'Maar met al die mooie gevoelens kunt ge nog geen mooie verzen maken' : het concept ‘gevoel’ in Kroniek der Poëzie van Marnix Gijsen

Dutch-language interwar literary criticism is largely based on abstract notions as 'art', 'life', 'form' or 'personality'. In the interwar period, critics use these key concepts in order to describe various aspects of literary works. In spite of their importance, however, these obscure notions remain largely undefined. This paper offers a detailed study on the concept of `gevoer ('feeling') in Kroniek der poezie (Poetry Chronicles) by the influential Flemish critic Marnix Gijsen. It tries to reconstruct Gijsen's poetics as well as his view on literary criticism itself, which are not focused on a poem's content as strictly as current research would suggest. Indeed, the concept of 'feeling' plays a crucial role on other (more formal) levels too and constitutes only one of the many parameters the critic uses to evaluate poetry. Thus, this article not only refines the prevailing opinions on Gijsen but it also calls into question the traditional dualist approach of interwar literary criticism.Dutch-language interwar literary criticism is largely based on abstract notions as 'art', 'life', 'form' or 'personality'. In the interwar period, critics use these key concepts in order to describe various aspects of literary works. In spite of their importance, however, these obscure notions remain largely undefined. This paper offers a detailed study on the concept of `gevoer ('feeling') in Kroniek der poezie (Poetry Chronicles) by the influential Flemish critic Marnix Gijsen. It tries to reconstruct Gijsen's poetics as well as his view on literary criticism itself, which are not focused on a poem's content as strictly as current research would suggest. Indeed, the concept of 'feeling' plays a crucial role on other (more formal) levels too and constitutes only one of the many parameters the critic uses to evaluate poetry. Thus, this article not only refines the prevailing opinions on Gijsen but it also calls into question the traditional dualist approach of interwar literary criticism.A