883–1945?). Toga filozofa, koji se profilirao u estetičara croceovskih nazora, te teoretičara i povjesničara književnosti, prvi je put spomenuo 1923. godine u pismu supruzi Beli, i to kao dobrog i otmjenog dubrovačkog književnika. Kasnije, u trima tekstovima otisnutima 1939. i 1940. godine u časopisu "Pečat" te u dnevniku iz 1942. godine Krleža je kritizirao Halerovo svjetonazorsko usmjerenje, ali i njegov pristup estetičkim temama. Iz istih je razloga i Haler potkraj 1938. te tijekom 1939. godine kritizirao Krležu. Krleža je smatrao da je Haler njega i pripadnike socijalne ili ljevičarske književnosti kritizirao zato da bi ukazao na pogubnost »takozvane lijeve knjige«, poručivši mu da prešućuje »čitave tovare ideoloških brvana u svojim pogledima« (»Svrha Pečata i o njojzi besjeda«). O Haleru se izjasnio kao »boguugodnom književnom idealisti«, koji je napisao »studiju o depoetizaciji umjetnosti«, a tu depoetizaciju, tumači Krleža Halerove zapise, »sistematski sprovodimo kao pravi sotone u ljudskoj spodobi« (»Dijalektički antibarbarus«). Halerov članak »Depoetizacija suvremenog života« ili, kako ga određuje, »pamflet o depoetizaciji umjetnosti«, izdvojio je kao primjer dugotrajnih napada, tijekom kojih su »svi ti Haleri« po njemu pucali iz »najtežih topova« (»Rasulo pameti«). Halera je doživljavao kao jednog od predvodnika »pamfletske rabote« protiv njega (dnevnik iz 1942). Krleža je zapažanja o Haleru izložio i oko 1960. godine u marginalijama uz Frangešovu enciklopedijsku natuknicu o hrvatskoj književnoj kritici. Tom je prilikom Ivi Frangešu priopćio da »Hallerovi Croceovi pogledi na našu literaturu« u tekstu njegove natuknice nisu dobro obrađeni pa dodao da je Haler naše književno stvaralaštvo procjenjivao »mjerilom jednostranim«. Dakle, sukobi Krleže i Halera odvijali su se ponajprije zbog njihovih drugačijih ideoloških usmjerenja, što je dovodilo do sukoba i o estetičkim pitanjima. Uz izuzetak pisma iz 1923. godine, Krleža je neslaganja s Halerom iznio u barem tri teksta, u dnevničkim zapisima i u leksikografskim marginalijama. U Halerovoj bibliografiji stoga bi trebao biti zastupljen s barem šest bibliografskih jedinica.

Izvorni jezik
Hrvatski

Znanstvena područja
Filozofija

Napomena
Miroslav Krleža (1893–1981) made frequent remarks on the views propounded by Croatian philosophers, as in the case of his contemporary Albert Haler (1883–1945?). Krleža’s first mention of Haler, a philosopher who later distinguished himself as an aesthetician of Crocean views, literary theoretician and historian, dates from 1923, when in a letter to his wife Bela Krleža remarked on Haler as being a good and elegant writer from Dubrovnik. Later, Krleža criticised Haler’s worldview and his approach to aesthetical topics in three of his articles published in 1939 and 1940 in the journal "Pečat", as well as in his diary entries from 1942. The same topics underlie Haler’s criticism of Krleža towards the end of 1938 and during 1939. Krleža thought that Haler criticized him as well as other authors of the social or ‘Left’ literature so as to draw attention to the detrimental influence of the “so-called Left book, ” claiming that Haler intentionally ignored “whole piles of ideological logs in his views” (in “The Purpose of Pečat and Discussion about It”). Krleža also remarked that Haler was a “God-pleasing literary idealist, ” who had written a “study on the depoetisation of art, ” and that the mentioned depoetisation, according to Krleža’s interpretation of Haler, “we systematically execute, as genuine incarnations of Satan in human shape” (in “Dialectical Antibarbarus”). Haler’s essay “Depoetisation of Contemporary Life” or, as Krleža put it, a “pamphlet on the depoetisation of art, ” Krleža singled out as an example of continuous attacks during which “all those Halers” fired their “heaviest cannons” at him (in “The Ruin of Reason”). He considered Haler as one of the leaders of the “pamphleteering action” against him (diary entry from 1942). His final observations on Haler Krleža expressed around 1960 within his marginalia concerning Frangeš’s encyclopedic entry on Croatian literary criticism. On that occasion, he informed Ivo Frangeš that “Haller’s Crocean views on our literature” had not properly examined in his entry, adding that Haler used a “one-sided criterion” while assessing “our literature.” Therefore, the antagonism that surrounded the relationship between Krleža and Haler from 1938 was largely rooted in their different ideological orientation, which eventually spilt over into the field of aesthetics. Excluding the letter from 1923, Krleža exposed his disagreement with Haler’s views in at least three articles, in his diary entries and in his lexicographic marginalia. Consequently, at least six of Krleža’s bibliographical units from 1939 to 1963 should be included in Haler’s bibliography.

POVEZANOST RADA