1) Chakkas' literary work in reference to the Postmodern

1. Historical circumstances of Chakkas' work

Marios Chakkas was born in 1931 and died in 1972. For the most part of his life he lived in
Kaisariani neighbourhood of Athens, which, as we shall see later, had a major impact on his work
(cytat).
Born and Died
Lived in Kaisariani (dets on Kaisariani, heroic past of the neighbourhood during the German
occupation, how it must have influenced Chakkas (cytat criticism, cytat Chakkas)
Generally about Chakkas' Work:
• From Kritiki Theorisi toy ergoy toy??
Chakkas and the Postmodern, the Postmodern considered as
a 'mode'
Let us note that this dicussion on postmodernism in the work of Marios Chakkas is based
purely
A discussion of the postmodern traits in work of Marios Chakkas, an author of a peripherial
culture … seem to be at a first glance highly problematic. Considering argument of Gregory
Jusdanis on the impossibility of postmodernism in Greek context on grounds of the lack of a high
modernism and a separate institution of arts in the country's culture, and subsequent attempts to
bring the term of postmodernism back to the critical dicourse this time however in reference to the
literature of the last quarter of the 20th century, arguing this to be the age of 'late-capitalism' and
favourable ground for the emergence of postmodern tendencies in Greek culture.
Critics
We'll be basing our analysis of the traces of postmodernism in Chakkas work not pure on aesthetic
grounds put how aesthetic devices he uses work to produce sense. In reference to the postmodern
theory of Lyotard and specifically notions of figure, metanarratives and the postmodern sublime1

Attempt of the Greek criticism to define postmodernism on the aesthetical basis.

(Χατζηβασιλείου 2002:157)
A tendency among critics to claim a work postmodern on grounds of the devices which are
used within. Even Lyotard does it by rejecting the eclectism as hallmark of postmodernity
(1984:496) and (a self catradiction since while promoting a war against totality of a canon he
creates acanon of postmodernity- the works of the avant-garde) defines the canon of the
postmodernity as the avant-garde (1985).
Claiming a work postmodern not on by virtue of aesthetical devices it emloys but on
grounds of how the elements of the art-work work in order to create sense. If we take into
consideration postmodern critique of the elytism of modernism
It will not be an overstatement to say that it was Gregory Jusdanis (1987) who gave the
theoretical background and tone for the discussion of the postmodernism in Greece defining
postmodernism as an opposition towards the modernism. The opposition modern/ postmodern will
be be part of our discussion on Chakkas example; however, we will not base our 'definition' of the
postmodern solely negatively, one against-the-modern , but positively, on the postmodern as defined
in J. F. Lyotard's theory as a shift from the aesthetics to ethics, from the Beautiful to the Sublime.
Discussion around the postmodern focused on the last quater of the 20th century
However postmodernism is not a chronological period but a mode.
Confining Ppostmodernism to any chronology is against the spirit of postmodernism itself.
Chakkas doesn't fit chronologically.
Defining the postmodern work not (solely) by it's intrinsic features (presence of certain themes,
figures devices or lack thereof) but by its mode(??)

1 Interestingly enough Dimitris Tziovas (2004) employes Lyotard's definiton of the postmodern as a 'incredulity
towards metanarratives' in his analysis of postmodern traces in the works of Aris Aleksandrou, Dimitris Chatzis
and..., writers whose work shares enough similarities with those of Marios Chakkas. Interestingly enough Tziovas
decides to ommit Chakkas in his analysis, calling him a '…'. Opinion, which I argue, is based only on very selective
reading of Chakkas works so similar to the 'posthumous' critics of Chakkas works mentioned above.
 • Natsina
• Papanikolaou
Postmodern in Greece:
Natsina
First mentioning of the postmodern in Greece 1973 (papanikolaou s. 3)
The role of Boundary 2 (William Spanos, editor of the Journal of Postmodern Literature)
Difficulties discussing postmodern in reference to Chakkas:
1. The prose he uses (patrz Lyotard, PMC)
2. Time he writes his works (in Greek circumstances)
Dificulties with discussing of the Postmodern in Greece (Natsina)
ad. 1
Lyotard:
uses 'a language unaltered in its syntax and vocabulary and writing which in many of its operators still
belongs to the genre of novelistic narration' (PMC:80)

The term 'postmodernism' is used by the criticism (however not without hesitation) in regards to
Greek literature of the last quarter of the 20th century (Βαγγέλης Χατζηβασιλείου, s. 156)
Natsina:
Μ’ αυτήν την έννοια οφείλω να σημειώσω ότι δεν έχουν τόσο μεγάλη σημασία τα καθαυτό θεματικά ή
τεχνοτροπικά χαρακτηριστικά των λογοτεχνικών έργων (κάποια από τα οποία μπορεί σίγουρα να
ανιχνεύσει κανείς και σε πολύ παλαιότερες περιόδους), αλλά το γεγονός ότι αυτά διαμορφώνονται,
ή τουλάχιστον πυκνώνουν, σε ανταπόκριση με ένα συγκεκριμένο ιστορικό και κοινωνικό πλαίσιο,
βασικά χαρακτηριστικά του οποίου είναι, μεταξύ άλλων, η άρση των κάθε είδους στεγανών, ο
πλουραλισμός, η σχετικοποίηση των αξιών, η υποχώρηση της διάκρισης ανάμεσα στην «ουσία» και τα
φαινόμενα, αλλά και η αναγνώριση της διάχυτης λειτουργίας της εξουσίας και η διερεύνηση και
προάσπιση της διαφορετικότητας9
Natsina here refers to the sociohistorical space he defined eralier in her article
According to Natsina we can talk about the postmodernism in Greece only in the post-junta period.
ο μεταμοντερνισμός είναι, πιστεύω, η κατεξοχήν πνευματική και καλλιτεχνική έκφραση της
μετανεοτερικής εποχής, τα χαρακτηριστικά της οποίας αρχίζουν να πυκνώνουν και να παγιώνονται στην
Ελλάδα με τη μεταπολίτευση, στο πλαίσιο μιας κοινωνίας ολοένα και πιο ανοιχτής και εξωστρεφούς και
μιας οικονομίας καθ’ οδόν προς την παγκοσμιοποίηση7.
However, Papanikolaou (141):
The point is not whether this or that text has postmodern characteristics; it is, rather, whether the text’s
postmodern features make sense as a whole and help create a meaningful relationship with its context, the
cultural institutions, the sociopolitical, economic and cultural reality that envelops the work of art and its
(re)production. Whether, that is, these features evolve into a modality that is meaningful within the
sociohistorical space in which they are uttered.
And it does!
Lyotard sais the same thing indirectly, if 'postmodernism is an incredulity towrds metanarratives' the
postmodern work of art or literature
The core of postmodernity is looking outside of the text (Postmodernism vs New Criticism)
The change from aesthetics to ethics
From 'Beauty' to 'Sublime'
Employing the postmodern elements in his prose
Critics call for the postmodern characteristics of the work of art (literature) 'make sense' in reference to
broader socio-political spectrum.
Chakkas' socio political spectrum:
• growing up in the war time conditions under the German occupation
• youth in the resistance, years of political imprisonment
• the now constrained by social structures, the modern technocracy (reference to junta's discouse of
'comfort' for the people?

It is not in the interest of this paper to discuss/ prove whether Chakkas was or was not a postmodern
writer; however, it will examine certain postmodern characteristics of his work.
Certain elements themes/ tropes and figues he uses have affinities with the postmodern mode of art
as described by Lyotard
 2. Themes of and tropes Chakkas' prose with reference to Lyotard's theory

Jusdanis (1987:72) argues a division between the philosophical and the aesthetic dimensions
of the postmodernism. We can see such a division even inside Lyotard's theoretical work. Having
outlined the theoretical framework of postmodernism Lyotard applies it in his interpretation of
works that share certain aesthetic characterisctics, and namely, that of the avant-garde, one that
breaks away from the 'traditional' modes of representation in order to 'put forward the presentation
itself'2. Such a division may be very helpful in reference to our analysis of Chakkas' work. Chakkas,
by the virtue of the intrinsic features of his prose, definitely cannot be accounted as one of the
avant-garde; however, we shall see how the devices, which are of more 'traditional' provenance, he
uses function as figures against the authority discourse and grand-narratives.

2 Jusdanis claims that Lyotard's choice of artistic works is, paradoxically, in fact not postmodern but of mature
modernism (1987:74-76). As mentioned above, such 'putting into boxes' is of no interest for this article and will not
ne discussed any further.
1. Disruptive force of the figure.
2. Chakkas' rhetoric, satire

3. Lyotard's 'grand-' and 'little narratives'

4. Chakkas' stories of the 'silenced ones'
5. Opposition: heroes of the past/ commodity society in Chakkas' prose