............................................................................... CROSSROADS. A JOURNAL OF ENGLISH STUDIES 37 (2022) (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)

ALEKSANDRA NIEMIRYCZ ¹ DOI: 10.15290/CR.2022.37.2.04
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4380-7256

Promethean struggle:
Shelley, Keats, and
Norwid in search of
rescue in the risky world

Abstract. The myth of Prometheus sacrificing his freedom to give men authority over a powerful element

of nature despite the will of the gods has, in modern times, inspired authors of different languages who

kept transforming it according to their views. Both Western and Polish poets of Romanticism favoured the

Promethean idea. In their Promethean – or Messianic – visions Mickiewicz and Słowacki emphasized the

importance of armed or spiritual struggle for Polands̓ independence against Tsarist Russia, while English

language poets praised the individuals̓ rebellion in the face of the oppressive society. Cyprian Norwids̓

interpretation of the myth combined the individual and the collective. He saw Prometheus as a craftsman

whose gift, fire – ʻteacher of all artsʼ - is a tool for ultimate salvation through Beauty incorporated in mas-

terpieces. Norwids̓ philosophy is profoundly rooted in Christian soteriology. According to the poet, the

revival of both his nation and of the individual is possible only through arduous work, through creative

effort understood as cooperation with Christ the saviour in the attainment of salvation leading to both in-

dividual and national resurrection.

Keywords: Norwid, Keats, Shelley, Byron, beauty, truth, Promethean struggle.

Human fear of death and suffering
– the never-ending story
The human struggle for domination over nature, and sometimes for mere survival,
continues to be one of the key themes of European literature and theological thought.
We find it reflected in the Bible. In the First Book of Moses, commonly called Genesis,
God, who created man “in his own image […] male and female he created them, said to
his supreme creature: Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it; and have
dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over every living thing

1 Independent scholar, e-mail: aniem@wp.pl

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4380-7256

............................................................................... CROSSROADS. A JOURNAL OF ENGLISH STUDIES 37 (2022) (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)

that moves upon the earth”. Soon the abuse of this dominant power brought the danger
of destruction of humankind because of human disobedience and lack of responsibility.
The fear of death and annihilation of the world has accompanied us since the begin-
nings of philosophical reflection and is one of the founding themes of religious ideas,
even if we replace strictly religious belief with confidence in science as a remedy to all
pain and risk. We believe in science, which will let us find a radical solution, be it an
alternative energy source, a miraculous vaccine or medication, a super anti-tank
missile, or space missions aimed at conquering the Universe. We tend to forget that the
Earth is and will remain our only home. Immersed in the chaos of conflicting thoughts
and feelings, exposed to dangers not known to our ancestors, living in a world threat-
ened with wars and diseases and in a parallel world of digital existence with all the
multiplying information mingled with massive amounts of fake news, we go back to the
sources of our culture to find out what went wrong. On the grounds of poetry, we recall
the ancient myth of a Prometheus – Rescuer whose gift helped humankind cope with all
the risks and find safety against the hostile environment.

Ancient roots of the Promethean ideas
Philosophers and poets of ancient Greece, who were able to contemplate stars in the
unpolluted sky or the flow of clean waters in unpolluted rivers, gained profound knowl-
edge of the nature of things and of man. Aristotle and Plato have inspired all their subse-
quent followers and opponents on the grounds of philosophy; Homer, Sophocles,
Euripides continue to fertilize poetical visions. The idea of human impact on Earth and
of human wrongdoings permeated the Greek and Roman myths, in which the gods
continued interacting with the people and interfered in their fate, either supporting or
preventing their actions. The myth of Prometheus is of special importance because of
its universal and multifaceted value.
Carl Kerenyi, who devoted many years to studying the myth of Prometheus and wrote

the most comprehensive study based on the original texts and analyses of images on
Grecian urns, found out that the famous research carried out by the Polish ethnologist
Bronislaw Malinowski gave an example of the myths̓ universality, since “the role of
mythology among the inhabitants of the Triobrand Islands fits in exactly with the
mythologem of the sacrifice of Prometheus, the primordial sacrifice of the Greeks”
(Kerenyi 1963: xx).
Remaining on the grounds of the Mediterranean culture and its most powerful Scrip-

ture, we read that the people very soon distorted the divine plan for them and took the
risk of being smashed “from the face of the ground” by God, who “saw that the wicked-
ness of man was great, and the Lord was sorry that he had made man on the earth, and
it grieved him to his heart”. According to the Bible, people got another chance thanks to
the righteous Noah, who “found favour in the eyes of the Lord”. So, he was able to build

............................................................................... CROSSROADS. A JOURNAL OF ENGLISH STUDIES 37 (2022) (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)

the Ark, rescuing Gods̓ creatures because of Gods̓ will. The act of Prometheus was so
much different – he acted against the will of the gods, who punished the people by
making them struggle by themselves with no divine assistance.
The mythical figure of Prometheus has been a theme for literary works and compara-

tive religious studies since the earliest known mention by Hesiod in his Works and Days,
written in the eight century BC, although the myth itself is older. M. L. West, author of a
worthy translation of Hesiods̓ works into English, noted that “we now know that it was
not the product of Hesiods̓ savage fancy but a Hellenized version of an oriental myth,
other versions of which are represented in a Hittite text of the thirteenth century BC and
the Babylonian poem of the eleventh” (West in Hesiod 1988: xi–xii). However, we should
appreciate Hesiods̓ creative contribution even if he was not the original author of the
myth, like we do in the case of Shakespearian themes, to refer pars pro toto to the great-
est genius of literature. With attention paid to minor details of his narrative, Hesiod was,
for example, specific in describing the trick which Prometheus used to steal fire from
the gods: “the noble son of Iapetos stole it back for men from Zeus the resourceful in the
tube of a fennel (Hesiod 1988: 38). The same motif appears in Prometheus Bound”, the
tragedy written three centuries later by Aeschylus, who gave the figure of the rebellious
ancient god inspiring strength. His Prometheus was aware of the meaning of his gift of
fire, as well as of the inevitable punishment the gods doomed him to suffer:

I, poor I, through giving
Great gifts to mortal men, am prisoner made
In these fast fetters; yea, in fennel stalk
I snatched the hidden spring of stolen fire,
Which is to men a teacher of all arts,
Their chief resource. And now this penalty
Of that offence I pay, fast riveted
In chains beneath the open firmament. (Plumptree 1894: 97)

Prometheus gave people some protection in a hostile world, so they could live quite
safely, but soon the Promethean sacrifice was wasted. His brother Epimetheus brought
“a disaster to men who live by bread, since he was the original one who received the
moulded maiden from Zeus for a wife” (M. L. West in Hesiod 1988: 18). Epimetheus will-
ingly accepted treacherous gift from the gods. His wife Pandora, Prometheusʼ sister-in-
law, opened the notorious box. Who can prevent a woman from being curious? Like Eve
from the Old Testament, Pandora did not obey the godsʼ order. Unrestrained female
curiosity unleashed all the calamities known to humankind since then: wars, diseases,
floods, fires, and volcanic eruptions. One is temped to add climate change, but the
ancients did not use the term, and, of course, they knew nothing abut the Covid

............................................................................... CROSSROADS. A JOURNAL OF ENGLISH STUDIES 37 (2022) (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)

pandemic. Zeus forced Pandora to seal the jar up before Hope could escape. In Dantes̓
Divine Comedy only those entering Hell were to give up any hope: Lasciate ogni sper-
anza, voi che̓ntrate, while in the ancient myth humans could not enjoy any hope on
Earth. But Prometheus gave them fire, ʻtheir chief resource,̓ not only as protection
against wild animals and cold weather, but also as a tool for creative work. Thanks to
Prometheus, people gained what had been previously restricted to Hephaestusʼ forge.

Promethean inspirations in modern literature
The myth of Prometheus gained special importance as a literary theme since Miltons̓
Paradise Lost. We encounter its echoes in the writings of poets and thinkers writing in
different languages, including the most prominent authors like Goethe, Maria Konopnicka,
Julian Ursyn Niemcewicz or Franz Kafka, who transformed the myth most radically.
Carl Kerenyi emphasizes that “we usually come to mythology through the poets, and the

best approach to it is through the poets who are closest to us. By their treatment of the
material, they can communicate to us not only the content of the myths but also the expe-
rience of mythology” (Kerenyi 1963: xxiii). In his fascinating book Prometheus. Archetypal
image of human existence Kerenyi focused on Goethes̓ vision of Prometheus, the Lord of
the Earth, while Shelleys̓ name is barely mentioned in the Index. It may be assumed that
Kerenyi chose Goethe as a pars pro toto example of a modern “mythológos who put his
own thoughts, the product of intense experience, into the traditional mythological figure”
(Kerenyi 1963: 6). Most probably he did not know any poems by Cyprian Kamil Norwid
(1821 – 1883), the Polish poet and thinker who had the most profound understanding of
the essence of the ancient myth, of the figure who – according to Kerenyi (1963: 3) –
“presents a striking resemblance and a striking contrast to the Christian saviour”. If he
had known Norwids̓ writings, he would have focused on his ideas not less carefully than
on those of Goethe, the only poet he included in his most profound analyses.
The figure of Prometheus was especially popular in Romantic and post-Romantic

poetry. The great and most influential author of the time, George Gordon Lord Byron,
refers frequently to Promethean inspirations. The memory of Aeschylusʼ Prometheus
Bound, read during his schoolyears at Harrow, remained vivid in his mind.
In his poem Prometheus Byron contained the essence of the myth and its importance

for posterity:

Of thine impenetrable spirit,
Which earth and heaven could not convulse,
A mighty lesson we inherit:
Thou art a symbol and a sign
To mortals of their fate and force.
Like thee, man is in part divine,

............................................................................... CROSSROADS. A JOURNAL OF ENGLISH STUDIES 37 (2022) (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)

A troubled stream from a pure source. (RA 2006: 888)
Byrons̓ fascination with Aeschyluss̓ hero transferred to Mary Shelley, who gave her

most famous novel, Frankenstein, subtitle The Modern Prometheus.
The idea of drafting the story originated from lengthy discussions with Byron and her

future husband, Percy Shelley, held in Geneva in 1816 during the excursion of the group
of young and, by all their contemporariesʼ standards, immoral poets. However, Mary
Shelley decided to follow Miltons̓ view of the rebellious hero; she used a quotation from
his Paradise Lost as a motto for her novel about the unfortunate scientist who wanted to
be like the gods. Miltons̓ Prometheus is Luciferian. The one who stole fire for people
wanted them to become equal to the gods; fire was a pre-condition for any progress, for
safety against the cold and wild animals, but fire could also mean destruction, so maybe
the Greek gods considered it too risky to allow humans use it. Were they right? Mary Shel-
leys̓ character, Victor Frankenstein, who believes in the progress of science at any price,
reminds us of the dangers associated with stealing divine supremacy over nature – and of
disasters released from research laboratories, like, for example, the awful consequences
of the intense work of physicists involved in the Manhattan project, or, most recently,
virologists from Wuhan and other well-hidden places. Success in science attained despite
all the moral limitations may only bring destruction and unhappiness in the world of
humans. Both Milton and Mary Shelley depicted the dark side of Prometheus.
Marys̓ husband, Percy Shelley, one of the best-known Romantic rebels, saw it differ-

ently. Despite his loudly proclaimed atheism, he created his Prometheus as a figure
echoing Christ, who sacrificed himself for humanity. We can find interesting parallels in
his greatest literary achievement, so much appreciated by the Young Poland poet Jan
Kasprowicz, in the masterpiece worth reading today, when environment protection and
sustainability concerns prove to be of critical importance for the future of our world.
Shelley begins his Prometheus Unbound – conceived as a “supplement” or “equivalent”

of one of the two missing parts of the Aeschylean trilogy – with an extensive introduc-
tion in prose, presenting his sources, his writing method, and his goal, assuring readers:
“I have […] a passion for reforming the world. […] Id̓ rather be damned with Plato and
Lord Bacon than go to heaven with Paley and Malthus” (RA 1094). William Paley, a
thinker now quite forgotten but famous in his time, was in favour of the usefulness of
the idea of hell to control morals. Thomas Robert Malthus argued that wars, diseases,
and famines were necessary to control the growth of the population, and his name is
remembered in the context of neo-Malthusian thoughts which emerge now and then,
being either praised or condemned as the Malthusian trap. Shelleys̓ irony in contrasting
the great thinkers of the past with his contemporaries veils his profound knowledge of
philosophical ideas and their consequences for people; he was aware of the danger of
theories and their consequences not dreamt of by the authors.

............................................................................... CROSSROADS. A JOURNAL OF ENGLISH STUDIES 37 (2022) (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)

In Shelleys̓ tragedy, the suffering Earth, one of the “dramatis personae, cries in
despair: Misery, oh misery to me […] Howl, spirits of the living and the dead, / Your
refuge, your defence lies fallen and vanquished”.
The Earth is put at risk, but in the poets̓ vision neither Prometheus, nor humankind

are doomed; there are the seals, stronger than Destruction’s strength: Gentleness, Virtue,
Wisdom, and Endurance.
Interpreting Shelleys̓ Promethean visions, one must mention his reception by repre-

sentatives of philosophies which proved to be dangerous for the world. Friedrich Engels
tried to translate Shelley into German, and Karl Marx appropriated his ideas in a
completely distorted way. It seems that only Mahatma Gandhi appreciated Shelleys̓
ideals of non-violence and respect for nature. However, researchers who claimed that
Gandhis̓ vegetarianism stemmed from Shelleys̓ dietary attitude were completely
wrong. Not eating meat and not doing harm to any living creature is one of the funda-
mental principles of Buddhism and other Indian beliefs constituting the whole back-
ground of the rich culture of the country colonized by England. Anyway, as Morton
rightly stated, (2006: 41), “nowadays, Shelley is seen as prescient about health, nutrition,
and the future of the planet”.
Of the poets fascinated by Prometheus who gained appreciation during their lifetime,

Robert Seymour Bridges, Poet Laureate, deserves special attention in the context of
Norwids̓ poetry, and not only because of the merit of publishing the poetical heritage of
Gerard Manley Hopkins, to whom Norwid is compared by some researchers who find
similarities in both Christian thinkersʼ originality and innovative approach to the style
and language of poetry. Bridgesʼ poem Prometheus the Firegiver: A Mask in the Greek
Manner, written in 1883, the year of Norwids̓ death, presents the aspect which was most
important to the Polish poet: the creative power stemming from Prometheusʼ gift.
Bridgesʼ Prometheus gives people not only fire, but the ability to transform the Earth in
a creative way:

Now give I thee my best, a little gift
To work a world of wonder; ʻtis thine own
Of long desire, and with it I will give
The cunning of invention and all arts
In which thy hand instructed may command,
Interpret, comfort, or ennoble nature
[…] with geometric hand,
True square and careful compass he may come
To plan and plant and spread abroad his towers,
His gardens, temples, palaces, and tombs.
[…] thy mind

............................................................................... CROSSROADS. A JOURNAL OF ENGLISH STUDIES 37 (2022) (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)

Can picture what shall be: these are the face
And form of beauty, but her heart and life
Shall they be who shall see it, born to shield
A happier birth right with intrepid arms,
To tread down tyranny and fashion forth
A virgin wisdom to subdue the world,
To build for passion an eternal song,
To shape her dreams in marble.
(Bridges 1912: 23, 26)

The ideas presented by Bridges correspond with Norwids̓ beliefs. Shaping the Earths̓
dreams in marble was Norwids̓ dream in the years when he studied sculpture in
Florence and admired the genius of his predecessors in this area of art.
It seems that beside philosophical attractiveness, the myth of Prometheus contained

an idea that was especially appealing to poets who in their lifetime could not count on
othersʼ understanding or appreciation for their sacrifices made. In her poem Felicia
Hemans, Letitia Elizabeth Landon gave a clear expression of that:

The fable of Prometheus and the vulture
Reveals the poet's and the woman's heart.

Unkindly are they judged--unkindly treated—
By careless tongues and by ungenerous words;

While cruel sneer, and hard reproach, repeated,
Jar the fine music of the spirit's chords (RA 1454)

Byron and the poets unkindly treated:
Shelley, Keats and Norwid
Among those unkindly treated we find poets of different languages, and three of them:
Percy Bysshe Shelley, John Keats and Cyprian Kamil Norwid shall be discussed here.
Unlike Byron, the celebrity of the Romantic era, the three poets, rejected by their

contemporaries for different reasons, gained recognition only posthumously thanks to
the efforts of their future grandsons – if Mary Shelley, the editor and propagator of her
husbands̓ writings, can be included in this category, and if we forget about the reflected
fame Shelley enjoyed thanks to his friendship with Byron, who attended his very roman-
tic burial ceremony at the seashore. As Shelleys̓ schoolmate and biographer observed,
“there is scarcely a great poet from the time of Milton, down to the present day, who has
not proved a mark for the invidious malice of his contemporaries. But among all authors
of a past or present age, none has been more unjustly handled than Shelley” (Medwin
1847: 359). At least Shelley had a spectacular burial ceremony; his body, drowned in the

............................................................................... CROSSROADS. A JOURNAL OF ENGLISH STUDIES 37 (2022) (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)

sea, was cremated on a beach near Viareggio. Prometheuss̓ gift, fire, consumed the
earthly remnants of his admirer. Zygmunt Krasiński, one of the Polish Romantics and
once Norwids̓ close friend, when suffering in Rome from the poor condition of his
heart, wrote jealously in his letter to August Cieszkowski: “Kto je spali, gdy pęknie, i
zachowa popiół z niego? Czy napisze mi kto na urnie jak Shellejowi tu na cmentarzu: Cor
cordium?” (Krasiński 1988: 92) ʻWho will burn it when it breaks, and save its ashes? Will
anybody write on my urn, like they did for Shelley, the heart of hearts?.̓ Well, Krasiński
was not a rebel like Byron, Shelley or Norwid, who, paraphrasing Norwids̓ own words,
newer bowed to circumstances, and never told the truths to stand behind the door.
John Keats also did not compromise on his vocation and praised the truth. He, like

Norwid, was raised by his grandmother after the death of his parents, and, unlike Byron
or Shelley (the latter being expelled from Oxford for his rebellious acts), could not have
any formal classical education and struggled hard to study literature and art by himself,
from books and through visiting collectorsʼ galleries. Ian Jacks̓ fascinating book Keats
and the Mirror of Art helps us understand how individual paintings or the sculptures of
the Parthenon marbles, robbed by Lord Elgin in Athens and exhibited in London, influ-
enced the poets̓ writings and his concepts of art, which saves the most important trea-
sures of human existence – the truth and the beauty: “a vase or an urn was sometimes
ʻthe shape of beautyʼ that helped him to escape from mundane reality and disturbing
thoughts” (Jack 1967: 216). Keats originated from a poor family. Though appreciated as a
would-be physician, he rejected financial stability and gave up medicine because he
knew that poetry was his real vocation. Having made friends in literary circles, he
managed to have a few of his works published, but then, as a low-class Cockney poet, was
faced with mistreatment “at the hands of the hostile critics […] and unlike Shelley, could
not sustain the abuse with which his creations were met” (Scrivener 1982: 273).
Researchers found out that there were also political reasons contributing to the harsh
critical opinions of Keats. The poet challenged the class structure of British society and
praised those who struggled against oppression. As Evert Walter noted in Aesthetic and
Myth in the Poetry of Keats, the poets̓ “political liberalism found something to admire,
without distinction as to nationality or specific circumstance, in all who had ever risen
grandly to the challenge of tyrannyʼ (sonnet ʻTo Kosciuszkoʼ)” (Evert 1965: 78).
Beside being poor and criticized as a poet by influential critics, Keats suffered from

the then lethal illness called consumption, later known as tuberculosis. His friend,
painter Joseph Severn, decided to take him to Italy, in search of a healthier climate, but
the travel difficulties contributed to a worsening of Keatsʼ health condition. After the
long sea journey, the ship from England stayed even longer in port. Based on Italian
regulations, all the passengers had to remain in quarantine for a couple of weeks. The
health authorities were afraid of typhus, which was taking lives in England, and wished
to avoid the risk of spreading the disease in Italy. Likewise, after the poets̓ death, they

............................................................................... CROSSROADS. A JOURNAL OF ENGLISH STUDIES 37 (2022) (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)

burnt all his belongings and all the furniture in the house today known as the Keats-
Shelley Museum and ordered that the funeral be held in sanitary conditions. We know
the system too well, living in our “safer” time.
Norwid, deaf, half blind and ill, died in a home for Polish veterans run by the Polish

Sisters of Charity of Saint Vincent de Paul at Ivry – then a suburb of Paris, and today part
of the city accessible in fifteen minutes thanks to the fully automated metro line, but in
his times the location meant an exile, making the poet feel abandoned and lonely. After
his death, Norwids̓ body was laid in a grave paid for five years only. Afterwards, the
ashes were exhumed from the Ivry cemetery and put in a cheap common grave at Mont-
morency. It is painful when one remembers that Norwid so tenderly cared for his poor
living and dead compatriots. He designed and sculpted several Polish tombs at three
cemeteries in Paris. Norwids̓ prophetic poem about the great heroes appreciated only
long after their deaths is, in a sense, autobiographical. Nevertheless, Norwid strongly
believed in his future fame, and he was not the only one who cherished such hopes.
Timothy Morton (2006: 35) rightly observed: “Romantic poets were acutely aware of
their afterlives, and their works reflect that”. And one must admit that they were right.
Unlike Byron, whom todays̓ researchers and readers seem to forget, the three unkindly
treated poets keep fascinating subsequent generations, gaining not only sophisticated
critical editions of the whole of their writings (Shelley and Norwid had to wait for that
till the twenty-first century), but also increased admiration among the public. Film
makers and rock stars of our times take inspiration from their lives and poetry, just to
mention Mick Jagger reading aloud Shelleys̓ Adonais, devoted to the death of Keats, in
memory of his friend Brian Jones at a concert in Hyde Park, or Czesław Niemens̓ unfor-
gettable music written for Bema pamięci żałobny rapsod, written by Cyprian Norwid in
memory of general Józef Bem, the national hero of Poland, Hungary and Turkey.

Norwid – the Polish grandson of Prometheus
Cyprian Kamil Norwid, the Polish poet, sculptor, painter, engraver, and thinker so
profoundly immersed in the sources of our culture, studied the ancient authors so
intensely that he was able to depict ancient Rome in his Quidam as if he himself had
lived there among our Greek and Roman ancestors. Norwid admired George Gordon,
Lord Byron and Byrons̓ Promethean ideas turned into life experience so much that –
like Adam Mickiewicz – he decided to translate some of Byrons̓ poetry into Polish. It is
worth mentioning that Norwid, like Shelley, was a devoted translator of those whom he
admired – of the greatest authors of all centuries. Therefore, his choice of Byron –
beside Homer, Horace, Ovid, Michelangelo, Shakespeare, Dante, Tasso, or Psalms, is
meaningful, as Mieczysław Giergielewicz observed in his essay on Norwids̓ translation
of Moses’s Prayer (see: Giergielewicz in Günther 1962: 190). Norwids̓ admiration for
Byron did not lead, however, to any attempt to imitate Byronic style or motifs. The

............................................................................... CROSSROADS. A JOURNAL OF ENGLISH STUDIES 37 (2022) (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)

Polish poet was so much “himself” in his writings while remaining a careful reader of all
the most important sources of Western Culture, both ancient and contemporaneous.
Norwid included Byron among the greatest not so much because of Don Juan or Childe
Harold’s Pilgrimages, but primarily for his ability to sacrifice his life in defence of the
Greeksʼ fighting for independence, which was Promethean to the full extent.
Norwids̓ fascination with Byron, reflected in his letters, is well known; literary

researchers have analysed many aspects of it. George Gömöri (1973) presented the
importance of “the myth of Byron in Norwids̓ life and work”. Grażyna Halkiewicz-Sojak
wrote the most in-depth analysis of Byrons̓ recollections in Norwids̓ writings. She
noticed that Norwids̓ contribution to creating the Byronic legend may seem surprising
because “trudno na pozór znaleźć w XIX wieku dwie tak odmienne osobowości twórcze
jak Byron i Norwid” (Halkiewicz-Sojak 1994: 5) (ʻapparently, one could hardly find two
creative personalities who would be so different as Byron and Norwidʼ).
Norwid himself emphasized, and was proud of, the fact that his birth (1821) coincided

with Byrons̓ death in Missolonghi in 1824. The death of Byron – a celebrity of the Roman-
tic era – was known and remembered all over Europe in the context of the Greek war of
independence. Norwid did not know that the deaths of the two poets less known during
his lifetime, Percy Bysshe Shelley (1822) and John Keats (1821), coincided with the date of
his birth even more precisely. The house in Rome where young Keats was dying of tuber-
culosis is located less than 200 metres from the house at 123 via Felice (today via Sistina),
just behind the Holy Trinity church at the top of the famous Spanish Stairs, where twenty-
five years later the young Norwid had his atelier for two years until January 1849, when
he moved to Paris, the main centre of Polish emigration after the defeat of the November
uprising of 1830-1831. Shelley had also lived in Italy, and both Keatsʼ and Shelleys̓
mundane remnants lay in the protestant cemetery in Rome. So, the three poets were
close in time (by the death-birth vicinity) and in space, and most probably Norwid
himself would have considered it important. Both English poetsʼ resorting to the moral
values which may prevent catastrophe, and to art, which is stronger than death, resounds
with Norwids̓ thoughts transferred to his poetry, his prose, and his letters.
In his writings Norwid expressed ideas so valid today, when thousands are wandering

round the globe escaping from wars and hunger, or simply in search of a better future.
Being Europeans – living in our secure, welfare world for decades since the atrocities of
World War II, all of a sudden we have been faced with not only the threat of another
great war, but also with the challenge of being torn between utmost compassion and
unbearable fear associated with all the risks associated with the strict application of the
command left by Christ – to accept the needy in ones̓ own home – in the situation when
those in need may undermine our safety by bringing in not only helpless women and
children, but also the cruellest terrorists acting on behalf of evil. Such dilemmas were
not alien to people in the times of Norwid, he himself being an emigrant fleeing from

............................................................................... CROSSROADS. A JOURNAL OF ENGLISH STUDIES 37 (2022) (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)

the oppressors who occupied his country, Poland, then divided into three partitions by
Russia, Prussia, and Austria. He himself as a student was arrested and sent to jail in
Berlin, accused of conspiracy against the authorities; he lost his health there and
suffered from deafness in later years, when he lived in Rome, Paris, New York, and
London, a poor emigree trying hard to make a living as a sculptor, painter and engraver,
and to gain recognition among his compatriots as a poet and thinker. But very few of
them could understand him, and fewer appreciated or accepted his innovative poetry.
He objected to the commonly accepted rules and superstitions and never tried to please
his readers by satisfying common tastes at the cost of compromising his artistic
message; so, like Shelley and Keats, he could count on posthumous appreciation only.
In his letter to Joanna Kuczyńska of 1 February 1869, Cyprian Norwid wrote (Norwid

1971: 388):

Jestem przeciwny systematom spółczesnym, które głoszą:
„Europe aux Européens !”
Selon moi – Madame ! – il nʼy jamais eu des Européens, car nous tous nous sommes venus
ici de lA̓sie – de ce pays qui nous reste maintenant sur le̓mbryon de notre intelligence
comme un rêve du Paradis !
Ja pochodzę of Jafetowego wnuka, co przykowany był na szczycie Kazbeku w Kaukazie –
od dziada mego Prometheusa. JA JEDEN przeczę temu systemowi krwi i ras. Ja jeden – ale
cóż robić! – to moje mniemanie takie. Moim zdaniem Europa nie jest rasą, ale
principium! – bo gdyby by ka rasą byłaby Azją!!! (Norwid 1971: 388)

[“I am against the contemporary systems which preach: “Europe for Europeans!” I think,
Madame, that there have never been any Europeans, since we all came here from Asia –
from the country which now remains in the embryo of our identity like a dream about
Paradise. I originated from Jafet s̓ grandson, from the one who was bound to the peak of
the mount of Kazbek in the Caucasus – from my grandparent Prometheus. I am the only
one who opposes the system of dividing the blood and the races. I am the only one – but
what can I do, this is how I think of it. In my opinion, Europe is not the race, but
principium! Because if it were a race, it would be Asia!!!”] (translated by Aleksandra
Niemirycz)

Driven by the same feeling of compassion and belief in the equality of all humans,
Norwid opposed slavery and racism in his poem: Do Obywatela Johna Brown. Taking the
risk of straying from the point, one should mention that Norwids̓ verses, with their
multi-layer meanings, plays on words, and depths of interpretation, constitute great
difficulty for their readers in the original, so it is easy to understand translatorsʼ unwill-
ingness to cope with the task, and the resulting scarcity of available – and acceptable –

............................................................................... CROSSROADS. A JOURNAL OF ENGLISH STUDIES 37 (2022) (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)

translations from Norwid, continuously collected and analysed by Agata Brajerska
Mazur. Only the bravest undertook the challenge, from the “pioneers” Jerzy
Peterkiewicz and Adam Czerniawski to Danuta Borchardt and Walter Whipple. Unfortu-
nately, there are too many poetical masterpieces by Norwid, not to mention his prose
and letters, which have not yet been rendered in English. However, there are a few quite
successful translations of the poem addressed to John Brown; I consider Peterkiewiczs̓
version quite adequate. The poem attracted translatorsʼ special attention not only
because of its international recognition, but also because of the ending lines presenting
the poets̓ creed. Norwid wrote it in 1859 during the hectic efforts undertaken to save
John Brown. The Polish author was among the Europeans who, like Victor Hugo, tried to
prevent the hanging of the brave man who fought against injustice and the sufferings of
the blacks in America, “the land of the free” (Norwid 2000: 33), where John Brown was
eventually killed. Without a literal reference, Norwid praises the Promethean deed of
the American hero, who gave his life in defence of the equality of people. John Brown,
like Prometheus, opposed the ruling “gods” – the owners of Black slaves in the American
South. Browns̓ raid on the federal arsenal at Harpers Ferry in the state of Virginia, the
courageous act aimed at the initiation of the liberation movement, was like the blessed
crime of the mythical fire-giver. The American abolitionist leader, like Prometheus,
wanted to provide helpless humans with weapons against the misery and dangers of life
in darkness of slavery. But beside the sacrifice, Norwid alludes to the Promethean ideas
dearest to him, to the saving power of art:

So, till the shadows – Kościuszko and Washington –
Tremble, accept the start of my song, John –
Since before song matures man often dies.
Before song dies, nation must first arise. (Norwid 2000: 33)

Norwids̓ spiritual grandfather Prometheus sacrificed himself for all men, without
differentiating between races; the only division he objected to was the division between
the almighty gods and the poor humans left abandoned on earth as prey for frost and
wild beasts. Norwid could see much more profoundly into the theme. He saw divisions
in society, and injustices and cruelties caused by humankind. The idea of the equality of
all human beings as well as of the goal of history is the topic of his poem Socjalizm
[Socialism], numbered III in the volume Vade-mecum:

Ludzie – choć kształtem ras napiętnowani,
Z wykrzywianymi różną mową wargi –
Głoszą, że oto źli już i wybrani,
Że już hosanna tylko albo skargi…

............................................................................... CROSSROADS. A JOURNAL OF ENGLISH STUDIES 37 (2022) (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)

– Że Pyton-stary zrzucon do otchłani:
Grosz? – ze symbolem już, harmonią?... – targi!
Oh! Nieskończona jeszcze? Dziejów praca –
Jak bryły w górę ciągniecie ramieniem:
Umknij – a już ci znów na piersi wraca,
Przysiądź, a głowę zetrze ci brzemieniem…
– O! nieskończona jeszcze dziejów praca,
Nie-prze-palony jeszcze glob, Sumieniem! (Norwid 2004: 16)

[ʻPeople – though branded with the shape of races –
Preach with lips distorted by varying lingos –
That the evil ones and the chosen are in their places,
From now on either hosanna or weeping are their shares,
That the old Python has been sent to limbo
Penny? – just a symbol now, and harmony? … the fairs!
Oh! History s̓ work has not yet been completed –
It is like hauling up a block of stone with your arm
You slip away – it gets back to your breast to hit it
Sit down, and the load will smash your head and harm…
Oh! History s̓ work has not yet been completed,
The globe has not been burnt with Conscience!ʼ]
(Translated by Aleksandra Niemirycz)

In this poem the myth of Prometheus is combined with that of Sisyphus – like in the
text by the Polish poet Maria Konopnicka, but the most important phrase of the poem
refers not to myths but reflects Norwids̓ views in relation to Hegels̓ Lectures on the
Philosophy of History, congenially developed and sometimes opposed by August
Cieszkowski, the Polish philosopher, Norwids̓ friend and benefactor. Georg Wilhelm
Friedrich Hegel considered Jesus Christ, the incarnation of God, and his teaching the
attainment of the goal of human history; Cieszkowski thought that the incarnation of
God in a mortal human, Christ, was just a turning point: God became a man, and the
people gained a share in God(see: Cieszkowski 1972: 305).
Cyprian Norwid, late grandson of Jan III Sobieski, the famous Polish king, known as a

defender of Christianity, believed, like Cieszkowski, in humanitys̓ responsibility for the
work of history in its continuous course. He would never have agreed with Francis
Fukuyamas̓ prophecies contained in The End of History and the Last Man, saying that the
achievement of the goal of humanity, a fair social system of democratic liberalism,
meant the end of wars and political turmoil on Earth. Norwid strongly believed that
history – the centuriesʼ work – has not ended yet, because the globe has not yet been

............................................................................... CROSSROADS. A JOURNAL OF ENGLISH STUDIES 37 (2022) (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)

burnt out with conscience. Burning the globe through with conscience refers again to a
purely Promethean idea of fire as the indispensable factor enabling the growth of
humankind. The one who stole fire for people wanted them to become equal to the
gods; fire was a pre-condition for any progress, not only for safety against the cold and
wild animals. But fire could also mean destruction. Yet burning through the globe with
Conscience, although risky, is a conditio sine qua non for the attainment of final salva-
tion, so the labour of ages must continue.
Norwids̓ Promethean idea goes far beyond that, and beyond the visions of Byron of

Shelley. He would not recommend or praise stealing power from the gods or sacrificing
oneself for the salvation of humanity – one cannot do more than Christ. His idea is
different – he demands that people “cooperate” with the saviour Gods̓ mission – people
need to save themselves throughout history, in their earthly dimension.
Mickiewiczs̓ famous vision of Poland – Christ of nations from Dziady [Forefathers’ Eve]

emphasized the Messianic aspect of Polands̓ suffering; Słowacki found another
Promethean symbol, the Swiss hero Winkelried, and so in his Kordian Poland is “a
Winkelried of nations”. Both concepts give Poland a unique place among the nations –
as a country which sacrifices itself for others. Norwid considered such ideas false or
even blasphemous. Being a faithful Christian, he wanted to follow Christ s̓ teaching, and
so he was against such national hubris and lack of individual responsibility of everyone.
Mickiewicz and Słowacki appealed to the collective identity of the Poles; Norwid put the
emphasis on individual effort and struggle for salvation, both in the personal and
national dimensions.

So, the Norwidian Prometheus would not fight with the gods to either protect or
doom people; he would rather fight with humans against the shortfalls of their nature,
against what he referred to as brak, the Polish word meaning a lack, a missing of some
part of the whole, of the entirety, a shortfall taking revenge on the individual for his or
her inefficiencies. Norwids̓ Prometheus encourages people to save themselves and their
nation through hard creative work, because, as the poet wrote in his poem Język ojczysty
(ʻThe Native Languageʼ), it is not the sword or the shield which defend the nations̓
language – its identity – but only masterpieces. To make it short, Norwid thought that
Prometheus should be incarnated in every human being, and especially in the artist.
Prometheus – not God, not one of the Titans, not the hero suffering for people, but
Prometheus – the craftsman, the artist, the one who helps humans become human, to
transform idle marionettes into industrious creative beings able to cooperate with
Christ their Saviour in the deed of salvation.
Salvation is possible through beauty, which for Keats is tantamount to truth, and for

Norwid, is the shape of love, and is attainable only through work in the sweat of ones̓
brow. The work must be of the utmost difficulty, must cost the hardest pains – to pave
new paths for human existence and its highest expression – art. We are all called to

............................................................................... CROSSROADS. A JOURNAL OF ENGLISH STUDIES 37 (2022) (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)

participate in the beauty of Gods̓ plan for humanity, every one of us humans. As we read
in Promethidion, Norwids̓ most important poetical treatise on beauty and art,

Każdy w sobie cień pięknego nosi
I każdy – każdy z nas – tym piękna pyłem. (Norwid 2011: 106)

[ʻEvery man in him has beauty s̓ shadow / And each—each one of us is beauty s̓ dustʼ]
(translated by Aleksandra Niemirycz)

Arduous work is necessary in the service of beauty and truth to achieve the perfection
of the ancient Greeks and of the greatest artists. Those who have suffered most in this
struggle for a more complete human being, though never understood by their contem-
poraries, left us the pattern we need to follow. Beauty and truth are redeeming values
and are to be strived for. We find these values materialized in statues carved by
Michelangelo, in Chopins̓ music, in words more durable than those carved in stone –
and not only those of poets like Horace or Sapho, but of Roman codes of law, of Egyptian
art of engineering, in the highest achievements of different nations. In Promethidion
Norwid specially addresses his compatriots and their dreaming of Polands̓ salvation. He
believes that his countrys̓ revival is possible only through art. Norwids̓ Promethean
idea was far from that proposed by Mickiewicz, who identified the suffering Poland with
the crucified Christ, and who offered his homeland the role of a “Christ of nations.”
Norwidian thought is much more profound – and much more demanding.
We, humans, must grow and mature – like the song-seagull sent to John Brown across

the Ocean – to reach beauty’s shadow, which is inherently associated with our nature –
created to be the image of God.
The essence and nature of beauty, the theme so important to Cyprian Norwid, fasci-

nated John Keats, the poet who lived so briefly, but left so much beauty enshrined in his
perfect poems. He saw the beauty of nature, believed that opposite to mortal humans,
the poetry of earth is never dead. Keats, like Norwid, believed in the redeeming power of
beauty, and of art. In Endymion he expressed his conviction that beauty has a moral
value which never disappears:

A thing of beauty is a joy for ever:
Its loveliness increases; it will never
Pass into nothingness […]
Some shape of beauty moves away the pall
From our dark spirits” … (RA 1344)

............................................................................... CROSSROADS. A JOURNAL OF ENGLISH STUDIES 37 (2022) (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)

Keatsʼ words of beauty being truth resound with those of Norwid, for whom beauty
constituted a shape of love.
Keats, like his friend Shelley, like Norwid, and a few other visionaries of the Romantic

and post-Romantic times, fortune-told the future of humankind with a warning that
people must change themselves, be more compassionate to others and to the chain of
being. Norwid and Shelley came to similar ethical conclusions, despite the major differ-
ence concerning religion – Norwid being a Roman Catholic of strong faith, and Shelley
declaring himself an atheist. Also, they both – like John Keats with his unforgettable
praise of the Grecian urn – believed in the redeeming power of art.
Byron focused on slightly other aspects of Promethean heritage. He evokes the

pantheistic feature and loneliness of the rebel Prometheus in the famous scene from
Manfred. His hero complains upon the cliffs of the mountain of the Jungfrau:

The spirits I have raised abandon me
The spells which I have studied baffle me,
The remedy I recked of tortured me;
I lean no more on superhuman aid,
It hath no power upon the past, and for
The future, till the past be gulfed in darkness,
It is not of my search. My mother earth,
And thou fresh-breaking day, and you, ye mountains –
Why are ye beautiful? I cannot love ye.
And thou, the bright eye of the universe
That opens overall, and unto all
Art a delight – thou shins̓t not on my heart. (RA 903)

The idea of the idleness of beauty does not resound with Norwids̓ thoughts, but
Byrons̓ bright eye of the universe inevitably makes us think of one of the most beautiful –
and most philosophical – of Norwids̓ poems, the one numbered VI in Vade-mecum, W
Weronie, in which the artist s̓ – painters̓ view permeates the image evoked by words:

W Weronie
Nad Kapuletich i Montekich domem
Spłukane deszczem, poruszone gromem
Łagodne oko błękitu –
Patrzy na gruzy nieprzyjaznych grodów
Na rozwalone bramy do ogrodów,
I gwiazdę zrzuca ze szczytu –
Cyprysy mówią, że to dla Julietty,

............................................................................... CROSSROADS. A JOURNAL OF ENGLISH STUDIES 37 (2022) (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)

Że dla Romea, ta łza znad planety
Spada, i groby przecieka,
A ludzie mówią i mówią uczenie,
Że to nie łzy są, ale że kamienie,
I – że nikt na nie… nie czeka! (Norwid 2004: 19)

[ʻIn Verona
Over the Capulet and the Montague houses
Thunder-shaken, rinsed with rain which douses
Mild eye of the heavenly blue –
Looking at ruins of unfriendly castles
And smashed gates in the gardensʼ rustle,
Throws from the high a star leaking through
Cypresses say that this heavenly tear
Is for Julliet and Romeo whose tombs are near
That the tear falls to wet their bones
But people say in a scholarly tone
That these are not tears but minerals alone
And – no one awaits these … stones! ʼ] (Translated by Aleksandra Niemirycz)

In this poem Norwid – unlike the Byronic hero – expresses his profound trust in
nature. Even if the people lose the feeling of transcendence, or even if they cease to
believe in the redeeming power of eternal poetry – Shakespearian heroes are referred to
as its representatives – the cypresses, trees of great symbolic meaning, will speak on
behalf of human culture, like the evangelical stones which were supposed to praise the
glory of the Lord if humans were silent.
Another image gets associated with Norwids̓ “star thrown by the mild eye of the blue”,

and of Byrons̓ bright eye of the universe. It is T. S. Eliot s̓ eagle from his Choruses from the
Rock which “soars in the summit of Heaven while the Hunter with his dogs pursues his
circuit.” In Eliots̓ vision the two orders, the heavenly and the earthly, are separated, and
the idea behind it is pessimistic. Eliot, like Norwid, asks fundamental questions associ-
ated with our human condition – since we are creatures torn between the safety and
dangers of life, between the lie and the truth, between the beauty and the waste, the
divine and the profane:

The endless cycle of idea and action,
Endless invention, endless experiment,
Brings knowledge of motion, but not of stillness.
Knowledge of speech, but not of silence.

............................................................................... CROSSROADS. A JOURNAL OF ENGLISH STUDIES 37 (2022) (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)

Knowledge of words, but ignorance of the Word.
All our knowledge brings us nearer to death,
But nearness to death no nearer to GOD.
Where is the Life we have lost in living?
Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge?
Where is the knowledge we have lost in information? (Eliot 1988: 148)

All these sad statements make us ask the question of whether the risk of ultimate
sacrifice – be it that of Prometheus, of Christ, or of an abandoned and suffering artist,
misunderstood by his contemporaries – is worth taking if the people remain ungrateful,
forgetful, lost in the universe, and sometimes evil.
Norwid gave us his answer. It is a statement and an appeal at the same time, expressed

in his poem Bohater [Hero], so profoundly understood by the Polish Pope-poet John Paul
II, the greatest of Norwids̓ late grandsons, and the most careful of his readers and
interpreters:

Heroizm będzie trwał – dopóki praca,
Praca? – dopóki stworzenie!... (Norwid 2004: 93)
ʻHeroism will last – until there is work,
Work? – until there is creation!...̓

References
The Bible containing the Old and New Testaments. Revised standard version translated
from the original [based on the traditional King James version]. 1967. Westlea, Swin-
don: British and Foreign Bible Society.

Bridges, R. 1912. Poetical Works of Robert Bridges Excluding the Eight Dramas. London:
Henry Frowde, Oxford University Press.
Cieszkowski, A. 1972. Prolegomena do historiozofii, Bóg i palingeneza oraz mniejsze pisma

filozoficzne. Ed. J. Garewicz & A. Walicki. Warszawa: Państwowe Wydawnictwo
Naukowe.

Eliot, T. S. 1988. Selected Poems. Poezje wybrane, transl. A. Piotrowski, M. Sprusiński,
J. Zagórski, W. Dulęba. Warszawa: Instytut Wydawniczy Pax.

Evert, W. 1965. Aesthetic and Myth in the Poetry of Keats. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton
University Press.

Giergielewicz, M. 1962. Norwidowska “Modlitwa Mojżesza”. In: W. Günther (ed.), Norwid
Żywy, 191-205. Londyn: B. Świderski.

Gömöri, G. 1973. The myth of Byron in Norwids̓ life and work. The Slavonic and East
European Review, 51(123): 231-242.

Jack, I. 1967. Keats and the Mirror of Art. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

............................................................................... CROSSROADS. A JOURNAL OF ENGLISH STUDIES 37 (2022) (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)

Halkiewicz-Sojak, G. 1994. Byron w twórczości Norwida. Toruń: Towarzystwo Naukowe
w Toruniu.

Kerenyi, C. 1963. Prometheus. Archetypal Image of Human Existence, transl. Ralph
Manheim. London: Thames and Hudson.

Krasiński, Z.1988. Listy do Augusta Cieszkowskiego, Edwarda Jaroszyńskiego, Bronisława
Trentowskiego. Ed. Z. Sudolski. Warszawa: Państwowy Instytut Wydawniczy.

Medwin, T. 1847. The Life of Percy Bysshe Shelley. London: Thomas Cautley Newby.
Morton, T. 2006. Receptions. In: T. Morton (ed.). The Cambridge Companion to Shelley, 35-
42, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Norwid, C. 2011. Dzieła Wszystkie IV, Poematy 2. Lublin: Towarzystwo Naukowe Katolick-
iego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego Jana Pawła II, Biblioteka Narodowa.

Norwid, C. 1971. Pisma wszystkie. Listy 1862 – 1872. Ed. Juliusz W. Gomulicki. Warszawa:
Państwowy Instytut Wydawniczy.

Norwid, C. 2000. Poems – Letters – Drawings, edited and translated by J. Peterkiewicz
(poems in collaboration with Ch. Brooke-Rose and B. Singer). Manchester: Carcanet
Press.

Norwid, C. 2004. Vade-mecum. Edited by J. Fert. Lublin: Towarzystwo Naukowe Katolick-
iego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego.

Plumptree, E. H. 1894. The Tragedies of Aeschylus. A new translation with a biographical
essay, and an appendix of rhymed choral odes. Boston: D. C. Heath and Co., Publishers.

Romanticism. An Anthology [RA]. 2006. Third edition. Edited by Duncan Wu. Malden,
Oxford, Carlton. Blackwell Publishing. Hereinafter referred to as 2006 RA

Scrivener, M. H. 1982. Radical Shelley. The Philosophical Anarchism and Utopian Thought
of Percy Bysshe Shelley. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

***

Aleksandra Niemirycz is a Polish researcher, poet, philosopher, literary translator and
conference interpreter. In the past she worked as an editor, a journalist and a high
school English and Polish teacher. She graduated from the University of Warsaw (M.A.
in Philosophy 1988, M.A. in Polish Studies 1989; Interdisciplinary Postgraduate Studies
in Translation and Interpreting), and continued her literary education in the Institute
of Literary Research of the Polish Academy of Sciences. In November 2016 she earned
her doctorate at Cardinal Stefan Wyszyński University in Warsaw.

ALEKSANDRA NIEMIRYCZ 1 DOI: 10.15290/CR.2022.37.2.04
Promethean struggle: Shelley, Keats, and Norwid in search of rescue in the risky world