# Talk:Zygmunt Krasiński

{{Infobox Writer}} should be used instead of {{Infobox Nobility}}. For the record, signature image: File:Autograph-ZygmuntKrasinski.png. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk  05:00, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Krasiński's Jewish world domination writings belong here because this is covered in works of scholarship.

WP:UNDUE. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 10:15, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
UNDUE: "Neutrality requires that each article or other page in the mainspace fairly represent all significant viewpoints that have been published by reliable sources, in proportion to the prominence of each viewpoint in the published, reliable sources". I cited two reliable sources. Here are another two. You wrote this article citing "Internetowy Polski Słownik Biograficzny" 51 times, a website patronized by the Polish president and ministry of culture. "Internetowy Polski Słownik Biograficzny" is given too much weight.

No, Icewhiz, Polski Słownik Biograficzny is a world-respected reference work. And it doesn't mention how many passing mentions on this you'll mention, they are simply UNDUE as not a single in-depth biography of Krasiński discusses such issues. Though a brief mention of it may be added to an article about his works once they are created. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:11, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
+1 more source: " Zygmunt Krasinski's Undivine Comedy is one of the earliest modern antecedents of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Published in 1835, the drama portrays a revolutionary plot against Christendom and the social order to be executed by a secret cabal of Jewish converts to Christi anity. Their aim was world rule by the Jews and their method?a proletarian revolution against the remnants of aristocracy. Krasinski's dour view of the converts can be traced in part to the suspicion of the Frankists' separatism that had been widespread among the Poles." . Polski Słownik Biograficzny, with big logo on top of page that it is patronized by the president and ministry of culture, is one source. 5 other cited works cover this.

Btw, what is your issue with "patronized by Polish president and ministry of culture" or such? Generally, around the world government endorsement is considered to be a mark of high quality, and an endorsement by ministry of culture is quite valuable. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:31, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
The "Jewish angle" might be something to discuss in specific articles devoted to Krasiński's pertinent works.
The topic's undueness for this article – particularly such a massive paragraph in the lead – is indicated by the topic's total absence in Czesław Miłosz, "Zygmunt Krasiński (1812–1859)", The History of Polish Literature, 2nd ed., Berkeley, University of California Press, 1983, ISBN 0-520-04477-0, pp. 243–247.
Nihil novi (talk) 11:43, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
+1 source: "Thus Maria Janion, author of a monograph on Krasiński and the most renowned contemporary scholar of Polish Romanticism, called Nie-Boska komedia a ‘tainted masterpiece’, showing that Krasiński’s work can be read as a foundational myth of modern Polish anti-Semitism.4 At this point, it is necessary to add that the anti-Semitic motif of The Un-Divine Comedy, though recognised and analysed by Polish literary specialists, became all but completely repressed from wider social consciousness. Krasiński’s text is still part of secondary-education curriculum in Poland, and educational materials omit uncomfortable aspects and remain silent about the poet’s anti-Semitism." Polish government educational material omits what everyone else covers. Mellow Boris (talk) 16:07, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
+2 sources: In a lengthy chapter devoted to Krasiński and entitled “The Founding Myth of Polish Anti-Semitism,” we are introduced to the complex archeology of the notions about the Jews as non-human creatures, the ritual murder, and the irrevocable Jewish evil that baptism cannot cleanse.  
 Mellow Boris (talk) 16:08, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

I am entirely unconvinced as to the sources, per my reading (they do support the notion that full out myth is a minority position, but minority does not mean WP:FRINGE). We generally avoid the promotion of fringe/conspiracy theories. No consensus for this change - cherrypicked information, UNDUE emphasis on minority position, no indication why this particular opinions is of any specific relevance or importance. Overly long, "progress" is WP:OR in this regard, serious NPOV issues. Also, no consensus for attack content in lede. The lede is supposed to be a summary of the body - not a place to interject random quotes.GizzyCatBella🍁 19:36, 26 May 2020 (UTC)


### Source quotes
Bronner, A Rumor about the Jews: The first work in which a Jewish conspiracy against a Christian society figured as the prominent theme was probably "The Undivine Comedy" by an early-nineteenth-century Polish poet, a romantic nationalist named Zygmont Krasiński.
Duker, The Mystery of the Jews in Mickiewicz's Towianist Lectures on Slav Literature: Zygmunt Krasiński's Undivine Comedy is one of the earliest modern antecedents of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Published in 1835, the drama portrays a revolutionary plot against Christendom and the social order to be executed by a secret cabal of Jewish converts to Christianity. Their aim was world rule by the Jews and their method - a proletarian revolution against the remnants of aristocracy.... Mickiewicz devoted five lectures to the play. He characterized it as "a thoroughly nationalistic... drama. The author touched in it all the problems of Polish messianism... [Krasiński]introduced in the drama the Israelite people, the Slav people... however at the same time, he also sized up falsely the characters of all these national types. He committed, it can be said, a national offense by defaming the character of the Israelites; he presented the Israelite people as only waiting for the proper moment to ruing the gentry and the peasants, in order to complete the destruction of Christianity. He placed in the mouths of the representatives of Israel words that are most hostile and cruel." ... Unlike Krasiński, [Mickiewicz] did not fear the presence of Jews... On the contrary, [he] believed that Poland's capacity for leadership was due in part to the presence of the Jews. Krasiński felt "contempt" at Mickiewicz's comparison of Poles and Jews.
Adamiecka-Sitek, Poles, Jews and Aesthetic Experience: The crux of the matter is that [the Undivine Comedy] is both canonical and profoundly embarrassing for Polish culture, on par perhaps with The Merchant of Venice in the western theatre canon... in Krasiński's vision... there is a tribe busying itself with work alone, forever bent on annihilation of the Christian world. Krasiński refers here to Jews or, more precisely, the Neophytes (converts from Judaism): Jewish traitors, members of the old order presenting themselves as Christians, allies of Satan. Thus Maria Janion, author of a monograph on Krasiński and the most renowned contemporary scholar of Polish Romanticism, called [it] a ‘tainted masterpiece’, showing that Krasiński’s work can be read as a foundational myth of modern Polish anti-Semitism. She then notes that the anti-Semitic motif of The Un-Divine Comedy, though recognised and analysed by Polish literary specialists, became all but completely repressed from wider social consciousness. Krasiński’s text is still part of secondary-education curriculum in Poland, and educational materials omit uncomfortable aspects and remain silent about the poet’s anti-Semitism.
Massey, Philo-Semitism in Nineteenth-Century German Literature: For Schmitt (Carl Schmitt, Nazi political theorist. -FR), [the Jews] are a gloating chorus, sitting by and watching the Christians rend each other, so that they can step in, literally devour the pieces, and take over the world. Interesting enough, that is, almost word for word, the identical scenario that Zygmunt Krasiński had envisaged a century before, revealing it to an insouciant Europe in an attempt to alert it to the Jewish menace...
Witold Mrozek in an interview with director Oliver Frljić: Was the question of depicting Jews  three years before March '68 discussed in [Konrad Swinarski's] rehearsals? We'll probably never know. But reviewers in 1965 wrote about the antisemitic nature of the drama. Swinarski... showed horned devils. Satan... The antisemitic phantasm of the "conspiring Jew", the progenitor of the "Żydokomuna", was presented in an exaggerated, ironic way. Officially, antisemitism was by that time only an historical issue... on stage, it was possible to show it ironically, as a superstition of the aristocrat Krasiński...
Krasiński, The 'Fragment'  (tr. Martha Walker Cook): Jews as merchants at the top of "world order", dealing in trinkets torn from the dead: Among the masses some cried: "We must die of hunger!" while others bellowed: "Hurrah! hurrah for the merchants! Long live the all-powerful merchants!"... And others groaned out: "O merchants! O our gods! have mercy upon us!" And later: One of the merchants then unloosed from the band he wore upon his head an enormous diamond, and said: "This is a nail from the cross of Golgotha, which was thus transformed during the night in which you God expired! It was torn from the wood at early dawn the newt morning by one of my own ancestors. Since that time it has always been preserved in my family... The Jew threw the diamond into the empty chalice, which rang in melancholy cadence as it fell!"
Krasiński, The Undivine Comedy (tr. Martha Walker Cook):

Then come references to Caiaphas and the Talmud. François Robere (talk) 10:54, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Interesting, I was reading a bit about this. It does seem that Krasinski had some views that can be described as anti-semitic, and some scholars remarked on this. I encourage you to add a relevant paragraph to the article, I'll be happy to review it. This article is certainly not comprehensive yet, and many more important dimensions of his work are not mentioned at all or mentioned way too briefly too. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:32, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
Piotrus, you've had all these sources in front of you for a week, and you're only reading about this now, after you filed for DYK?[1] François Robere (talk) 12:33, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
The DYK is not about this article but about a play. And while I agree the antisemitism is an aspect of both articles, it is a minor aspect to both subjects. Let's not make mountains out of molehills - it's enough likely socks of a banned editor try to do this. WP:DENY, you know. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:52, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
And so are most of these sources. It's the same discussion, so don't play surprised.
it is a minor aspect to both subjects With all due respect, Piotrus, but the man gave graphic descriptions of the most heinous antisemitic stereotypes. That is not minor. The "neophytes" - convert Jews who try to take over the world in the poem - are not "minor". François Robere (talk) 08:31, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Here is Britannica for comparison [2]. This isn’t even mentioned in there. It’s clearly UNDUE, aside from a sentence or two. Volunteer Marek  02:11, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
Indeed, although I think we would all agree Wikipedia tries to be better than Britannica, whose entries are also often much shorter then ours. Either way, I concur that a sentence or two, as you say, noting K.'s antisemitism or such can be added here. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:27, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
This is not minor aspect, it is defining aspect. This play is the foundational myth of Polish antisemitism in the modern era. It is compared to work by Nazi racial theorist Carl Schmitt. It is inspiration for The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, It is often covered just for its antisemitism. Mellow Boris (talk) 05:13, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Problematic from an WP:NPOV and WP:PROFRINGE standpoint. No consensus for this change - cherrypicked information, UNDUE emphasis on minority position. The article reflects the coverage of these items as available in reliable sources, fairly widely cited, publishing journal articles and books - in Polish and English. GizzyCatBella🍁 06:29, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
That's actually not what the sources say, brand new account. Volunteer Marek  13:27, 24 February 2021 (UTC)


### Still not in article
There currently appears to be nothing about anti-semitism on the page despite as far as I can tell the consensus here being to make at least a mention of it. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 23:08, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
@Volunteer Marek:
Either there is[3] or there isn't[4] consensus for inclusion, but not both.
Why did you remove all mention of the Protocols?
Don't you think that if his "most famous and enduring work" is notable enough for the lead, so is the fact that it's deeply antisemitic? François Robere (talk) 19:04, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
We've already been over this. This does not belong in the lede since none of the major works on the guy discuss it extensively. It should be mentioned in the article text. I'm also pretty sure you're violating your interaction ban here FR. Volunteer Marek  14:53, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
@Volunteer Marek:
You've removed all mention of antisemitism and the Protocols from the article (lead and body), and I want to know why.
We only cite two "major works" here - by Milosz (The History of Polish Literature from 1983) and Bronner (The Tale of a Forgery: Inventing the Protocols from 2019), neither is "[a] major work about the guy".
And even if we had cited a third, I'm yet to see a policy-based argument explaining why a major work on antisemitism should be considered less important than one about Polish literature.
I'm not, but thanks for the notice. François Robere (talk) 16:42, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
It should be mentioned in the body. I'll put the info in. In the meantime you need to stop reverting, especially since this and this is you undoing edits by a user you have an interaction ban with [5]. And of course this is you restoring text originally added by what looks like a sock puppet. Of a user you used to collaborate with extensively. Volunteer Marek  17:09, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
Those edits precede the I-ban, and since it isn't retroactive there's no violation. Also, I wrote the text from scratch based on the refs I brought to this TP, so keep your insinuations - against which you've been repeatedly warned - to yourself. François Robere (talk) 17:33, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
WP:WIKILAWYER. You went back, found an older edit by a user you have an interaction ban with and then undid it. So in addition to violating the interaction ban you also tried to WP:GAME it. You did NOT write it "from scratch" yourself. It was added by this WP:DUCK account. I'm not "insinuating" anything. Volunteer Marek  17:54, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
I'm going to choose another venue to reply to this, since it seems you're not getting the message. Cheers. François Robere (talk) 20:55, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
And actually I DID NOT remove "all mention of antisemitism" from the body. This is just false. It's still in there. Volunteer Marek  17:11, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
So you didn't just add it back after having removed it earlier? François Robere (talk) 17:30, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
I didn't "remove all mention". It was still there. I re-added an extra sentence just to make you happy. Please stop misrepresenting my edits. Volunteer Marek  17:54, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
Can you show me where in your revision was the term "antisemitism"? Also, why did you remove the mention of the Protocols? François Robere (talk) 20:21, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

It would be well if someone could research in the sources the exact circumstances of Krasiński's expulsion from the Russian Imperial University in Warsaw. The article's present account is very confusing. Why would a member of the Russian administration of Russian-ruled Poland criticize him for not participating in a student demonstration, and so on?
Nihil novi (talk) 07:18, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
Reading the bio of pl:Piotr Bieliński it seems he was a Polish patriot (even through he worked in the Congress Kingdom's judiciary), so presumably his funeral became an occasion to demonstrate opposition to the Russians and their proxies. Since ZK's father became a vocal supporter of the pro-Russian regime (Milosz discusses this too), and told ZK to attend classes and not to join the protest of the patriotic students, I think it makes sense. You just have to look at Bielinski as a member of the opposition. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:12, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for looking into this question.
What was the role of Leon Łubieński in this matter? If I'm understanding the story correctly, he "accused" Krasiński of boycotting a student patriotic demonstration. Would that explain his expulsion from the Warsaw Russian Imperial university?
Nihil novi (talk) 10:07, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
Hmmm, [6] uses the Polish phrase "pl:relegacja z uniwersytetu" which I think properly translates as such. Milosz says he just "left" for Geneva, ditto for Encyklopedia Interia. . A somewhat different account entirely seems to be present in [7] (reprint of 1919 source), and it reads even more confusingly IMHO. [8] helps a bit: "Po incydencie na Uniwersytecie Warszawskim 14 marca 1829 r., kiedy to młody Krasiński został czynnie znieważony przez Leona Łubieńskiego i nie pozostał mu dłużny, Zygmunt musiał opuścić uczelnię i dalsze nauki podjął w Genewie. " with a note to "Sprawę dokładnie opisał Zbigniew Sudolski. Zob.: Tenże, Krasiński. Opowieść biograficzna, Ancher, Warszawa 1997, s. 82–86" Unfortunately I don't have access to this book. In the end, Sudolski is the expert, and if he says K. was relegated=expelled, I think it is true. Reading the snippets I think he got into a scuffle/fight and it caused enough of the waves his father just decided to have him study abroad... --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:07, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
I have simplified the perhaps overdetailed, yet murky, incident.
In the "Literary travels" section, paragraph 7, do you think "Frankuft auf Men" could be a distortion of "Frankfurt am Main"?
Nihil novi (talk) 12:00, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
Yes, my bad. Thanks for catching that!  --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 13:22, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Ping User:GizzyCatBella and User:Nihil novi: which of the two of you (I assume, since both of you did some major c/e here) replaced Template:Ill with the interwiki to pl Wikipedia? Template Ill is preferred, compare Irydion to pl:Irydion (dramat). Ill template links to the Polish article and at the same time contains a clear WP:REDlink, which is correct per MoS and makes it easier for people to start new article on English Wikipedia. Could I ask whichever one of you removed the ill template to restore it? See for example the version from ~2 weeks ago: [9] if you need to quickly copy paste the relevant parts. I very much appreciate copyediting, but Template:Ill is preferred per MoS. TIA. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:01, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

I fixed it myself... sigh. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:05, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

I doubt I can take this to FA, but things to do:

a section listing monuments to Krasiński
an overview of monographs about him (books and collection of conference papers)
Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:29, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Citizenship	– Polish? Abraham (talk) 20:55, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

This information was removed from the article:  Polish composer Jadwiga Sarnecka used Krasiński's text for at least one of her works for piano and voice. Reference:  https://polskiekompozytorki.pl/en/project/sarnecka-jadwiga-2/ T. E. Meeks (talk) 11:16, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

I'm the editor who removed the text; see this thread on the original poster's talk page for more context. Graham87 14:58, 18 July 2023 (UTC)