His contribution to the Rome Conference had the following title: “Al-Shicr
al-cArablwa-mushkilmt al-tajdld” (Arabic Poetry and the Problematic of
Innovation, Proceedings171–91). In twenty pages, he unwittingly follows
Ibn al-Muctazz’ (d. 296/908) model in Kitmb al-Badlc(Book of the new,
written in 274H).^105 Ibn al-Muctazz tends to vindicate AbnTammmm and the
innovators obliquely and in terms of denial, for both the “definable” rhetoric,
embellishments, and extant innovations are already there in classical sources,
and the badlcshould not be seen therefore as an anomaly.^106 Adnnls also
expounds on innovation and modernity in contemporary poetry as an old
practice: “... it is ancient, belonging to the eighth century, in the early
cAbbmsid period” (Proceedings, 171). It is only at a later stage, in 1971, that he
qualifies his early understanding of tradition by reference to French poetic
mediations. His reading of Abn Tammmm, Abn Nuwms, al-Macarrl,
al-Niffarl, and al-Jurjmnl, we are told, is informed by his readings of Baudelaire,
Mallarmé, Nerval, and Rimbaud. The passage in his book reads as follows:
It was reading Baudelaire, which changed my understanding of Abn
Nuwms and revealed his particular poetical quality and modernity,
and Mallarmé’s work, which explained to me the mysteries of Abn
Tammmm’s poetic language and the modern dimension in it. My
reading of Rimbaud, Nerval and Breton led me to discover the
poetry of the mystic writers in all its uniqueness and splendor, and
the new French criticism gave me an indication of the newness of
al-Jurjani’s critical vision.^107French poetic mediations are not originators of some epistemological
breakthrough. Nor are they a sole source of influx. We know that Adnnls was
attracted to Eliot, too, and collaborated with Ynsuf al-Khml in translating
Eliot’s poems in 1958. On the other hand, the Eliotesque element was no less
invigorating for a Tammnzltradition in Arabic poetry, which had also among
its sources Antnn Sacmdah’s (1904–1949) book, Al-Xirmcal-fikrlflal-adab
al-Snrl(Intellectual conflict in Syrian literature),^108 which calls for a recovery of
native mythology, with its emphasis on cyclical regeneration and rebirth.
Adnnls listed the book as “... the first to influence my thought and poetic
bent,” for it “had a great impact on a whole generation of poets beginning with
Sacld cAql, Xalmh Labakl, Ynsuf al-Khml, Fu’md Sulaymmn, and Khalll >mwl.”^109
Sacmdah’s book should not be underestimated, as it spoke in terms of regenera-
tion and fertility, and offered its readings of conflict in terms that veer away
from the romanticisms of other nationalist ideologies. It also placed its argu-
ment within a cultural context that accommodated other views and writings in
translation that redrew the map of reading beyond inherited views of tradition.
The book’s use of myth as quasi-factual was in tune with the vogue of mythol-
ogy and the search for roots. Indeed, it was one of the sources for the Tammnzl
movement, with its use of Middle Eastern mythology, Biblical and Islamic
THE TRADITION/MODERNITY NEXUS