An Analysis Of One Love Relationship

An Analysis Of One Love Relationship

In 2007, Martin Solotruk returned in the field of view of the readers by publishing his two new books of poetry ̶ Plankton of Gravity and Lovestory. Agent and Pacient (Ars poetica, Bratislava, 2007). Both of these books of poetry undeniably represent his distinctive writing style, but are strikingly different to each other in certain aspects. In Plankton of Gravity, the readers might struggle to understand the subject-matter, because the connections between the meanings sometimes collapse, therefore the poetry could be rather a difficult to get a grasp of. On the other hand, Solotruk’s Lovestory. Agent and Pacient shows that this time the author didn’t get carried away by his intellectual capabilities and his work is easier to perceive, mainly thanks to the fact that even though the text is still dynamic, it puts more emphasis on the lyrical subject and the thematic background – a partner relationship.

Lovestory. Agent and Pacient is constructed according to “the most intimate / mental geometry“ (p.10), decomposed into subtler particles and subsequently re-linked in almost architectural manner in order to once again create a dynamic, multi-dimensional text that aims to capture not only, but mainly the depth of issues that require us to stop and fully concentrate.

An attempt for tactile perception, a touch of a wandering finger, becomes the synonym of two people being very close, of feeling the significant other through “abstract weaving / touch and contact (p.78), creating small history of one love relationship. Author demonstrates the connection between partners by frames from the seemingly prosaic, everyday situations and authentically sounding fragments of intimate talks between man and woman, and although it is clear that the solitude of a living individual is outgrown by the connection created by a relationship, it can never be outgrown completely, same as we can’t fully objectify the feelings, a feeling about our partner.

Nevertheless, Solotruk doesn’t describe the love relationship through the emotional experience of a lyrical subject, but through the intense scrutiny, analytic observation and self-observation, which sometimes remind more of a scientific attempt to capture the biological processes and phenomena. Some passages of Solotruk’s work are certainly influenced by biosemiotics (as expressed by the author), attempting to conduct a meticulous introspection, a visceral view of the “internalized picture” (p.47), which we show to the outside world (p. 11) thus we indicate something. The author manages to describe the process of two people becoming closer in an unorthodox and interesting way, because he doesn’t only look at the process from outwards – objectively, but also from inside, intertwining what we can and cannot grasp, therefore it cannot be passed on.

Solotruk’s writing style is once again very intellectual, most certainly influenced by a number of movements in the field of the contemporary international poetry, but also by his knowledge, or at least fragments of knowledge, of a variety of scientific disciplines, hence the already mentioned biology, but also geometry are physics are only a fraction of what the reader might identify in his works. The author rather frequently uses the technical terminology as a part of expressions that create some innovative images, but also his sense of rhythm and assonance he is capable of developing in a span of a few short fragments is a quality that shouldn’t be overlooked.

Clearly, his texts are precisely thought through, sophisticated and certainly were subjected to a strict, rational audit, and indeed are not just spouts of feelings and emotions one experiences in a relationship. This approach links Solotruk’s poetry with the works of a number of contemporary Slovak authors whose style is often seen as unpoetic, because it is primarily based on examination, observation and then definition while enriching the poetry with the terminology that has been traditionally reserved for scientific literature; such approach is typical for Macsovszky, Habaj, Hablák or Šulej. Despite the fact that their pieces are sometimes created as a recirculation of some other texts, they are still interesting for the readers, especially if the authors refrain from trying to overwhelm the reader with a load of oversophisticated expressions that lack a deeper meaning.

In Lovestory. Agent and Pacient, Solotruk successfully managed to avoid this pitfall and serves his readers an interesting approach to writing on relationships by mixing the abstraction with prosaicism of the common everyday experience.

Review written by Veronika Rácová, RAK 8/2009
Translation into English by Pavol Lukáč

Print page Print page10. 12. 2009, 15:24