MigajÄ ce wibrujÄ wersety,
Nie uchwycisz, co siÄ w nich ukrywa â¦1
(Julian Tuwim, Biblia cygaÅska, 1933)
Papusza and the Origins of Tears of Blood
The uniqueness of Papuszaâs work is often taken as an axiom, for example, it can be heard that âPapusza had a unique personality, and her songs are unique as wellâ (Szott 2016, 469). Indeed, her work enters literature during the 1950s, when it was impossible to talk about female Roma poets and writers as a visible trend. The Soviet Roma literary project had actually come to an end in 1938, while the future female Czechoslovak Roma writers were still going to school.
Hence, the uniqueness and loneliness of Papusza as a literary figure is undeniable. On the other hand, a differing opinion also circulated among Roma that there were many people similar to Papusza: âAmong Romnis (Roma women) there are many poets like Papuszaâ (Machowska 2011: 62; Kuzniak 2013: 165). These opposed points of view are not mutually exclusive. If we consider all those involved in oral creativity as poets and poetesses, then this was indeed the situation. Each Roma family, perhaps, can find among its members a person reputed to be a âgenerator of texts,â who on this account became part of the collective memory. However, not everyone was able or wanted to write down these texts, let alone have them published. The uniqueness of Papuszaâs case lies in the fact that the poet had a clear understanding of the importance of presenting the results of her creativity to the reading public in the form of a book. This achievement required on her part quite extraordinary efforts and sacrifices. Furthermore, the feat would not have been possible without the help of state officials, in particular, writers with an established political position in the communist Poland. What is more, they facilitated Papuszaâs membership in the Union of Polish Writers (ZwiÄ zek Literatów Polskich), as only this organizationâs members were allowed to publish works of literature without too many problems.
To comprehend properly the phenomenon of Papuszaâs poetry, one has to address simultaneously and in conjunction these three questions, first, how to grasp properly what was written; second, what compelled Papusza to write it; and third, how it should be pronounced correctly. The last point is of much significance in the poetâs absence. When Papusza was alive, the authorâs performance of her poetry was conceived as the final stage of the creative process. At this stage, the poet could smooth out any rough edges and distortions left in writing with the use of another languageâs spelling system. After all, âPapusza sings her poemsâ (Szott 2016: 472).
These three issues are of import when researching the entire corpus of Papuszaâs poetic and prose writings, both in Romani and in Polish, which together add up to her literary legacy. Yet, with respect to a single text, for example, the epic poem RatwaÅe jaswa (Tears of Blood), such an approach is also necessary. Unfortunately, this approach is not easy, because it requires much attention from the reader to the questions of composition, when perusing the poemâs Romani original or English translation, both presented in this volume. It would be more comfortable to deal with these issues one by one. However, the need to move constantly from one perspective of analysis to another, from the minutiae of sound transmission to hidden meanings encoded in the overall structure of the poem compel us to consider these three issues as inextricably intertwined aspects of text interpretation.
The difficulty entailed by such constant consideration of these three issues in conjunction explains why Papuszaâs poetry âhas rarely become a subject of the analysis of literary discourseâ (Szott 2016: 470). Although many scholars discussed and analyzed her poems, driven by the fame of the poetâs oeuvre. For this reason, leaving aside the analysis of minutiae at the level of form, it is necessary to reflect more holistically on the poetâs idea of a given poem as a singular phenomenon.
But even with this caveat, the end result may not be satisfactory.
The opinion that Papusza did not emulate any examples needs to be clarified. MirosÅawa Szott justifiably corrects Ficowskiâs statement âthat her poetry does not draw on any other examples with the exception of Roma folk songsâ (Szott 2016: 474). However, by limiting research exclusively to the ethnically Roma origins of Papuszaâs poetry, scholars risk to overlook the influence of Polish culture on her poems. The attraction of this culture was such that still in her childhood Papusza learned how to read and write in Polish.
In the two-layer model of Roma culture, it is appropriate to single out âthe traditional layer, for instance, occupations, housing, dress, holidays, customs and rituals, oral and musical folklore, etc.â and the recently formed âcontemporary layer, that is, modern forms of artistic creation, such as literature, painting, music, theater, cinema, etc.â (Marushiakova, and Popov 2016: 35). In contrast, the actualization of a particular culture is steeped in an inseparable fusion of phenomena belonging to both layers. In a car, one should not mention beng (âdevilâ in Romani), as well as one did not mention it in the traditional Roma cart (wóz kryty in Polish). Likewise, the Roma social decorum requires that when talking to assembled authorities via a video link, one should stand up before addressing them. The same rule applies at any meeting of oneâs extended family indoors. Roma literature is an important part of the so-called âcontemporary layerâ of Roma Culture (Marushiakova and Popov 2016: 35). But Romani linguistic means for creating texts in novel genres remain rooted in traditional types of discourse, developed earlier in the context of traditional culture.
During the formation of a literary (standard) language, initially its use spreads to social spheres and contexts where previously it was not employed. Therefore, what Papusza did with the Romani language should not be considered narrowly as mere object of linguistic analysis, but also in a more encompassing manner, which recognizes this achievement as âa fact of the history of cultureâ (
Reading literature significantly impacted the formation of Papuszaâs emotional world, for example, Helena Mniszkównaâs (Mniszek) melodramatic bestseller novel TrÄdowata (The Female Leper, 1909). Papusza reminisced: âWe also had time to read. I chose novels, whose plots could help as an example with everyday life. Dyźko [Papuszaâs husband] and I were crying over one book. Its title was TrÄdowataâ3 (Kuźniak 2013:41). The sad fate of a poor noble girl touched the Roma camp girlâs heart and, perhaps, gave rise to some fantasies. Along with fiction, pre-war Polish cinematography could also influence the formation of Papuszaâs imagination. Although the cinema was then still seen a poor relative of literature. In 1926, skeptical Virginia Woolf asked: âIf the [cinema] ceased to be a parasite, how would it walk erect?â (Woolf 1926: 382). Literature has remained the foundation for filmmaking since the latterâs inception. But soon enough, in the reversal of roles, the cinema began impacting literature. The first film adaptation of TrÄdowata (released in the same year 1926 that saw Virginia Woolfâs wry remark mentioned above) was silent, while a decade later, in 1936, was already a talking picture. As early as the former film, a special tie-in edition of the novel was published (Mniszek 1926).
Perhaps Mr and Mrs Wajs (Dyźko and Papusza) read this cheap mass publication. Books and films provided Papusza with models of noble behavior for emulation, including posture, gestures, facial expressions and intonation, which distinguished the poet until her old age. She remained so âpre-warâ in her demeanor. In this context, the relevant section from her diary on Papuszaâs own sufferings follows the cinematic model, including the poetâs trip to the city of Grodno (today, Horadnia in Belarus) to find oblivion. It reminds a film-like mise-en-scène: the unfortunate âgypsyâ is crying, sitting alone on a bench on the banks of the Neman River, and passers-by cast her sympathetic glances (PamiÄtnik: 12â13).
And a few words about the importance of the third question, namely, the performance of a poetic work on the stage. For Papusza, given the inherently imperfect shape of her writings, performance is of critical importance. Only then she can check upon and correct the realization of her artistic concept. So, in the documentary film about Papusza (1974), she reacts with the interjection âCzekaj Pan!ââ4 (CygaÅska 1978: 18:55) to Ficowskiâs attempt to break into her monologue about the Gypsy idea of happiness with some clarification at the very moment when she is approaching the rhetorical acme of the final passage. From his point of view, it was an acceptable intervention as part and parcel of the ongoing intellectual dialogue with Papusza. In contrast, from the poetâs perspective, Ficowski thus could âruin the songâ when the film was being shot.
When talking about texts that emerge at the intersection of cultural conventions, even different conceptual universes, one has to keep in mind that the meaningful value of communication is often inversely proportional to the ease of communication. Unlike small talk, which often is formulaic and part of the formal etiquette, messages that overcome intercultural barriers do not always correspond to the typical formats adopted in one of the interacting cultures. A high level of emotions is often communicated through the violation of the rules of grammar, etiquette, or style. For instance, often a paradoxical narrative arises when a non-English-speaking victimâs traumatic war experience is translated into this language (Kelman 2009). The imperfect form of the dramatic message may even discredit the seriousness of its content. However, it does not negate the emotional meaning of the event itself, as well as the sincerity and seriousness of the authorâs intentions. The latter believes that the social value of this message amply excuses its imperfect form.
Briefly, the higher the barriers to communication are, the more the message costs. Bridging the gap between the meaning communicated by the Other and the limited possibilities of interpretation the addressee possesses and is prepared to apply, the Other can use any means in unusual contexts in order to achieve at least some understanding on the addresseeâs part.
Creating texts in a foreign, not always fully mastered language, can be evaluated in different ways. Thus, Kelman writes about the content value of evidence rendered in imperfect (non-native) English. In contrast, R.M. Rilkeâs Russian-language poetry was assessed highly in terms of lyrical imagery and linguistic originality. Papusza also tried her hand at writing in Polish (PamiÄtnik âDiaryâ). The use of the Polish majorityâs language and literary patterns Papusza acquired through her indiscriminate reading of sentimental mass publications, leading to a predictable initial stage of imitation. It is characterized by a combination of idiosyncratic and normative uses, including regional (dialectal) features and phonetic spelling. The poet commented in Polish âCzytaÄ Ã³mÄ dobrÄ Alie PisaÄ szkaradnieâ5 (âI can read well, but my way of writing is uglyâ) (PamiÄtnik: 2). Papusza found writing difficult.
Obviously, for the Other to resort to an unusual mode of communication is a challenge. But for the recipient, the acceptance and recognition of the relevant details of this message is not a trivial task, either.
Authors from the lower strata of society, be it Captain Lebiadkin (from Fyodor Dostoyevskyâs novel Demons) to present-day bloggers, produce works whose artistic and meaningful assessment cannot be based on the literary standards of their time. Such texts transcend or even hack these standards, even if their authors pledge allegiance to them. This is also the case of Papuszaâs voluminous literary Diary (PamiÄtnik), written and re-written several times in Polish prior to the composing of Tears of Blood in 1949 (Machowska 2011: 121). Only on one page does the Polish text (in an idiosyncratic spelling) is interspersed with Romani in 13 lines (PamiÄtnik: 196). The poet took a firm decision, so to speak, to play on a foreign pitch, by writing in Polish. The publication of Papuszaâs Diary is not even planned yet. Even choosing a compromise spelling may not be an easy task. Although a good solution could be to keep the original in Papuszaâs own idiosyncratic spelling side by side with the text in standard Polish orthography.
The bilingualism of Roma ethnic groups (in plural) is a complex phenomenon. It also manifested itself in the use of various (language) forms of the poetâs official name BronisÅawa Wajs. It is worth reflecting on the well-known phenomenon of official (language) and community (Romani) names of Roma. The Roma(ni) name, usually intended for use in oneâs own family and community, rarely coincides with the official one. In the case of Papusza, we have a rare example of revealing the Roma name to the outside world. Such a step, from the Roma perspective is considered unsafe in a practical and symbolic sense.
In Romani papusza (or nowadays papuÅ¡a in popular Romani spelling) means âdoll.â How the poet received and used her Roma name appears similar to the story of the stage name of the popular Soviet actress of Roma extraction Lyalya Chyornaya (Nadezhda Sergeevna Khmeleva, 1909â1982). They say that when the actress was born, one of the guests called the pretty baby a lialechka âdollyâ in Ukrainian or Belarusian. The description stuck to her as the future actressâs Roma name, and as such became also entrenched in the outside world of gadže (non-Roma). Thus, the Polish equivalent of the Roma name Papusza is Lalunia or Laleczka (that is, diminutive forms of lala or lalka âdollâ). âOh! Mama called me Lalunia in Romaniâ6 (Machowska 2011: 95). The usage is not exclusively of Roma character and is widespread among Polish-speakers, too, for example, âthe youngest sibling Anna, due to her beauty and height was called Lalkaâ7 (Sznajderman [2019]: 226).
Not each bilingual author in her creative work decides to switch from the majoritarian language with all kinds of registers fully developed to her native language that was not previously employed in such contexts. This requires a serious reconfiguration of attitudes and a switch in the already mastered patterns of language use. Also, a thoroughly different situation arises in the perception and evaluation of creativity in a self-taught authorâs native language, which is also a minority language. This is always a cultural breakthrough, even if the achievement is limited to mastering trivial topics or meeting propaganda goals. Indubitably, such an experiment expands the horizons of a minority language that previously was limited to everyday communication.
In the case under consideration, Papusza simultaneously draws on two traditions, the Roma oral folklore system and its genres and their Polish counterparts. In the former case, it was stories about life experiences and lyrical texts about fate. On the other hand, the Polish models included poems and ballads, but also sermons and prayers. Often, to create a radically novel kind of a text in a minority language, its author must feel a strong internal conviction or compulsion. After all, an audience of readers who would enjoy and appreciate such a text has not coalesced yet. Only in the future, such a reading audience may arise, who would enjoy and appreciate texts in their native (minority) language. Subsequently, writers would create more texts for a growing number of readers, leading to an accumulation of genres and publications. In turn, the process may produce an entire literature in a minority language. But prior to this moment, a minority language author, like Papusza, needs to work in a cultural vacuum.
In the case of Papusza, we have no answers on the goals of her creativity, or why she wanted to enter the circle of a written culture. More than once she denies the sarcastic suggestion of other Roma women that she wants to become a teacher: âno BÄdzisz Poni naóczycielkuâ8 (PamiÄtnik: 3). However, Papusza never reflects on her own literacy goals. Apparently, it was not clear to Papusza, either, what she intended to attain. Literacy is a basis of polite society. It is grzecznoÅÄ (âpolitenessâ in Polish) that Papusza and a Polish girl Irusia are hotly discussing (PamiÄtnik: 194â196). Politeness and respect for one another is something that Papusza sorely missed at home. Acquaintance with another more comfortable and delicate world began with literacy in its language. In Papuszaâs case it was Polish language and culture, to which the popular primer Elementarz (Falski 1910) or any other of that time opened the way.
What is striking in Papushaâs stance is her confidence that she has the right to be different from anyone else. Admirably and with steeled determination, she humbly endured the hostility of her family and other Roma, when confronted with her desire for gadjo (non-Roma, formal) knowledge. The image is biblical in its origin, reminiscent of an unrecognized prophet persecuted by his own people. âCo chcieli to mowili namnieâ9 (PamiÄtnik: 3), âdóżo omnie mówionoâ10 (PamiÄtnik: 4, 6), âsiÄ Åmieli z mnie ⦠Plóli namnieâ11 (PamiÄtnik: 5). Apparent indifference and lack of reaction to humiliation appears to reproduce the (Polish) nobilityâs pattern of reserved and courteous behavior. Papusza learned about it and its role in polite society from the popular novels she read. Yet, the attention paid to these situations in the diary shows that she was still hurt, after so many years.
In the context of any majoritarian culture in Europe, a reading Roma girl who joined a library at the age of 14: âjosz mam PeÅnych 14 lat lat życia zapisaÅam siÄ do Bibliotekiâ12 (PamiÄtnik: 3) is an oxymoron. The mirror opposite of Papusza transitioning from non-literate to literate culture is young Julian Tuwimâs quest for pre-literate joy, as encapsulated in his ecstatic self-presentation as a dancing Socrates, which is also the title of his poem âSokrates taÅczÄ cyâ (Tuwim 1920).
Originality and insightful content that, as if by chance, shed light on the experience of the Other, thanks to the structures of a majoritarian culture is not always guaranteed. It is a high-risk area. Like Papusza, Mikhail Bezlyudsky (1901â1977) experienced this dilemma first hand. He was a Roma boy from the region of Ryazan. In 1928, in a Moscow prison, the future writer learned about literature and creative writing by attending courses led by Russophone poets (Marushiakova and Popov 2022: 456). Afterward, similarly to Papusza, he enjoyed reading Russian-language pulp-fiction indiscriminately (Marushiakova and Popov 2022: 451). Meanwhile, Bezlyudsky began to write poetry first, and then prose in the Romani language. Unfortunately, after the end of the Soviet policy of nativization (korenizatsiia) in the mid-1930s, he was unable to write and publish in Romani any longer. Romani was excluded from among the narrowing group of Soviet languages in which literary and book production was supported by the state.
The epic poem RatwaÅe jaswa (Tears of Blood) was written, above all, to soften evil hearts. This lofty goal is declared at the beginning and at the end of the poem, constituting its overarching framework. Te skowloÅ ÅÄgro / dzi âso that their soul will softenâ (RatwaÅe 23â2413 ); sare swetytka dzija. te / skowlakireÅ âI would like you to soften / all the worldâs soulsâ (RatwaÅe 1018â1019). It is worth noting that these fragments were dropped from the abridged publication prepared by Jerzy Ficowski. He did not appreciate this message, although it was also addressed to him. It was not for nothing that the Roma kept repeating: âIt is justified what we say about Ficowski: A Golden head, but a Cold Heartâ14 (Machowska 2011: 60). Obviously, the political and cultural context of communist Poland still in the grip of stalinism was not conducive to the publication of the entire poem. Had Ficowski disregarded censorsâ suggestions, it would have never come off the press and probably would have been lost.
Apart from the overarching appeal for softening hearts, the poem is permeated by the eponymous metaphor of ratwaÅe jaswa (tears of blood). The rhetorical figure is repeated eight times in the text: RatwaÅe jaswa (RatwaÅe 2), jaswin / Ratwali (12â13), dzi roweÅ ratwaÅe / jaswÄnca (20â21), jaswa {r} ratwaÅe (137), jaswa ratwaÅe (294), rowen ratwaÅe jaswÄnca (516), syr ratwaÅÄ / perenys jaswa (712â713), ratwaÅÄ jaswa (868).
The poemâs title and main rhetorical figure of âtears of bloodâ is an allusion to popular Catholic prayers in Polish, for instance, âKoronka do krwawych Åez NajÅwiÄtszej Maryi Pannyâ (Chaplet for the Bloody Tears of the Blessed Virgin Mary) or âRóżaniec do Åez Maryiâ (The Rosary of Our Lady of Tears). The imageâs origin is biblical, for example, see: âhe prayed more earnestly, and his sweat was like drops of blood falling to the groundâ (Luke 22:44). The figure is of such pivotal importance for the poemâs plotline that the adjective ratwaÅo âbloodyâ is used in the text exclusively in relation to tears (of sorrow). Repetitions of the appeal to God na de, Devla! (RatwaÅe 101, 161) (âDo not permit, God!â) and reminders of the selected genre gili, gili tugani (RatwaÅe 15, 38) (âthe song of sorrowâ) show the poemâs direct parallels with the aforementioned prayers.
The poemâs genre and rhetorical framework reflect the fate of its author, who can be justifiably seen as a poetess-cum-prophetess. Initially, the Roma rejected Papusza. Then the Roma perception of her as a fellow Roma person evolved from traitor to heroine (Krzyżanowski 2016: 67â81).
My Story of Acquaintance with the Poem
I decided to add a little about my own personal experience with the poem RatwaÅe jaswa (Tears of Blood), since it sheds light on my attitude toward the text. I first came across an abridged version of the poem in the volume Cyganie na polskich drogach (âGypsies on the Polish Roadsâ) (Ficowski 1965). Probably, it was in 1986 I had a rare occasion to borrow this book for a brief period. During the time, I rewrote for my own use all Papuszaâs texts found in this edition. The Romani dialect of the Lowland Roma of Poland is quite close to the North Russian dialect of this language. Romani linguist Matras says that âtheir [Polska Roma] dialect is closely related to that of the xaladitka roma or âNorth Russian Romaââ (Matras 1999: 4). The dialect of the Polska Roma (âPolish Gypsiesâ) constitutes part of the Northeastern macrodialect of Romani, spoken from Poland in the west to Vladivostok in the east (Tcherenkov and Laederich 2004, Vol 1: 370, 376). Unbelievably, in the mid-1920s, the same dialect was selected as a basis for the Soviet project of the Romani literary language in the period of nativization (korenizatsiia) (Demeter and Chernykh 2018: 168). Thus, despite some differences observed between these closely related dialects of Romani, potential readers of Papuszaâs poetry live in numerous countries outside Poland.
My first encounter with Papuszaâs texts impressed me immensely. But at that time, I had no idea how much richer the original manuscripts were. I had a chance to learn about much later. In August 2021, I received a letter from Volha and Tomasz with an offer to transcribe and translate the Romani manuscript of Tears of Blood in Papuszaâs own hand. Subjectively speaking, it seems to me that this year lasted much longer than it actually did, since work on the manuscript completely absorbed me. Thanks to the covid restrictions and lockdowns, I had time and space to devote my full attention to Tears of Blood. And I did not let it go until the last letter was identified and transcribed. I discussed some Romani manuscripts of Papuszaâs poems with Emilia Kledzik, which allowed me to gauge the scale and achievement of Papuszaâs oeuvre as a poetic whole.
The full text of the poem turned out to be four times longer than the selection published in 1956. For some time now researchers have postulated the need to refer to Papuszaâs unabbreviated and unedited texts of her poems. âOnly Ficowskiâs translations available for analysis, it is difficult to determine to what extent the translations of [Papuszaâs] poetry differ from the Romani originalsâ (Szott 2016: 471).
This cavalier approach to publishing Papuszaâs writings was characteristic of Jerzy Ficowski, who followed the changing attitudes of communist Polandâs censorship (cf. Koper 2016: 170â181). The same is true of the publication of his Polish-language field notes of living with Papuszaâs Polska Roma family group. The most altered and abridged version of these notes came off the press in 1953. According to Ryszard Krzyżanowski, in its published form only a quarter of the original account was preserved, mainly the parts concerning the persecution of the Roma by Nazis and Banderites (Kledzik 2020: 184). Particularly, Ficowski left out all the neutral and positive details of everyday Roma life. In an orientalizing fashion, he concentrated on Roma holidays and family celebrations. This was a politically acceptable image of Roma as ethnically non-Polish war victims and survivors. Furthermore, Ficowski cast aside almost all Papuszaâs philosophy of peace and harmony with the universe, alongside her reflections on the sources of human brutality in war and day-to-day relations.
In the abridged version of Tears of Blood, Ficowski, as its translator and editor, strove to foreground the suffering. In comparison with the full text, his version is not only much shorter, but also strangely monochromatic. Perhaps, his command of Romani was probably insufficient for Ficowski to grasp all the nuances. In the Romani original, Papusza is an epic character, a Roma Homer. On the other hand, in Ficowskiâs version she is molded into a socialist realist writer, who goes straight to describing a prescribed topic, like a diligent schoolboy.
The role of Ficowski as a researcher, translator and editor of Papuszaâs oeuvre has not been fully assessed yet. Emilia Kledzik broached the subject by proposing that âthe subject, whenever he decides to reveal himself, becomes a modernist ethnographer, using the language of discursive domination and orientalizing clichésâ (Kledzik 2019: 157). Such a âsubjectâ might misinterpret lengthy repetitions in Papuszaâs texts and other oral poetic devices as a sign of insufficient literary skill. But Papusza was guided in her choices by the strictures of oral performance of poetry as songs. In addition, she followed the tradition of the Roma rhetoric, according to which it is necessary to make the performance comprehensible to the Roma audience. Above all, this approach entails the repetition of the most important events and statements.
Ficowski was open about the fact that he published fragments of Tears of Blood. âIt is a selection of fragments of from a longer story in verse about the experiences of Gypsies [Roma] in the years of the greatest intensification of their extermination [by Germans] during the Second World Warâ (Ficowski 1956: 153). Ficowskiâs choices were dictated by politics of his times and the inability of the mass European reading audience to comprehend oral Roma narratives, especially about the experience of the Roma Genocide. Political considerations are quite obvious. For example, Ficowski left out the entry barrier painted in red and white stripes, or the Polish national colors, to the camp site of a detachment of the Armia Krajowa (Home Army), which was anticommunist and opposed the Soviet control of Poland (RatwaÅe 816 and 818). Likewise, Romani-language monologues on serious and tragic topics are longer than their translated versions, which were shortened to suit the expectations and tastes of Polish and European readers.
In oral literary production and performance different rhetorical devices are employed than in writing or on the printed page in a book. The importance of words uttered by a senior member of a Roma community is signalled by the special Romani verb phukavel âto narrateâ or âto bear witness.â A witness account of this type fulfils two main functions. First of all, it teaches the community, and especially its younger members, about lifeâs tribulations, including advice on how to stay away from harmâs way among the gadzios (non-Roma). Second, such stories confirm the correctness of the Roma way of life.
Ficowski had to conform to the limits of the printed page, which is not conducive to preserving the fullness of oral performance. But he was able to preserve and convey the main aspects of what Roma had suffered during the war, caught between various parties fighting against one another. In general, it can be said that the abbreviated version of Tears of Blood serves âthe purpose of raising awareness about the Roma among the majoritarian (non-Roma) populationâ (Berkyová 2017: 51). This role is confirmed by the translations of this poem into many languages of the world. Yet, the unabbreviated Romani original is considerably richer in content and literary devices.
The epic component of the original was thoroughly removed from the abbreviated version. What may at first glance seem like verbosity entailed by the poetâs ineptness, in reality is ritualized remembrance of the past and the dead. This is also a lament, so typical for oral culture, for the victims of war and the genocide. In this context, monologue is a manner of expressing grief and compassion.
The description of the death of Papuszaâs friend, with whom they both led the Russian troops (RatwaÅe 598â609) is a good example. The redundancy of the narrative is an indicator of the authorâs emotional solidarity and involvement in the events described. The composition of the poem as an oral object forced onto paper shows the dominance of the former over the latter. The original, recorded in a slim copybook, ends exactly at the last line available on the copybookâs last page. The closing message is appropriately uplifting not to leave the (notional) listeners downtrodden. Perhaps, symbolically even the poetâs official (gadjo) name is split between the two last lines for the sake of an optimistic future and closing the poem. As with each note and melody turn in a song performed live, in the manuscriptâs copybook Papusza strives to fill in each page to the last line.
Not always did Ficowski properly comprehend, transcribe, and translate lines from the manuscript of Papuszaâs Tears of Blood. Romani adverbs with the ending -kiro (for instance, bikhameskro âwithout sunâ) were not correctly identified and transcribed (RatwaÅe 15â16, 38â39). It is typical for Ficowski to mix the noun rat ânightâ and the adverb raty âat nightâ (RatwaÅe 50â51, 191, 472). He translated the verses {?} Gijam dór dór {?} swÄtenca (RatwaÅe 57â58) as â*during the holidays / Christmas,â though what the poet intended was â(s)he went to the (broad) world.â Papuszaâs substitution of the letter [e] for [Ä] caused this misunderstanding.
Ficowski not only transcribed and translated Papuszaâs manuscript, but also heavily edited it. Traces of his labors can be identified by comparing the manuscript with the published abbreviated version of Tears of Blood. We confine ourselves to two examples. First, Ficowski changed the manuscriptâs isy âisâ to kamen âthey want toâ or âthey are going toâ in a syntactic construction that conveys obligation or inevitability (RatwaÅe 50â51). Secondly, he replaced the borrowed Slavic adjective in the description of the night to a âmore appropriateâ one of Indic origin. Papusza wrote och. odo {ciomno} [kali] raciory! (RatwaÅe 536), while Ficowski transcribed this line as follows: Och, do kali raÄori!
This approach to editing is a form of purism. However, the collocation ciomno raciory âthe dark nightâ is attested widely in Romani folklore texts. Their producers do not tend to mechanically increase the proportion of Romani lexical elements. Such purism has no esthetic value in folklore. On the contrary, fluency in two or more languages allows Roma performers to engage in complex word games and translingual puns.
At times, Ficowski excluded from publication fragments acceptable for communist censorship, because he misunderstood a word or expression.
Ficowski did not include in the abbreviated version, these fragments where the verb applied exclusively to the Germans, meaning âto retreatâ. Let us have a look at the examples:
A_dzia kaj saso mós[i]ndzia te wychytoÅ âSo, where should the German escape?â (RatwaÅe 72).
po|kóty sa Chylton âthey keep gradually receding (stopping?)â (RatwaÅe 234â235).
czy | sasio doredyr chyltyja<?> âdoes the German retreat further?â (RatwaÅe 354â355).
sasy chylcien âthe Germans are retreatingâ (RatwaÅe 639).
The four sentences give three forms of the same verb with the hesitation in the notation and pronunciation of the final consonant of in the root, namely /t/, /tâ/ or / tÍ¡É/, which is written as
[wy-chy|l|toÅ], [chyltoÅ] and [*chylcioÅ] â(s)he retreats;â
[chylton], [*chylcion], [chylcen] and [*chylcien] âthey retreat;â
[chy(*l)tyja] and [*chylcyja] â(s)he retreatedâ.
The first person singular form of this verb could possibly be [*chylciowaw].
Probably, Papusza quoted an expression either from some gadjo slang or another Romani dialect, which would explain the variability of spelling.
It is unclear why Ficowski avoided consulting obscure words with Papusza. A telling example of how Ficowski dealt with words he failed to comprehend is connected with the name of the walking stick. The word pcherybnagry (female grammatical gender) appears four times in the manuscript. It stems from pherav âI walk,â and developed through the following forms: pherybena âwalksâ (pl.), and pherybna|n|giro âsomething or someone related to walksâ. All of these fragments were omitted from the abbreviated version.
PaÅ jamÄder sasy klistes i Aménca pcherybnagry, na {d}_maras âThe Germans after us on horseback, chasing us, we <only with a hiking staff> wonât escapeâ (RatwaÅe 62â64). In the manuscript, this place is marked with the symbol [/], which indicates the end of a fragment omitted from the abbreviated publication.
jek i paÅestyr bót gadzio desz dzine pcherybnagrja pre pchikie. bolbowcy zamarde âhe was alone, many non-Roma [chased] him, ten people with sticks on their shoulders. The Bulbovites killed themâ (RatwaÅe 408).
pcherybnagrja lidzianys tykne rakla âlittle girls <local Ukrainian girls> were carrying these sticksâ (RatwaÅe 585).
A_dre foryco zatradyjam gadzi czechi tsinde roma sawe) tylko mamósza pcherybnagraja A_dre wasta i partyzantka dre wesza âwe entered the little town, namely, Poles, Czechs, Jews, Roma, what different kinds of people <you could meet in this townlet>, walking stick in hands, while the guerrilla detachment [remained] in the woodsâ (RatwaÅe 946).
Usually, it is easy to reconstruct the reasons for the deletion of certain fragments from the abbreviated version of Tears of Blood. For example, at the poemâs end, there is this passage, which praises the positive aspects of free life in the forest. It had to be cut:
As clearly visible, Ficowski wanted to emphasize the negative aspects of nomadic life. For this reason, the optimistic vision of unity with nature and the likening of the Roma to birds of the forest were considered inappropriate. They had to be deleted. The poetâs vacillation in her assessments of the new sedentary way of life was not allowed to reach readersâ eyes.
Another obvious reason for deleting some lines was communist Polandâs official atheism. The word âGodâ was removed wherever possible. It occurs 37 times in the manuscript, but only only 12 references of this kind made it to the abbreviated version.
In general, the feeling that permeates the entire text is the state of shock. The narrative depicts wartime suffering, everyday life, nostalgia for the waning nomadic way of life. Yet, Papusza concluded the poem with a cautious hope for a wonderful peaceful future under the novel conditions of sedentary life in communist Poland. Often, her poetry is seen as veiled propaganda for sedentarization, but the poet was quite satisfied with the results of âthe beginning of the action for sedentarizing Roma in communist Poland, which was to make them âmore productiveââ (Kledzik 2019: 166) from the perspective of the countryâs centrally planned economy.
The first impression from the point of view of language use is overwhelming. It was sufficient to grasp Ficowskiâs way of reflecting Romani phonemes in order to read out the poem as it should sound in Romani. However, the manuscript of Tears of Blood in Papuszaâs own hand opens a path to a deepened understanding of this masterpiece and its further dimensions that are absent in Ficowskiâs abbreviated version. It is not alone the fact that at least 75% of the Romani original were left out. What really strikes is the frankness with which Papusza described military life and emotions of the poemâs protagonists.
However, on the way to read and transcribe the manuscript, a prominent obstacle is encountered. First of all, it was Papuszaâs own idiosyncratic hand, typical for autodidacts with no formal training in calligraphy. I immediately recollected the peculiar hand of Roma poet Evdokiia Orlova from Moscow. It felt that this singer and dancer embarked on drawing each letter like on a difficult quest. Similarly, Papusza showed diligence and labor with which the poet wrote her texts, letter by letter. The reader must bear in mind the process and its ramifications. Polish spelling re-employed for conveying Romaniâs phonemes constitutes the initial barrier. Another barrier is posed by Papuszaâs regular omissions of letters in certain phonemic contexts, alongside typical and ad hoc ligatures, so typical of the Polish written school hand.
While boundaries between words are easy to establish, separating sentences posed a problem. It was especially difficult to discern boundaries between different speakersâ words in the dialogues, which also happens in traditional Roma songs. However, reward was rich for the hard work. The suddenly revealed Romani manner of leading conversations with peasants, Soviet guerrillas, Bulbovites or AK (Polish Homeland Army) soldiers turned out to be amazingly accurate.
The Manuscript
Unsurprisingly, the handwritten manuscript of Tears of Blood is executed in a specific Romani spelling. After all, any of the projects for the consensual Romani orthography has only met with limited acceptance, e.g. the alphabet which was coined in the 1990s. Papusza used her son WÅadysÅawâs (Tarzanek) school copybook, ironically earmarked for lessons of the Polish language. The poemâs text exceeded the slim copybookâs 16 sheets. So, the poet had to resort to inserting additional sheets of paper. Probably, it was Ficowski or an archivist, who paginated all the manuscriptâs pages in pencil, from folio 1 recto and 1 verto (corresponding to page 1 and page 2) to folio 27 recto and 27 verto (corresponding to page 53 and page 54).
The 12 inserted sheets, perhaps torn out from another copybook, Papusza paginated in her own hand. In the completed manuscript, this pagination commences with number 2 on page 29 (NB: âF. 15râ means folio 15 recto, while âF. 19vâ means folio 19 verto):
575 2. (P. 29 <F. 15r>).
620 3. (P. 31 <F. 16r>).
664 4.) (P. 33 <F. 17r>).
707 (5.) (P. 35 <F. 18r>).
789 (6) (P. 37 <F. 19v>), at the bottom, circled.
792 (7) (P. 39 <F. 20r>), at the beginning of the first line, circled.
817 (8) (P. 41 <F. 21r>), circled.
857 (9) (P. 43 <F. 22r>), circled.
896 (10) (P. 45 <F. 23r>), circled.
916 (11.) (P. 47 <F. 24r>), circled.
959 (12) (P. 49 <F. 25r>), circled.
1002 (13.) (P. 51 <F. 26r>), circled.
The rearrangement of words in a number of cases testifies to copying from an earlier draft. For instance,
dzijepen \\ szukar â in the manuscript, while in Ficowskiâs published abbreviated version: Å¡ukar džiipen (RatwaÅe 114);
Bary \\ tu sam (RatwaÅe 118) â in the manuscript, while in the abbreviated version: tu san bary âthou art great (fem.)â (pronounced /sam_ba.Ërɨ/). This example suggests that the original word order read tu sa/m/ bary., compare with the two following instances: moginem men te chtyÅeÅ âthey can catch usâ (RatwaÅe 67), where moginem + m ⦠< moginen + m â¦; 467 merem bokchatyr 2 dój Ähawore â2 children are starvingâ (RatwaÅe 468), where merem + b ⦠< meren + b. ⦠Perhaps, Papusza rearranged the order of these words in the final draft by mistake, while the corresponding editorial markings only correct these errors.
Insertions in blue ink are a later markup, probably in Ficowskiâs hand. Likewise, it was probably him who also edited the manuscript in black ink and pencil, as far as can be deduced from the scanned copy of the manuscript.
The communication of evidence of public importance to Roma communities, even today on the internet, necessitates the replication of traditional rhetorical figures required by the situation, for instance, expressions of respect to listeners or spectators: Te javen saste i baxtale sare Roma, terne i phure. Mangav tumen te skenden tumen p ada lajfo âMay all Roma, old and young, be healthy and happy. Please join this running brookâ (
A public statement made by a member of a traditional Roma group cannot be banal. It is always devoted to some extraordinary deviations from the usual order of things. The decision to deliver such statement entails a high degree of responsibility and is bound to evoke a similarly high level of emotions both in the speaker and among the listeners. For example, it is exactly this aspect that poet Osip Mandelstam comments on in reference to Danteâs verse Così gridai con la faccia levata (Inferno 16: 76) (âThus cried I with my face upraisâdâ [Alighieri Hell 16: 76]). According to Mandelstam, these words signal Danteâs ecstatic state, when he is addressing all the world. Appropriately, this message is multi-layered in semantic and emotional terms (
The way in which such a public statement of the truth is performed, Papusza strives to reflect in writing. As the song or speech fills in the space of a room to the fullest, the poet aims at achieving a maximum text density, so that no blank spaces are left. In the process, the final letters in a line are squeezed tight, at times requiring that the lineâs end is bent downwards to accommodate the last word.
Papusza avoided splitting words between lines, or pages, because when sung each word constitutes a whole in its own right. But if a word did not fit in the line, then only one letter could eventually be transferred to the next line. When after filling the entire page with text it was necessary to split a word, Papusza did not use a hyphen, but rather underlined the penultimate letter of the split word on one page and the wordâs last letter on the next page. In some places such underlining is missing but is never used for any other purpose.
Papusza never wrote more than one word in the last lines at the bottom of the page. Apparently, from the purely technical point of view, it was difficult to fill in the entirety of this line. First of all, the writing hand did not have sufficient support, while at the same time it was necessary to be careful to not touch the finished page, because the ink was still wet.
When in some instances the bottom of the page is left blank, this may indicate the poetâs desire to distribute the text rewritten from the first draft in accordance with some typographic plan she had in mind for the final draft. For example, at page 7, a couple of lines are left blank at the bottom, because a new section begins at page 8. It opens with a second address to the listeners, so the importance of such an address did not let Papusza to start it at the end of a page. Directly addressing the listeners is a common rhetorical practice in the case when an official testimony is delivered orally at a Roma community meeting. It can be said that Tears of Blood, as a witness account, was addressed to a close circle of family and friends belonging to a single Roma group. On an important occasion, they met at a community gathering and listened to Papusza singing about their wartime tribulations.
Among the Polska Roma, such community meetings are referred to with the polonism sendo âlaw courtâ (in Polish sÄ d). They continue to play an important role in traditional Roma culture when making final decisions on issues of importance for the entire community, often controversies and conflicts (Marushiakova and Popov 2012). Sendos follow a strict formal. Especially speakers take an oath to ascertain that they would tell the truth.16 Nowadays, the rise of modern means of communication allows for keeping in touch with all the members of a single Roma community, who live in different countries. As a result, sendos are held more rarely.
A sendo was to be convened in 1950 for discussing the possible damage to the Roma community from the publication of Papuszaâs poems. âUnconsciously Papusza revealed âsecretsâ to Ficowski and he published themâ (Machowska 2011: 31fn62, 46, 186).17 The question whether Papusza should be allowed to publish texts arose before writing Tears of Blood. That a sendo would deliberate the issue perturbed the poet. In late 1950 the Roma community was alarmed at the publication of Julian Tuwimâs interview on the Roma with Ficowski (Tuwim 1950). âIn this year Tuwimâs interview with Ficowski appeared in the periodical Problemyâ (Kledzik 2019: 162, 177).
A sendo on the case of Papusza never took place. But in her 1952 poem the poet reiterates arguments in defense of her innocence. She listed her services to the Roma community rendered during the war and afterward.
Monologues, like speeches at a sendo, usually begin with well-wishes and an address to the audience. Next, these elements are repeated as markers of a new section, which is a witness account communicated through the monologue. Papusza borrowed this âcommunication etiquetteâ from oral performances at Roma gatherings (
However, the poet also turns to another addressee, a much larger audience that includes all people in the world. The problems of âincluding the Gypsy population into the production processesâ (Kledzik 2019: 170) of communist Polandâs economy were not resolved as gently as the representatives of the Roma communities expected. This negative outcome gave rise to the desire of identifying the culprits. Certainly, Papusza found herself among them. Yet, it must be emphasized that the poetâs oeuvre and archive have not become a subject of thorough and rigorous study yet. Hence, it is difficult to sift between the description of real-life events, self-censorship and flourishes required by literary (folklore) conventions of Roma performing.
Furthermore, it is necessary to analyze and describe Papuszaâs âspontaneous and intuitiveâ (Sonnemann 2019: 25) Polish-style spelling system, which she employed to write down Tears of Blood and her other writings. This task must include a reflection on the poemâs phonemic features. So far reasons for the variability in the spelling of this or that word has not been established. But it should be presumed that these changes communicate important shades of a meaning or altogether different meanings.
Papuszaâs way of writing Romani is phonetically faithful. Working in a family of professional harpists, she had a perfect pitch. As a result, the poet tried to reflect as many phonemic, suprasegmental and other prosodic elements of spoken Romani as possible. This ambition explains why Papuszaâs spelling is quite variable.
Another important aspect of Papuszaâs narrating is detailed remembrance, which makes Tears of Blood both a witness account and a historical document. The text is overloaded with quotes. Numerous Polish expressions were used under the guise of Romani words, mostly through calquing. For instance, the Romani expression syr dewÅes kamam âas I love Godâ is a calque of the Polish set saying jak Boga kocham for confirming the sincerity of oneâs words. The poet faithfully translated dialogues conducted in a variety of languages. For example, she used the polite plural form of the pronoun âyouâ (that is, wy in Polish, cf. vous in French) for addressing a person, which is unattested in regular Romani speech.
As a result, Papusza âdistortedâ Romani to imitate the specific way of addressing Polish soldiers or common people in Volhynia. Quite exceptionally, the Romani used in Tears of Blood is not only the poetâs native dialect. She quoted what Roma from different groups had spoken in a variety of their own Romani dialects, variously influenced by the languages of their gadjo (non-Roma) neighbors, be it Belarusian, Polish, Russian, Ukrainian or Yiddish. Thus, Papuszaâs epic poem deserves to be treated as testimony, carefully crafted and delivered by an experienced observer, rather than a message from a barely literate person. Unfortunately, the latter lazy and orientalizing assessment (or rather dismissing) of Papuszaâs oeuvre still prevails.
Peculiarities of Papuszaâs Rhythmic Prose
The first task is to describe of the method of reproducing Romani speech, which Papusza developed for writing her texts. Without the reconstruction of phoneme to grapheme correspondence in Papuszaâs writing, any decoding of her texts will be limited and prone to erroneous readings. Not surprisingly, Papuszaâs writing system is typical for autodidacts. Unlike an uninitiated non-Roma reader may think, Papuszaâs manuscripts are written in an extremely careful hand. Due to the idiosyncrasies of Papuszaâs writing, some letters and their shapes may seem ambiguous or hard to establish. Yet, it should be borne in mind and appreciated that the poet invested much time and effort into writing relatively extensive texts by a hand untrained in school calligraphy. The pages of the manuscript of Tears of Blood are a testament to the poetâs great concentration and perseverance. She was clearly inspired by the self-imposed mission to bear witness on Roma sufferings during World War II.
I researched numerous Cyrillic hands of Roma authors who wrote in the interwar Soviet Union. Those who received elementary education as adults had a clear, but not fully developed, style of handwriting (
The squeezing of letters and words in order to fill in each blank space on the page is another remarkable feature of Papuszaâs manuscripts. This desire to maximize the use of the entire sheet, Papusza shared with the neurotic Fyodor Dostoevskyâs approach to writing by hand. This feature is a sign the author was overwhelmed by the visceral urge to get rid of the memories of a traumatic experience as soon as possible through leaving its detailed description on paper. This tension dictated the peculiar emotional and dynamic rhythm of writing the manuscript of Tears of Blood. Papusza wrote at night, she was very tired, but felt unable to stop. âAt times I wrote so long until all the kerosene in the lamp was goneâ (Papusza in Kuźniak 2013: 85). Fatigue was the main cause of errors, omissions and unnecessary repetitions of letters and words.
Often reasons for missing a letter are not of a phonemic nature, but a plain error, for example, sz[u]kar Te dziweÅ â[it is] wonderful to liveâ (RatwaÅe 31), ja[s]|wÄnca âwith tearsâ (RatwaÅe 36â37), or char[a]kter âcharacterâ (PamiÄtnik: 3). However, in each case, a check is recommended to identify a possible phonemic reason for omitting a letter. For instance, wytsiór[e]nes â[they] were stealingâ (RatwaÅe 758) can be pronounced as /vɨtÉuËrenɨs/ or /vɨËtÉurnɨs/. Yet, the latter option should be discarded in favor of the former, which works much better in relation to the rhythm observed in the preceding and the following verses.
Papusza sometimes repeated the last word on the page at the beginning of the following page. In some instances, reasons for this practice may be different, but typically it was a mnemonic aid often observed in hand-written books, for instance, [Page 34] wawyr ziakirde [Page 35] (5.) żakirde âthe other [people] waited || waitedâ (RatwaÅe 706â708).
The shift of the Polish postalveolar fricatives and affricates /Ê, Ê, tÍ¡Ê, dÍ¡Ê/ (written [sz, ż, cz, dż]) into the dentialveolar sibilants /s, z, tÍ¡s, dÍ¡z/ (written [s, z, c, dz]) is called mazurzenie. Another linguistic phenomenon occurring in Polish is jabÅonkowanie, or the merger of the retroflex sibilants /Ê, tÍ¡Ê, Ê, dÍ¡Ê/ (written [sz, cz, ż, dż]) and palatal sibilants /É, tÍ¡É, Ê, dÍ¡Ê/ (written [Å, Ä, ź, dź]) into the intermediate series /Êʲ, tÍ¡Êʲ, Êʲ, dÍ¡Êʲ/ (sometimes written [Åz, Äz, źż, dźż]). Both phenomena are reflected in Papuszaâs variable spelling. Palatalization observed in the manuscript of Tears of Blood may be used for stylistic reasons. For instance, sasio Baro âthe Great Germanâ (for obliquely referring to Adolf Hitler) (RatwaÅe 123), Mas âmeatâ (RatwaÅe 267, 385), but: kuÄ masiore âtasty pieces of meatâ (RatwaÅe 147).
Some words repeated in a row (âdoubledâ), which reflects different ways of their pronunciation, for example:
so ÅÄn dewÅa ziakireŠżakire[Å] âOh Lord, what does for them wait || waitâ (RatwaÅe 99) â regional vs standard pronunciation of Polish ż;
konyka / konika âa horsey || a horseyâ (RatwaÅe 768â769) â Ukrainian vs Russian pronunciation.
These repetitions in all likelihood arose spontaneously as a result of the poetâs âmental dictatingâ to herself). At other times, such repetitions are inadvertent, the seemingly repeated word belonging to the autonomous phrases stem from the overlapping words from neighboring phrases.
A_daj boba / Ähórdeja niekones na zamar[dzia] / A_dzia jek dywes âthey dropped another bomb, but didnât kill anyone. / So that is how once â¦â (RatwaÅe 936â938).
The word na zamar[dzia] â[a pilot] didnât kill [anyone]â is unfinished at this page. Its ending was added at the following page, where it also doubles as the beginning of another phrase, namely, A_dzia âso.â Such overlapping of the neighboring parts in the two phrases written next to each other should be suspected, when no sensible syntactic structure can be restored through the simple transcription of the manuscript.
It is not always clear whether this phenomenon is a result of skipping one word or its segment when alike with the initial word in the following line, which might happen in the process of copying from the preliminary draft. Another possible explanation is that Papusza faithfully reflected the properties of performed (sung) speech, when such overlapping may be dictated by the needs of rhythm or rhyme. In such a formalized setting, the listener is ready to attribute the same word or its segment both to the previous and following line. For example:
gorownia rowen syr mamósza / wymarde so ki cherój katelaregÄ / i zaÅen ÅÄgro Barwalipen âCows cry, like people / killed to the last one, from the Catholics, / [they] are taking their propertyâ (RatwaÅe 372â374). The sentence can be also interpreted differently if the phenomenon of overlapping is borne in mind (overlapping elements are emboldened): âCows cry, like [any] people killed to the last one; / as this <Polish> people were killed to the last one, from <these> Catholics / [they = Ukrainians] are taking their propertyâ.
The doubling of a word in a written text occurs also due to other reasons. Let us consider this example: soske na mereÅ ciororo {ty[l]ko} tylko / mósineÅ wesz weszestyr TepchereÅ âWhy donât the poor die, only / have to wander between the forestsâ (RatwaÅe 880â881). Papusza considered the first attempt to write the word tyko as non-standard. She corrected the spelling by inserting the letter [l], resulting in ty[l]ko. But this outcome did not suit her, either. Subsequently, the poet crossed out this attempt and rewrote it as the perfectly correct tylko.
Sometimes the doubling of a word is a result of unrealized automatic repetition (dittography). Instances of this phenomenon can be found in Papuszaâs unpublished diary, written mainly in Polish, for example, i do Åmierci PamiÄtaÄ BÄdÄ BÄdÄ âand until [my] death I will will rememberâ (PamiÄtnik: 2). The end of the phrase is also repeated in this example: Apre Boli / ben Boliben âin the sky skyâ (RatwaÅe 193â194); jatsian sygedyr {sygady sygede} / [syg][e]dyr â[Why have you] stayed behind? Faster, [faster, faster] faster!â (RatwaÅe 253â254); {T}[d]ykch|e|n A_pre boliben syr // syr migoczyneÅ zdraÅ âdo you look at the sky, how // how does it flash, tremble [with fires of explosions]â (RatwaÅe 208â209).
Two close, but slightly different, grammatical forms written in a row can express hesitation, for example, bistyr[Åa] // bistyreÅ â<God> will forget // forgets [us]â (RatwaÅe 300â301). The repetition of an adverb may express emphasis, for instance {?} Gijam dór dór âwe went far, farâ (RatwaÅe 57).
All in all, both repetitions and omissions were a result of Papuszaâs hard work on Tears of Blood. She was fatigued but pressed on with the necessary work to bear witness. Her tiredness and haste generated minor flaws in the design of the manuscript and spelling. At the moment of writing, she did not notice such errors, because the poet paid her full attention to the sung internal dictation of the text in her mind. It is a complicated business to transfer an oral text in its fullness onto the written page.
Papuszaâs Idiosyncratic Spelling
The letters used by Papusza to write Tears of Blood stem from the Polish-style Latin alphabet. The peculiarities of Papuszaâs usage are caused by the lack of formal education and by the poetâs application of this writing system to represent the phonemes of the Romani language. Because of the former, the poet did not really distinguish between uppercase and lowercase forms of letters. On the other hand, faithfulness to the pronunciation of Romani generated several spelling variants of the same word.
Most Polish Latin-alphabet letters, as employed by Papusza, are used in a standard manner. Yet, some require a detailed explanation, regarding their use.
Letter A
Papusza prefers to use the capital [A] at the beginning and even in the middle of a word or phrase, for instance, pszegijam Apre WoÅyÅ âwe suffered in Volhyniaâ (RatwaÅe 3). Papusza learned to write by drawing in sand time and again all the letters of the Polish alphabet in the established order âA, b, c and the rest of the letters, as they stand in the primerâ (Papusza in Kuźniak 2013: 32). However, this does not explain why the uppercase [A] is more common in Papuszaâs hand than the lowercase [a]. In her diary, Papusza recollects differently the process of learning how to write: i tak sÄÌ naóczyÅam a B c d i tak dalej18 âand thus I learned a B c d, etc.â (PamiÄtnik: 2).
Papuszaâs spelling idiosyncrasies include the widespread use of the capital [A] and [B]. At times it is hard to establish whether a given letter executed by the poet is a capital or minuscule. The use of such uppercase [A] and [B] (for instance, Bersza [RatwaÅe 3]), alongside the lowercase [t] with a high crossbar typical of the capital [T] (for example, ne so TÄ keres TszÄbi Te bagÄÅ [RatwaÅe 8]) served to better distinguish these letters from the minuscule [f] and [Å]. This method can be observed in numerous hands at the turn of the 20th century.
Letter Ä
In the Polish vernacular (dialect) used and heard by Papusza in everyday life, the nasal vowels, so typical for standard Polish, did not occur. The denasalization of these vowels is a distinctive feature in the eastern dialects of Polish, or in todayâs western Lithuania, western Belarus and western Ukraine (Dejna 1973: 191). That is why Papusza rarely uses the letter [Ä ]. In Tears of Blood it occurs only three times. Twice this happens, when a need arises to represent the Indic phoneme in the Romani adjective nÄ go /naÅo/ ânakedâ (RatwaÅe 179). Perhaps, the poet wished to emphasize the difference in pronunciation between this adjective and its Polish counterpart, nagi, which is rather similar, due to the interrelatedness of the Indo-European languages. The third occurrence of [Ä ] is observed in the Russian-language song, namely, kÄ somol[i]c âkomsomoletsâ19 (RatwaÅe 795). Papusza used the ad hoc letter [Ç«] twice to differentiate between the Romani nasal vowel designated with [Ä ] and the close Polish nasal vowel (in Polish orthography written with the letter [Ä ], but here with [Ç«]), for instance, kÇ«somoliec âkomsomolets,â bÇ«by âbombsâ (RatwaÅe 764, 917).
Perhaps, it is not necessary to consider all the letters employed in writing by Papusza, but some clearly need detailed commentaries, due to their idiosyncratic use.
It is difficult to say whether phonemic or spelling factors caused Papuszaâs tendency for confusing [B] and [P], for instance, BrosiÅa[m] rodzicow (in standard Polish: ProsiÅam rodziców) âI asked my parentsâ (PamiÄtnik: 3). When relating a Russian-language song, the poet wrote: probaÅa (correct phonemic transliteration of this Russian word into standard Polish spelling: propaÅa) âshe was lost, perishedâ (RatwaÅe 798). One case was difficult to decide, because Papusza clearly wrote [B], but the context strongly suggested that it should be [P]: Pirja âpotsâ (RatwaÅe 735). Fortunately, other cases of the poet confusing certain letters with each other when writing words in Polish or Russian, allowed for identifying this Romani word.
For conveying some Romani phonemes, Papusza employed digraphs and trigraphs. For instance, the digraph [ci] in the case of the phoneme /tÍ¡É/ in the word for âbird,â that is, cierykÅo, CirykÅo (RatwaÅe 1055, 1075). Striving to convey the affricative /tÍ¡Éx/, Papusza used several options. First of all, the trigraph [Äch] and the digraph [Äh], as in A_pre Ächórja âon the knives,â Ähórdeja âhe threwâ or Ähawen âRoma childrenâ (RatwaÅe 198, 937, 1044). It can be assumed that the trigraph was simplified to the diagraph under the influence of Ficowskiâs editorial choices when Papuszaâs poems had been published earlier. In some cases, Papusza forgot or decided not to use the acute accent [ Ì] in [Ä], resulting in [c], as in: cchawore âRoma childrenâ or chaworo âRoma childâ (RatwaÅe 93, 14). The last usage is quite confusing, because it is left to the reader to decide whether [ch] denotes /tÍ¡Éx/ or /x/, as in chyrja âbad, evilâ (RatwaÅe 9).
For denoting the palatalized version of the aspirated voiceless affricate /tÍ¡ÉÉ/, written [Äh] in academic Romani transcription, Papusza used the trigraph [tsi], for instance, matsiore âfishesâ (RatwaÅe 95). This trigraph [tsi] is regularly contrasted with the digraph [ci] for the same but unaspirated affricate, as in ciororo âpoor (m.)â (RatwaÅe 13), but also as a reflex of /t/ in the context that entails palatalization, leading to / tʲ/ as in pacien âbelieve (2nd p. pl.)â (RatwaÅe 5). On the other hand, the corresponding voiced alveolo-palatal affricate /dÍ¡Ê/, like in Polish, is denoted with the trigraph [dzi], for instance, nek dzinen âlet them knowâ (RatwaÅe 10).
Letter E
Papuszaâs use of the letter [e] reflects phonetic peculiarities of Polish dialects as observed east of todayâs Poland. Interestingly, the Slavonic vowel denoted with the Church Slavonic letter yatâ [
The sporadic preference for the letter [i] in place of the standard [e] next to palatalized consonants in Romani is noticeable in the second half of Tears of Blood, for example, sawi żeÅ / keren /saËwʲe Êe É kʲeËren/ â[you used to] do the same [things]â (RatwaÅe 627â628). The expressive doubling of the particle [że ż] is characteristic for Romani-speaking in what today is the western sections of Lithuania, Belarus and Ukraine. Papusza took careful note of the assimilation of consonants, for example, when [że ż] finds itself next to the phoneme /kʲ/ the following assimilation takes place [że Å], as [czy ż > czy /s/] in czys saso pszepereÅ âwill the German perish?â (RatwaÅe 742â743).
Letter Ä
As in the case of the letter [Ä ] for the nasal vowel /ÉÅ/, Papusza sporadically used the letter [Ä] for the nasal sound /ÉÅ/ in a denasalized manner instead of [e] for /e/, for example, so TÄ keres âwhat have thou doneâ (RatwaÅe 8).
We retain the rare spelling variant of the Greek epsilon letter [É] in the function of [e], as employed by Papusza in the manuscript. However, this variant denotes only the sound /e/ and does not indicate any phonemic peculiarities, for instance, nÄ gÉ ânaked (pl.)â (RatwaÅe 155).
The mutual linguistic influences between speakers of Polish, on the one hand, and speakers of Belarusian and Ukrainian, on the other, brought about interferences in the form of the subsystem of smooth sonorous consonants (liquids). Instead of the standard Polish alveolar lateral /l/, Papusza preferred the dialectal palatalized approximate /lʲ/, typical for the region, for example, Alie (standard Polish: ale) âbut,â w_calie (standard Polish: wcale) âat all, quiteâ (RatwaÅe 414, 1021); lieÅna (standard Polish: leÅna) âof forest (f. sg.)â (PamiÄtnik: 2).
On the other hand, [Å] for denoting /w/ and [w] for conveying /Ê̯/ are not differentiated in Papuszaâs individual phonetic system, as in many Polish dialects (Dejna 1973: 114â115). As a result, a fluctuation is observed in Papuszaâs spelling of Romani words that contain these sounds, for instance, na chochawalw = na xoxavav âI donât cheat,â phocia{Å}w = phuÄav âI ask,â and in the Russian-language song: prowa[ża]{w}[Å]a âshe accompaniedâ (RatwaÅe 460, 455, 774).
Furthermore, traces of self-correction are worth noting, when the poet replaced the initial choice of regional [w] with the more standard [f], for example, {w} feder âbetterâ, {w}foryco âa small townâ (RatwaÅe 883, 834).
Eastern Polish dialect, alongside Belarusian and Ukrainian, also influenced Papuszaâs pronunciation and spelling of Romani. For instance, she spelt the title of Tears of Blood poem in accordance with this type of pronunciation, that is, gili RatwaÅe jaswa âTears of Blood: A Songâ (RatwaÅe 2). Ficowski, in his abbreviated version, modified the spelling of the Romani title to make it closer to the standard Polish pronunciation, namely, RatfaÅé jasfá (Ficowski 1956: 118). With time, thanks to prolonged exposure to these variants, Papusza acquired most nuances of Polish standard and dialectal pronunciations. In later interviews, she reproduced them flawlessly.
Another specifically Polish feature worth mentioning is the inter-word voicing of the voiceless consonant. This phonemic phenomenon occurs in Tears of Blood just once, dadywez rakie[r]ÅÄs = dadivés rakÃrÅys âtoday <a soldier> was tellingâ (RatwaÅe 188; Ficowski 1956: 128). Usually, this phenomenon of inter-word voicing is not reflected in the poemâs manuscript, perhaps, meaning that Papusza did not use it in her own speech, for instance, paniory AgiÅ dywes rakireÅ âa river chatters before dawnâ or poÅokes rakiren âthey speak softlyâ (RatwaÅe 93â94, 96).
Sporadically, Papusza confused [r] and [Å], as in Bersz ciero = correctly: Bersz cieÅo âthe whole yearsâ (RatwaÅe 1009), ciaÅa = correctly: caÅa âwholeâ (PamiÄtnik: 180).
It is evident that the manuscript the final draft of Tears of Blood was executed in haste. Hence, in many places the acute accent [â] is missing in the Polish diacritical letter [ó] for the phoneme /u/, confusingly resulting in [o] for /o/, for instance, phore = phure âold (pl.),â Bocho, bócho = buxo âbook,â bótedyr = butedyr âmore,â tó = tu âthouâ (RatwaÅe 164, 1005, 1084, 1004). This proves that Papusza usually wrote the whole word, and then introduced missing diacritics. Hence, the wider morphemic context must be borne in mind to ensure the correctness of deciphering. What is more, Ficowskiâs spelling choices for the publication of Papuszaâs writings also influenced the poetâs spelling, for example, Tómanósa = tumanósa âwith fogâ (RatwaÅe 1045). In this instance, the first [ó] for denoting /u/ is Papuszaâs own choice, while the other [ó] for the stressed pronunciation of /o/ was Ficowskiâs editorial intervention.
At times, Papusza went for a deliberately simplified, for instance, writing [ó], instead of [iu], as in samótka = samiutka âvery lonely (f)â (PamiÄtnik: 9). This does not suggest that in the poetâs pronunciation no palatalisation of the consonant /m/ occurred. Basically, the letter [i] for signalling such softening could be skipped, as the phenomenon could be easily deduced from the phonemic context, see: katylary ciacióne âreal (true) catholicsâ, Betki ciacune âgenuine (true =eatable) mushrooms,â or gila cacune âtrue songsâ (RatwaÅe 988, 144, 170).
Such variability might indicate Papuszaâs expectation that the reader fluent in Romani (and in Polish) would actively cooperate while reading out this text, most probably aloud. This expectation saved the poet time and effort necessary for paying close attention to the details of spelling and writing conventions adopted.
Unusual Letters
Apart from the Polish-style Latin alphabet letters used for the composition of most of the manuscript, sporadically atypical letters are also employed. Their status is ambiguous and difficult to establish, as these are rare occurrences. The letter [É], mentioned above, probably was a variant of [Ä], while [Ç«] a variant of [Ä ]. The letter [É] was used just once as a variant of [e] or [a], in: sÉmÄnca âfamily, clanâ (RatwaÅe 22). The letter [ï] could arise with the poet accidentally doubling the dot over [i] or was borrowed from the Ukrainian-style Cyrillic letter [ï], for instance, tsïaworen âchildren (acc. pl.)â (RatwaÅe 96).
Perhaps, some hybrid characters arose in an ad hoc manner, for example, dajÌa Åawa = dala lava âthese wordsâ (RatwaÅe 631). The phrase was restructured in the process of writing. The original intended daja kamanda âthis order (Romani+Russian)â was amplified into dajÌa Åawa wypchendzia i kamanda / podyja âHaving spoken these words, he orderedâ (RatwaÅe 631â632). In the process of correction, the tilde was put above [j], making this letter look almost like the handwritten [Å]. At times apparently erroneous characters or diacritics were introduced in haste, for instance, chıyra, typically: chyrja âbadâ, or 9 [6] mamószegÄ, typically: manuszenge âto the peopleâ (RatwaÅe 415, 9).
In some cases, Papusza spelled the same word in several different ways. It was not only a result of insufficient proficiency or attention, but also an effort at reproducing sung words from memory. In this way, Papusza conveyed nuances in pronunciation depending on the context of which other words the given word was employed during performance. This seems to explain the rise of the following spelling variants manósza, manusza, or manosza âpeopleâ (RatwaÅe 425, 60, 588). Yet, the following variants appear to be clear errors, namely, mamósza, correctly: manusza âpeople,â mani, correctly: nani âthere is notâ (RatwaÅe 372, 946, 202), or chany, correctly: chamy âboorsâ (PamiÄtnik: 10).
Ligatures occur when a text is composed in hurry. An important feature of Papuszaâs hand is ligatures, which arise from merging the neighboring letters in the continuous manner of writing, that is, without detaching the pen from paper, for instance, kali pchen mirej âmy black sisterâ (RatwaÅe 226). This manner of handwriting was typical for the Polish school hand. Papusza hesitated when choosing between the phonetically close vowels [e] and [y], especially when it was stressed in a word. She tended to write [e] first, and then added the letter [y] to it. However, it might also be an attempt at indicating the lengthening of the final syllable in a word, which is quite appropriate in a lamentation, for example, for a dead friend. So, what at the first glance appears arbitrary may turn out to be phonetically relevant or even deeply thought out in Papuszaâs system of idiosyncratic spelling.
Let us have a look at more examples of ligatures in the manuscript of Tears of Blood. In the case of daa býda (dê³ býda) = daja bida âthis woeâ (RatwaÅe 228), the ligature was formed through the fusion of the two neighboring letters [a], probably to indicate the lengthening of the vowel /a/ in the pronoun daa âthis.â In this manner, Papusza probably conveyed the peculiarities of her deceased girl friendâs speech. Other examples of interesting ligatures, include,
Nakand/en âthey donât obeyâ (RatwaÅe 131â132), [nd] is written as a ligature. These two letters were merged probably to spare place at the lineâs end.
rom miro âmy husbandâ (RatwaÅe 266), [mi] is a ligature. The merged letters look like [mÌ] or [ni]. It might be also a result of the doubling of [mm]. alongside the loss of the sixth stroke.
Me wolin-aw âI desireâ (RatwaÅe 421). In this case [in] was replaced with the ligature [á¹ ].
kaj na kaj, a calque of the Polish expression gdzieniegdzie âhere and thereâ (RatwaÅe 424). The merger of the letters [a] and [j] into the ligature [aj] results in what looks almost like [ej].
Papuszaâs Meters, Verse Rhythm and Rhymes
The Austrian slavist and philologist of Slovenian extraction Franz Miklosichâs opinion on Romani-language folklore poetry retains its relevance to this day:
as far as content is concerned, it includes elements from both Romanian and Hungarian fairy tales. The folk poetry of the Rumunians and Ukrainians had an unmistakable influence on the Romani songs. The songs are sung without instrumental accompaniment. The verses are rhymeless. Each verse regularly has two accents. Only one stressed syllable can be in the accented syllable, the tone may be the tone of the word or, in the case of monosyllabic words, the tone of the sentence (Miklosich IV. 1874: 2).
Unfortunately, the boundaries of the verses are not marked in the manuscript. Of course, I would like to listen to Papuszaâs performance in order to understand her preferences in the case of possible options for the distribution of pauses. It is possible to reconstruct such a division into verses during a recitation.
It is possible to use the bar sign [|] for helping readers to visualize borders of poetic verses. Nevertheless, some parts of manuscript are in prose.
Papuszaâs poetry shares some traits with Polish folk songs, especially changing number of syllables in a verse (DÅuska 1954; DÅuska 1987). âAsyllabism, or to put it more mildly, relative syllabism, thrives through the 17th century in urban lyrics, even longer in folk verse, but it no longer returns to the upper regions of poetry [as practised by nobility and intelligentsia]â (DÅuska 1987: 192).
Papusza used to emphasize, that she was not âany poet at allâ (Papusza in Kuźniak 2013: 167). Thus, the poet defines her genre with the Polish term piosenka âlittle song:â
CoÅ we mnie znajszli. Bo pan Tuwim jeszcze. Znajszli jakiÅ wielki talent. A ja takich pioseneczek, co oni chcieli, to mogÅa kiedyÅ miliony zrobiÄ. SzÅam górami, lasami. Jeden moment i już. Pan Jerzy mówiÅ, że to wiersze, ale to nie byli wiersze. Piosenki. Wierszy sÄ inny. Trzeba rym skÅadaÄ, a piosenka to prosta. Piosenka to niżej. A wiersz wysoo, trzeba ksztaÅconych ludzi. Musi byÄ uniwersytet, a ja nie mam ani jednej klasy koÅczonej. Nie mogÄ byÄ wierszopisarka (Papusza in Kuźniak 2013: 70).20
âPapuszaâs poems are dubbed âsongsâ because they stem from the deeply rooted Roma oral traditionâ (Szott 2016: 472). Papusza translated into Polish the common Romani term gili âsongâ (RatwaÅe 2) as piosenka âlittle song.â In regular usage this Polish term denotes a song of several to about 15 verses. Yet, Papuszaâs âsongsâ are much longer. Tears of Blood is comprised of over a thousand verses. According to Papusza, the main difference between her gili âsongâ and real poems is the absence of rhymes, alongside the simple structure of Papuszaâs âlittle songs.â On top of that, Papusza saw the lack of formal education as disqualifying her from being a poet. It is worth adding that when the Soviet Romani literature developed on the basis of a dialect quite similar to that of the Polska Roma, its codifiers had to coin a term for âpoem.â They settled on the Romani
Papuszaâs rhymes are irregular. The peculiarity of Roma morphology often causes wordsâ stressed endings to become phonemically similar, for instance,
But such similarities in the pronunciation of word endings may occur more often, as in:
All these features of the Roma folk song verse are present in the work of contemporary poets. Having stepped rather painlessly over attempts to accurately imitate the strict poetic meters characteristic of the academic poetry typical of the surrounding peoples, many Roma poets turned to freer poetic forms. âNothing justifies treating the rhythm of a folk poem as a cinderella of artful poetry. Spoken rhythm and melic rhythm must be treated separately, but as equals, with respect for each, according to the laws that govern itâ (DÅuska 1954: 502).
Osip Mandelstam noted about the famous Italian poet that âDante sees the beginning of prosody in the footâs step, which is locked with breathing and spawns thoughtâ (
Languages of the Indigenous Populations and of the Occupiers
Multilingualism of interwar and wartime Volhynia is an aspect of utmost importance for grasping the complex phonetic score of Tears of Blood. First of all, Papuszaâs writing is phonetically oriented, and then visually motivated. Writing as such was a later addition that did not impact the poetâs memory but afforded her an instrument to record words and images to bear witness of the Roma genocide. Papusza mentions in a conversation with Ficowski that in her dreams she hears words uttered in languages that she does not understand: i coÅ mi przychodzi, jakaÅ mowa inna21 (Papusza in: CygaÅska 1978: 4.00â4.07).
Formally, Tears of Blood is written in Romani. Yet, foreign intrusions are quite numerous in the text. Most are almost imperceptible, because they are skillfully calqued into Romani,22 while direct borrowings from other languages are fewer. Analyzing Polish borrowing in this section would be inappropriate. After all, apart from Romani, Polish was also a native language for the Polska Roma. âRomani was Papuszaâs first language. In this language, she composed her songs. But with the passing of years, it appeared that Papusza began to think exclusively in Polishâ (Machowska 2011: 72).
Below selected examples of intrusions in other Romani dialects and foreign languages in Tears of Blood are analyzed.
Intrusions in Foreign Languages
Papusza acknowledged her knowledge of only a single foreign language, namely, Russian: Ankieta literata 1962 r. (ZwiÄ zek Literatów Polskich). NarodowoÅÄ: polska. WyksztaÅcenie: samouk. ZnajomoÅÄ jÄzyków obcych: j. rosyjski. Podróże zagraniczne: Tak. Na WoÅyniu w czasie wojny23 (Papusza in Kuźniak 2013: 172). The Russian language in its standard form is uttered in the poem by the Soviet soldiers:
maÅadziec (RatwaÅe 273), or the Russian expression
The partisan song cited in Tears of Blood (RatwaÅe 761â801) was written down partly in Russian, but mostly in Ukrainian:
The poet denotes pronunciation faithfully in her idiosyncratic spelling. Hence, without too much difficulty the songâs text can be presented in Russian and Ukrainian Cyrillic. For the sake of clarity, the Russian elements are italicized:
The song continues as follows:
It is obvious that this fragment does not conform either with standard Russian or Ukrainian. However, the predominantly Ukrainian background is visible from the fact that Russian words are fewer. For clarity these words are italicized:
Obvious similarities in meter (mainly five-foot trochee) and in the sequence of images it appears to be a popular guerrilla song by poet Mikhail Isakovsky (1900â1973). The citation in Tears of Blood overlaps with a third of Isakovskyâs poem, see:
Soviet soldiers mentioned in their postwar memoirs about the popularity of this song during the war (
Drawing freely on folklore tropes and images, Papusza reworked this song as a creative coauthor. She incorporated a popular folk song plot, namely, a conversation between the dying warrior and his relatives.
Papusza was a poet, not a scholar. She did not aim at scholarly objectivity. Her goal was to clothe emotions and events in words that would be graspable by their Roma audience. In her diary, when listing ethnic groups, Papusza uses exonyms, which one could consider as stereotypical or even offensive, for instance, i żydy i Polacy i chany i cygayy, in standard Polish spelling: i Å»ydzi, i Polacy, i chamy, i Cyganie âand Jews and Poles and Hams (= literally âpeasantsâ for Ukrainians and Belarusians) and Gypsiesâ (PamiÄtnik: 10). It is obvious that among the people for whom Papusza told fortune not only Poles and Jews were represented. The Polish census of 1931 noted in Volhyniaâs population mainly Ukrainians (68.4%) and Poles (16.6%). Tears of Blood carefully portrays the regionâs multiethnic character, including interethnic tensions (cf. WasiutyÅski 1939).
Obviously, Papuszaâs interlocutors also included Belarusians. In all likelihood, most referred to themselves TuteiÅ¡yja (literally, âpeople from here, this localityâ) or PalieÅ¡(Ä)uki (that is, inhabitants of the region of Polesia, at times considered also an ethnic group in their own right). For instance: âOn 20 September 1941 [â¦] Ukrainian-Belarusian Polishchuks at last become the rulers of their own native landâ (
Interestingly, the Russians featured in Tears of Blood are portrayed sparingly. From Papuszaâs words it is impossible to determine their political affiliation. Hence, it is unclear whether they fought for or against the Germans. Papuszaâs relative, Andrzej B. Lewkowicz, recollected in an interview: âI read a few poems in which my aunt writes about her wartime experiences in Volhynia, when the Russians and Ukrainians teased the Roma on why they kept hiding in the forestsâ (Lewkowicz in: Machowska 2011: 80). Who were these Russians or Ukrainians is hard to establish. But Papuszaâs family were more at ease talking about their wartime experiences to a radio journalist than the poet. At the height of the stalinist period in communist Poland, Papusza was aware that a careless word on the printed page could endanger her family and herself. Otherwise, friendly or not, meeting any armed people in the forest during the war meant at least the loss of essential foodstuffs.
The poet paid close attention to words and usages in different languages, as employed around her in different spheres of life. On top of that, she developed idiosyncratic strategies of recalling and writing down such foreign words, for instance, Pre tuwissio zanaswali-jame sare âsomething (tuwissio) we all fell ill [with]â (RatwaÅe 493â494). The word Tuwissio may be a phonemic rendering of the French acronym TBC /te-be-se/ for âtuberculosis.â Another possibility is the Latin medical term tussis âcough.â In this quote Papusza used an unambiguously French expression wizaw wodar A_dre wodar âvis-Ã -visâ âface to faceâ (RatwaÅe 967â968). First, it is given in the Polish phonemic spelling as wizaw[i]. Then a Romani calque of the Polish expression drzwi w drzwi ânext doorâ is given, which is a translation of the French term vis-Ã -vis.
Lytamorie (RatwaÅe 450) is obviously a place-name. It is written with the initial capital, which on Papuszaâs part, is a rare case of scrupulousness. She probably had problems with recollecting the correct pronunciation and spelling of this place-name, which explains the crossed out [a]. Papuszaâs family, the Weisses (Wajses) lived in the town for some time. It was known as WÅodzimierz in Polish, Volodomyr in Ukrainian and Vladimir in Russian. The Germans rendered this name variously as Wladimir or Wolodimir. The same Ruthenian place name yielded âLodomeriaâ in the traditional Austro-Hungarian name of the Crownland of Galicia, namely, the Kingdom of Galicia and Lodomeria. Hence, the fusion of the initial letters [w] and [l].
The German in its origin word szlabanto âbarrierâ (RatwaÅe 816, 818) was acquired from its Polish form szlaban. In German the term is written Schlagbaum.
Many pondered on Papuszaâs idiosyncratic word falorykta. Whatever it denoted provoked a panic reaction in the poet (Kledzik 2019: 174). And we cannot ignore it. Although this word is absent from Tears of Blood, it is hard to ignore, given that it was a constant source of horror for Papusza. She intended to give an expensive finger ring to her son, so that he would have something to live on, when Papusza feared she would be arrested. Papusza said that all Roma would end in prison, due to falorykta (Machowska 2011: 59, 186, 197). In vain did the Polish writers, collaborating with Papusza, try to convince her that it was none other than the harmless term âfolkloreâ (folklor in Polish) or âfolklor studiesâ (folklorystyka in Polish) (Kuźniak 2013: 144). Ficowski (1986: 208â262) devoted a study to the incident with this strange word, which exacerbated Papuszaâs illness, when she read it. Curiously, no one seems to have noticed that what Papusza meant might be the German legal term Fallrecht âcase law.â The Weisses (Wajses) as itinerant harpists were active in Austria-Hungary before the Great War. Then German terminology prevailed until the turn of the 1930s in Polandâs Galicia gained from the Dual Monarchy. World War II, which entailed the arrival of German troops in Volhynia, perhaps activated these half-remembered scary legal terms in the familyâs collective memory.
In Tears of Blood, Papusza warns Ficowski about danger by resorting to a strange mixture of languages: mosinaw ciacipen te / pchenaw foldaj_CzÄry i dadywes / TeszysÄ âI must tell the truth, the Volksdeutsche are shooting <people?> todayâ (RatwaÅe 992â994). The Romani infinitive with the particle te is formed from the German verb schiessen âto shoot,â resulting in TeszysÄ. The term Volksdeutsche âethnic Germansâ is written in such a manner (foldaj_CzÄry) that it is difficult to decipher it. Although it may be reflection of the Polish (dialectal) augmentative fold-o/a-jczery employed to criticize these interwar Polish citizens who declared themselves to be ethnic Germans.
These examples illustrate the breadth of Papuszaâs and her fellow Romaâs polyglot contacts with people from numerous ethnic groups (nations, confessional communities). In wartime Volhynia alone, apart from Germans and Hungarians as invading troops, the Roma also came across âFinnsâ (or rather Estonians or Latvians), Caucasians (Crimean Tatars, Georgians, Armenians, Azeris), French, Czechs, or Slovenians (more likely, Slovaks) (
Romani Dialects
In the Romani original of Tears of Blood Papusza quoted words and phrases from other Romani dialects than her own. The word wórdena âcartsâ (RatwaÅe 667, 726) comes from the Polska Roma dialect, but the same word spelled wyrdona (RatwaÅe 814â815) is probably a quote in a different variant of Romani. Once, in the lamentation for her deceased girl friend Maliuna Papusza introduced a different, perhaps, local variant of Romani. In Volhynia one could hear both Polish dialectal býda (standard Polish: biada) âwoeâ (RatwaÅe 229) and local Ukrainian
It is difficult to establish with full certainty which word may be a borrowing from this or that Romani dialect or variety. The Romani word nusarel looks like a verb from Slovak Romani. In the fragment if parno / drom / jamÄgÄ mósardz|i|a âthe white snow spoiled our pathâ (RatwaÅe 846â848) the last word in the Romani quotation looks like a Slovak Romani borrowing. A Romanian Romani (Vlach) borrowing for â[tree] branches,â namely, krÄży.) {gaÅÄz{y}i} (RatwaÅe 869) is underlined and supplied with a footnote-like glossa, which the Papusza crossed out later. Boundaries between dialects in their oral use are fluid, while Romani-speakers tend to be bi- or multi-dialectal.
Conclusion
The uniqueness of Papuszaâs poetry stems from the tension between the poetâs two cultural identities, namely, Romani and broadly speaking âPolishâ (but embracing interwar Polandâs multicultural character). On the one hand, Papuszaâs sensibilities were shaped in a typical Roma family of musicians, while on the other, she was at home in interwar Polish culture. It was a tragedy for the poet that she lost both of her identities. After World War II, not only Roma life changed dramatically, but many features of prewar Poland did not make it to communist Poland. This discontinuity in Papuszaâs life was similar to the fate of actor Aleksander Å»abczyÅski (1900â1958). Upon his return to postwar Poland, he realized that he would not be able to restart his acting career. Yet, surviving the total war was an incredible stroke of good luck. The fate dealt a worse to actor Eugeniusz Bodo (1899â1943), who like numerous interwar celebrities.
The uniqueness of Papuszaâs oeuvre and its very existence were possible thanks to an incredible combination of favorable factors. Firstly, the poetâs enormous labor to write down her own songs and other texts was not supported by the social environment in which she lived. In Roma society, few men, let alone women, would dare to undertake such a long-term creative commitment against all odds. It was a gadjo thing, not part of the Roma social world. Secondly, with all the restrictions of political censorship observed in communist Poland, the âcivilizing projectâ to sedentarize Roma created minimal conditions for the partial publication of Papuszaâs poetry. This Polish Roma policy emulated the vast interwar Soviet program of language standardization and nativization (korenizatsiia), alongside the Kremlinâs 1956 decree that sedentarized Roma living in the Soviet Union. In this contradictory context, the fact of the very publication of a part of Papuszaâs oeuvre became a foundation of the poetâs well-deserved worldwide fame. Nowadays, the published fragments fit a variety of ethnic, feminist and other emancipatory projects with identity and the recognition of the past wrongs at their center. However, most of Papuszaâs writings remain in precariously preserved manuscripts, unavailable to researchers, let alone readers. Papusza as an icon is widely known and revered, but no serious research on her writings has commenced yet.
The Romani dialect, in which Papusza wrote, is a phenomenon largely formed in the sphere of the Polish linguistic culture. This is manifested at all linguistic levels from phonetics to phraseology and to meter. The interpretation of previously unpublished fragments of Tears of Blood often depends on the correct reconstruction of Polish phrases and translations, which Papusza almost literally translated (calqued) into Romani.
The inclusion of elements borrowed from other languages must be also analyzed, especially in the case of the dialogues in Tears of Blood. Although Papusza translated them into Romani for her Roma audience, she left enough distinctive features that make it possible to establish whether quoted speakers uttered their parts in Ukrainian, Russian or even Belarusian. Given the portrayal of Jews in the poem, an interesting question arises whether they spoke in a Slavic language or in their native language of Yiddish.
In 1956 Tears of Blood was published for the first time in Ficowskiâs abbreviated version. In this version the emphasis is on the sufferings of the Roma extended family (group) of musicians in wartime Volhynia. In line with the needs of communist Polandâs culture and propaganda, Soviet guerrillas are portrayed as saviors of the Roma. The Germans are these guerrillasâ antagonists. However, in the full text of this epic poem, the picture of the military confrontations is more nuanced, confusing, and ambiguous. The Germans, Ukrainians and Hungarians fight against Catholic Poles, Soviet guerrillas, the Red Army, Polish anticommunist guerrillas (AK, Armia Krajowa Homeland Army), or pro-Soviet Polish communist guerrillas (AL, Armia Ludowa Peopleâs Army). In the maelstrom of these multidirectional conflicts, Roma, Jews or ethnically Czech colonists are caught. On top of that, the genocidal-scale mutual Ukrainian-Polish ethnic cleansing then unfolded, a kind of regional civil war within World War II.
However, the poemâs message to humanity is not limited to the denunciation of war crimes and cruelty, and to bearing witness on the Roma Genocide. Tears of Blood includes an important layer, which almost does not show up in the abbreviated version. It is a repeated emphasis on the emotional unity of the human soul with nature, which constitutes a platform for Papusza to address all the worldâs people. The poet calls for peace. Her visualization of peaceful life inevitably evokes an idyllic image of the Roma past, unhurried and devoid of external duties and pressures; life led in the forest, on the go from one country to another, with no border officers stopping and harassing Roma and their caravans. This lost ideal of Roma freedom is not compensated by anything else in the poem, except for Papuszaâs hope for softening peopleâs hearts.
Papusza is deservedly presented as a witness to war crimes. Communist Polandâs propaganda showed the poet as an unwavering supporter of the state program of sedentarizing the countryâs Roma way of life. But she was not. Papuszaâs doubts about sedentary life did not make it to the abbreviated version of Tears of Blood. Censors would not allow it. Neither would they accept Papuszaâs universalist philosophy and exhortations to Roma life immersed in nature. The poetâs benchmark of a good and happy life fell too far away from the strictures of marxism-leninism in the heydays of the stalinist period.
Translated from Russian by Tomasz Kamusella
December 2022
References
Alighieri, Dante. The Divine Comedy. The Vision of Paradise, Purgatory, and Hell by Dante Alighieri. Complete On-Line Index. Translated by the rev. H. F. Cary, M.A. https://www.gutenberg.org/files/8789/8789-h/8789-h.htm#link16. Accessed: Aug. 17, 2022.
Berkyová, Renata. 2017. ObeÌtujeme Romy ve prospeÌch veÌdy? (pp 38â57). Bulletin Muzea romské kultury, No. 26.
CygaÅska poetka Papusza. 1978. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AzYRyyq8VNY. Accessed: Aug. 15, 2022.
Dejna, Karol. 1973. Dialekty polskie. WrocÅaw â Warszawa â Kraków â GdanÌsk: ZakÅad Narodowy imienia OssolinÌskich.
DÅuska, Maria. 1954. Wierz meliczny â wiersz ludowy (pp 473â502). PamiÄtnik Literacki: czasopismo kwartalne poÅwiÄcone historii i krytyce literatury polskiej, 45/2.
DÅuska, Maria. 1987. Wierz (pp 179â209). Problemy teorii literatury. Seria 4. Prace z lat 1947â1964. Wydanie drugie poszerzone. WrocÅaw, Warszawa, Kraków, GdaÅsk, Åódź: ZakÅad Narodowy im. OssoliÅskich. Wydawnictwo.
Falski, Marian. 1910. Nauka czytania i pisania dla dzieci. Kraków: Wyd. im. Tadeusza Wierzbowskiego.
Ficowski, Jerzy, eds. 1956. PieÅni Papuszy. PapuÅ¡akere gila. WrocÅaw: Wydawnictwo ZakÅadu im. OssolinÌskich.
Ficowski, Jerzy. 1965. Cyganie na polskich drogach. Kraków: Wydawnictwo Literackie.
Ficowski, Jerzy. 1986. âFaloryktaâ (pp 208â262). In: Ficowski , Jerzy. Demony cudzego strachu. Warszawa: Ludowa SpóÅdzielnia Wydawnicza, 1986.
Kelman, James. 2009. Translated Accounts. Edinburgh: Polygon.
Kledzik, Emilia. Etnolog i pisarz. 2019. O autokreacji w romologicznej spusÌcizÌnie Jerzego Ficowskiego (pp 157â178). Autobiografia, nr 1 (12).
Kledzik, Emilia. 2020. âPanowie! Za co nas będziecie wybijacÌ?â WoÅynÌskie wspomnienia rodziny KrzyzÌanowskich w relacji Jerzego Ficowskiego (pp 165â202). Narracje o ZagÅadzie, nr 6.
Koper, Tomasz. 2016. Cyganie polscy oraz Cyganie na polskich drogach. Próba porównania trzech wydanÌ ksiązÌki Jerzego Ficowskiego (pp 170â181). Annales Universitatis Paedagogicae Cracoviensis. Studia Historicolitteraria XVI. DOI 10.24917/20811853. 16.13
Kovalcsik, Katalin. 1993. Menâs and Womenâs Storytelling in a Hungarian Vlach Gypsy Community (pp 1â20). Journal of the Gypsy Lore Society. Series 5, Vol. 3, No. 1.
KrzyzÌanowski, Piotr J. and Wasilewski, Krzysztof. 2016. Papusza â From Traitor to Heroine (pp 67- 81). Journal of Applied Cultural Studies. Vol. 2.
Kunicki, MikoÅaj. 1959. PamiÄtnik âMuchyâ. Warszawa: Wyd-wo MON.
Kuźniak, Angelika. 2013. Papusza. WoÅowiec: Czarne.
Machowska, Magdalena. 2011. Bronislawa Wajs Papusza. MiÄdzy biografiÄ a legendÄ . Kraków: Nomos.
Marushiakova, Elena & Popov, Vesselin. 2012. The Gypsy Court in Eastern Europe: Researches, Mystification, Discussions (pp 43â51). Culture and Art, No. 6.
Marushiakova, Elena & Popov, Vesselin. 2016. Roma Culture: Problems and Challenges (pp 35â64). In: Elena Marushiakova and Vesselin Popov, eds. Roma Culture: Myths and Realities. In Memoriam of Donald Kenrick (1929â2015). Munich: Lincom Academic Publisher.
Marushiakova, Elena & Popov, Vesselin, eds. 2022. Roma Portraits in History: Roma Civic Emancipation Elite in Central, South-Eastern and Eastern Europe from the 19th century until World War II. Brill Schöningh: Paderborn.
Matras, Yaron. 1999. The Speech of the Polska Roma. Some Highlighted Features and their Implications for Romani Dialectology (pp 1â28). Journal of the Gypsy Lore Society, Vol. 9, No. 1.
Miclosich, Franz. 1874. Ãber Die Mundarten Und Die Wanderungen Der Zigeuner Europaâs. IV. Wien: Karl Geroldâs Sohn, 1874. https://archive.org/details/berdiemundarten00miklgoog/page/n4/mode/2up?view=theater. Accessed: Aug. 19, 2022.
Novac, Fevronia. 2010. Lâarticulation de la voix dans la poésie de BronisÅawa Wajs (Papusza) et de LuminiÅ£a CioabÄ (pp 82â95). Ãtudes Tsiganes, No. 43.
Mniszek, Helena, TrÄdowata. 1926. Wydanie filmowe. PoznaÅ: Wielkopolska KsiÄgarnia NakÅadowa Karola Rzepeckiego.
Papusza. PamiÄtnik âDziennik z życia Papuszy od 12 lat życia ⦠od 12 roku życiaâ (manuscript).
Sonnemann, Anna-Maria (née Anna-Maria Meyer). 2019. The Creation of Orthographies for Romani by Means of âSlavicâ Alphabets (pp 129â160). In: Tomelleri, Vittorio S. & Kempgen, Sebastian, eds. Slavic Alphabets in Contact. University of Bamberg (Bamberger Beiträge zur Linguistik. Vol. 19).
Sznajderman Monika. 2019. FaÅszerze pieprzu. Historia rodzinna. WoÅowiec: Czarne.
Szott, MirosÅawa. 2016. PiesÌni Papuszy w perspektywie geo- i etnopoetyki (pp 469â486). Konteksty kultury. 2016/13. doi:10.4467/23531991KK. Accessed: Aug. 15, 2022.
Tcherenkov, Lev & Laederich, Stephane. 2004. The Rroma. Vol. 1â2. Basel: Schwabe; Vossen.
Tuwim, Julian. 1920. Sokrates taÅczÄ cy. Warszawa-Kraków: Wydawnictwo J. Mortkowicza.
WasiutyÅski, Wojciech. 1939. MiÄdzy III RzeszÄ a III RusiÄ . Warszawa: Towarzystwo Wydawnicze âRójâ.
Woolf, Virginia. 1926. The Cinema (pp 381â383). The Nation and Athenaeum. Vol. XXXIX, No. 13.
ÐезлÑдÑко, ÐÐ¸Ñ Ð°Ð¸Ð» Т. 1933. ÐÑво джиибÑн. ÐилÑ. ÐоÑква: ÐÐÐÐ â Т???? ???????ÑÑÐ½Ñ Ð³Ð²Ð°ÑдиÑ.
ÐÑлÑба-ÐоÑовеÑÑ, ТаÑаÑ. 2008. ÐÑмÑÑ Ð±ÐµÐ· деÑжави. Слава Ñ ÑÑагедÑÑ Ð£ÐºÑаÑÌнÑÑкого повÑÑанÑÑкого ÑÑÑ Ñ. Спогади. ÐиÑв: ÐÐÐÐÐ Ð ÐÐУ.
ÐемеÑеÑ, Ðадежда Ð. & ЧеÑнÑÑ , ÐлекÑÐ°Ð½Ð´Ñ Ð., Ñед. 2018. ЦÑгане. ÐаÑÐ¾Ð´Ñ Ð¸ кÑлÑÑÑÑÑ. ÐоÑква: ÐаÑка.
Ðовпак, Ð¡Ð¸Ð´Ð¾Ñ Ð. 1945. ÐÑ ÐÑÑÐ¸Ð²Ð»Ñ Ð´Ð¾ ÐаÑпаÑ. ÐоÑква: ÐÐ¾ÐµÐ½Ð¸Ð·Ð´Ð°Ñ ÐÐРСССР.
ÐозиÑкий, ÐÑÑеÑлав Ð. и дÑ., ÑоÑÑ. 2010. ÐаÑÑизанÑÐºÐ°Ñ Ð²Ð¾Ð¹Ð½Ð° на УкÑаине. Ðневники командиÑов паÑÑизанÑÐºÐ¸Ñ Ð¾ÑÑÑдов и Ñоединений. 1941â1944. ÐоÑква: ЦенÑÑполигÑаÑ.
ÐанделÑÑÑам, ÐÑип Ð. 2004. Ð Ð°Ð·Ð³Ð¾Ð²Ð¾Ñ Ð¾ ÐанÑе. Moskva â Augsburg: im Werden- Verlag.
ÐаÑканов [ÐÑÑомин], ÐеÑÑ Ð¡. 1900. ЦÑганÑкий ÑзÑк. ÐÑаммаÑика и ÑÑководÑÑво к пÑакÑиÑеÑÐºÐ¾Ð¼Ñ Ð¸Ð·ÑÑÐµÐ½Ð¸Ñ ÑазговоÑной ÑеÑи ÑовÑеменнÑÑ ÑÑÑÑÐºÐ¸Ñ ÑÑган. ÐоÑква: Ñипо-лиÑогÑ. âÐ ÑÑÑкаго Т-ва пеÑаÑн. и издаÑ. Ðелаâ.
СанаÑов, ÐалеÑий Ð. 1979. ÐÐРи ÑнлонавÑÑ Ð² ÑвеÑе ÑолÑклоÑиÑÑики (cc 46â52). Ð¢ÐµÑ Ð½Ð¸ÐºÐ° молодежи. â 11. Also: Sanarov, V. I. 1981. On the Nature and Origin of Flying Saucers and Little Green Men, Current Anthropology, No. 22; Sanarov, V. I. 1994. Ufo e ufonauti nel mondo della folcloristica, La Ricerca Folklorica, Vol. 5, No. 29.
ШапиÑ, ÐакÑим. 1993. ЯзÑк бÑÑа / ÑзÑки дÑÑ Ð¾Ð²Ð½Ð¾Ð¹ кÑлÑÑÑÑÑ (cc 120â138). ÐÑÑÑ. ÐеждÑнаÑоднÑй ÑилоÑоÑÑкий жÑÑнал. â 3.
Шаповал, ÐикÑÐ¾Ñ Ð. 2019. ÐалÑкиÑование в ÑовеÑÑком ÑомÑком ÑзÑке 1927â1938 годов (cc 229â234). ÐоливановÑкие ÑÑениÑ, â 13.
Шаповал, ÐикÑÐ¾Ñ Ð. 2020. ÐоÑеÑк как ÑеÑÑа ÑзÑÐºÐ¾Ð²Ð¾Ð¸Ì Ð»Ð¸ÑноÑÑи (cc 235â239). Ð: ÐÑÑÑÑнко, Ð. Ð. et al., Ñед. Ðовна оÑобиÑÑÑÑÑÑ: лÑнгвÑÑÑика Ñ Ð»ÑнгводидакÑика / ÐÐРУкÑаÑÌни, ÐиÑÌвÑÑÐºÐ¸Ð¸Ì Ð½Ð°ÑÑон. лÑнгвÑÑÑиÑÐ½Ð¸Ð¸Ì Ñн-Ñ., ЧеÑкаÑÑÐºÐ¸Ð¸Ì Ð½Ð°ÑÑон. Ñн-Ñ. Ñм. Ð. ХмелÑниÑÑкого. ÐиÑÌв-ЧеÑкаÑи: вид-во ФÐÐ ÐоÑдÑÑнко Ð. Ð.
Шаповал Ð. Ð. 2022. ЦиÑÑовÑе коммÑникаÑии и ÑÑÑÑкÑÑÑа ÑзÑÑа беÑпиÑÑменного ÑзÑка ÑÐµÐ³Ð¾Ð´Ð½Ñ (как коÑÑÑÑ Ð² инÑеÑнеÑе) (cc 309â314). Ð: ÐикÑлова, Ð. Ð. et al., Ñед. Ðиалог кÑлÑÑÑÑ. ÐÑлÑÑÑÑа диалога: ÑиÑÑовÑе коммÑникаÑии. ÐаÑеÑÐ¸Ð°Ð»Ñ Ð¢ÑеÑÑей междÑнаÑодной наÑÑно-пÑакÑиÑеÑкой конÑеÑенÑии. ÐоÑква: ЯзÑки наÑодов миÑа.
âFlashing verses vibrate / You cannot grasp what is hidden in them â¦â. The quote is taken from the famous Polish poet of Jewish origin Julian Tuwimâs 1933 collection titled The Gypsy Bible. After World War II, Polandâs communist authorities lauded Tuwim. Thanks to his privileged position, the poet enabled Jerzy Ficowski to help Papusza with quotidian issues, but most importantly with the publication of her poetry.
Interestingly, a Roma researcher in the USSR wrote an article, which proved that literary descriptions of a meeting with space aliens tend to be steeped in the folklore model of how meetings with evil spirits are presented. In this aspect, science-fiction literature displays its ancient roots (
Na czytanie też byÅ czas. WybieraÅam ksiÄ Å¼ki, ażeby przykÅad na życie można braÄ. A nad jednÄ to razem z Dyźkiem pÅakaliÅmy. TrÄdowata, taki tytuÅ.
âWait a moment, Mister!â in Polish.
In standard Polish spelling: CzytaÄ umiÄ dobrze, ale piszÄ szkaradnie.
O! Mama nazwaÅa mnie Lalunia po cygaÅsku.
najmÅodsza z rodzeÅstwa Anna, z racji urody i wzrostu znana jako Lalka.
In standard Polish spelling: No, bÄdziesz PaniÄ nauczycielkÄ (âWell, you will become a Miss Teacherâ).
In standard Polish spelling: Co chcieli to mówili na mnie (âThey said all kinds of bad things about meâ).
In standard Polish spelling: dużo o mnie mówiono (âI became a subject of gossipâ).
In standard Polish spelling: siÄ Åmiali ze mnie ⦠Pluli na mnie (âThey were laughing at me ⦠They were spitting on meâ).
In standard Polish spelling: już mam peÅnych 14 lat życia, zapisaÅam siÄ do biblioteki (âI turned 14, so I enrolled with a lending libraryâ).
When citing from RatwaÅe jaswa, or the Romani original of the poem, verse numbers are given, not pages.
In Polish: Mówimy o Ficowskim sprawiedliwie: ZÅota GÅowa i Zimne Serce.
In standard Polish spelling: A Pan może sobie jak chce pisaÄ, a ja kÅamaÄ nie mogÄ, bo [to] nie ma sensu (âYou, Sir, may write as you want. I canât lie, because it doesnât make any senseâ).
âThe oath is to verify the truthfulness of the parties involved in a conflict, which Å ero Rom (literally âBig Head,â that is sendoâs judge) is to resolve. In this ritual, the parties submit themselves to Godâs justice, meaning that âGodâs punishmentâ would befall a perjurer. Å ero Rom orders an oath in a situation where no resolution can be found, for instance, due to the lack of evidence or witnesses of an incidentâ (Machowska 2011: 56fn24).
It is worth noting that the author of the first Russian manual for studying the Romani dialect of the Russka Roma presciently enumerates the possible claims that the Roma may level against him. They largely coincide with the accusations that were made against Papusza. âI know that the Gypsies will not appreciate it [the manual]. Secretive by nature and due to historical reasons, they are most reluctant to initiate a newcomer into the secrets of their language. At present, when almost all speak Russian [in the empireâs European section], Romani remains the sole reliable shield for protecting Roma, the peace of their households and their group interestsâ (
In standard Polish spelling: i tak siÄ nauczyÅam a B c d i tak dalej.
The term âkomsomoletsâ denoted a member of the Communist Partyâs youth wing in the Soviet Union, that is, the All-Union Leninist Young Communist League.
They found something in me. Because Mr. Tuwim found a great talent. And such little songs they craved I had been able to compose millions [in the past]. I walked through the mountains and forests. One moment and that was it, [another song ready]. Mr Jerzy [Ficowski] said they were poems, but they werenât poems. They were songs. Poems are different. You have to develop rhymes for poems, while the song is simple. The song is placed below [the poem]. The poem is always a rung higher, you need educated people [to compose poems]. They finished universities, while I never attended a single year of elementary school. I canât write verses, so I canât be a poet.
âAnd I hear something, as if a foreign language.â
The camouflaging of words and expressions in a majoritarian language through calquing them into Romani is characteristic for Romaâs bilingual communication. As such it is easy to convey in writing (
âWriterâs Questionnaire, 1962 (Association of Polish Writers). Nationality: Polish. Education: Self-taught. Knowledge of foreign languages: Russian. Travels abroad: Yes, in Volhynia during the war.â