ENGONOPOULOS IN 3000 WORDS

ENGONOPOULOS in 3000 WORDS

Gouva Vagia - Spyridoula, Anagnostaki Maria - Agathi, Chimona - Mavrogeni Evgenia, Fourtouni Efrosini

Import

The present work is a creative and at the same time interpretative approach to the work and personality of Nikos Engonopoulos, through a multi-layered composition, which utilizes elements of archival research, literary recomposition, stage imagination and contemporary reflection on artistic identity. Focusing on the concept of public exhibition, the promotion of the artist and his relationship with the image – an issue particularly topical in the digital age – a convergence between the past and the present, the historical and the current, the personal and the public, is attempted.

Nikos Engonopoulos, one of the most important exponents of Greek surrealism, was a contradictory personality: withdrawn from publicity, but at the same time influential; a profound poet of interiority, but also an artist with a clear political and aesthetic stance. His attitude towards the public was almost hostile. As he himself has repeatedly emphasized, art is not a trade; it is not a performance nor a means of personal promotion, but an act of necessity. Artistic creation, for Engonopoulos, derives its value from its truth and not from its acceptance. It is precisely this attitude that has been the starting point for this work.

As part of the preparation for participation in the Panteion University conference, the working group sought ways to get in touch with the spirit of the creator. The material used was varied: the book "... and I love you madly" with love letters from Engonopoulos to Lena, interviews and his authentic phrases, biographical data and public statements, as recorded by scholars and newspapers, as well as a primary approach to his style through literary exercises. The group chose not to stay only on the analysis, but to proceed with a creative composition, which will bring Engonopoulos to life in today's world, but following his own idiom – linguistically, emotionally and morally.

The thesis includes two main parts: (a) the composition of a hypothetical interview of Engonopoulos in 2025, answering students' questions about art, promotion, social media, publicity and the artist's position in public space; (b) the representation of a poetic dialogue between the poet and Lena, as a rendering of the style and mental tone of the relationship between them;   based on the material of the letters and the emotional honesty of his work.

As an accompaniment, an audio excerpt was incorporated with the voice of the writer-translator Irko Apostolidis, who read part of the hypothetical interview as Engonopoulos, giving an even more lively dimension to the work. The use of audio material enhances the experiential reception of the narrative and creates a kind of "presence" of the poet within the educational condition.

Overall, the work attempts to shed light on the attitude of Nikos Engonopoulos not only as an artist, but also as a thinker on the relationship of the creator with society. The deliberate distancing from self-promotion, the interiority of his speech, his relationship with memory, love and silence are the elements that emerged as central, topical and fruitful for discussion and rapprochement today.

Module 2: Theoretical and Historical Context

The analysis of the relationship between art, image and public display is not a new question; however, at the beginning of the 21st century it takes on new dimensions due to the overexposure brought about by the media society. In this context, Nikos Engonopoulos' stance, as it emerges through his work, letters and statements, lends itself to a substantial reapproach to the limits of the artist's creation and public presence.

The theory of artistic autonomy, as it has been shaped in contemporary aesthetics, holds that the work of art must exist and be judged independently of external ends, such as political expediency, commerciality, or personal vanity (Adorno, 1970). Nikos Engonopoulos seems to embody exactly this perception. His insistence on silence, abstinence from public appearances, and his unwillingness to participate in the formation of the "profile" of the creator, are consistent with the thesis that art must be self-sufficient, a kind of internal resistance.

At the same time, in the work of Engonopoulos one encounters a firm commitment to Greekness, not as an ideological flag, but as an aesthetic experience. The images of his poems, the way in which he incorporates historical figures, symbols of the Greek landscape and mythological motifs, show a synthesis between Western surrealism and a deep sense of domestic memory. The Greek tradition does not appear as a "folk reference" or as folklore, but as material that is transmuted into a poetic image – even when it remains allusive or disconnected at the level of logical continuity. Engonopoulos himself had written: "Language is a homeland. The art of my homeland, the art of my world."

In terms of historical context, Engonopoulos belongs to the generation of the '30s, a generation that defined the Greek literary and artistic production of the 20th century. His conversations with Elytis, Seferis, as well as his idiosyncratic distance from the dominant poetic style of his time, place his work in a dialogue with the national and the supra-local at the same time. An important milestone in his career was the introduction of surrealism in Greece, which he carried out not as an imitation of French models, but as a re-meaning of the limits of imagination and consciousness. His works, such as "Bolívar", highlight his poetic autonomy and his ideological independence.

It is also noteworthy that his personal life is not cut off from his work, but, on the contrary, is integrated into it in an internally poetic way. The letters to Lena, the woman with whom he was linked in a deep life bond, are not just personal evidence: they are the embodiment of a peculiar lyricism, which goes beyond their diary nature and acquires the dynamics of the work of art. At a time when the public exhibition of love is a banal practice, Engonopoulos' language works almost the other way around: as a reminder of the honesty of emotion and the power of simple honesty.

At the same time, his critical attitude towards the media and mass culture makes him extremely relevant. His aversion to any kind of "advertising" was not naïve, but deeply conscious: the projection of the work without the projection of the creator was the goal for Engonopoulos. A phrase incorporated into the work sums up his attitude: "If art is to be projected, it must be done as light is projected through the crack: without screams. The work must be seen. The creator — not necessarily."

The inclusion of the person of Engonopoulos in the context of a conference on the relationship between art and public image is therefore of particular importance. It is not just a retrospective of a poetic work of the past, but an attempt at dialogue with an attitude that seems to resist today's landscape of overexposure, commodification and loss of silence. His work offers a proposal of existence, where art is not a tool, but a testimony.

3. Description of the Creative Project

The work presented in the context of the Panteion University conference is a multi-level creative project, which seeks to bring to life, on an interpretative and narrative level, the personality and work of Nikos Engonopoulos. Our central goal was not just the biographical recording or the literary approach, but the production of a hypothetical, but convincing scenario of dialogue with the present, through the language, style and mindset of the creator himself. The work consists of three main pillars: an interview that unfolds imaginatively in 2025, a poetic dialogue between Engonopoulos and Lena, and an audio document that is incorporated into the presentation as a vocal representation of the interview.

3.1 Design and Implementation of the Hypothetical Interview

The idea of the imaginary interview was formed through an extensive study of the material we have available about Nikos Engonopoulos: his poems, his statements, his letters, but also the ways in which he expressed his views on art, creation, publicity and communication. The aim was to keep the project strictly within the stylistic and conceptual framework that characterized the creator himself, without idealization, but with respect to his temperament.

The interview was shaped as a series of questions by students of the Department of Public Relations and Communication, in the year 2025, to the poet himself, as if he were still among us. For the composition of the answers, unaltered phrases from interviews were used, such as the famous answer:

"Write, paint, create—not to be seen, but to be remembered when they don't see you."

Other answers were formulated synthetically, in a style that was perfectly compatible with that of Engonopoulos. Examples:

"I would upload a white square on Instagram. Vacuity. And in the caption: 'What you can't bear not to say, maybe it wasn't worth saying.'"

ή:

"Art is not a means. It is not a message. It is a necessity. It's the act of existing deeper than you can speak."

The choice of questions was not random; it reflects our attempt to explore the poet's perceptions of the contemporary public sphere, social networks, self-exposure, authenticity, and the author's place in the social imaginary. In all his answers, the imaginary Engonopoulos maintains his characteristic thoughtfulness and simple linguistic precision, avoiding unnecessary interpretations.

The hypothetical interview was not presented as a literary exercise or a game, but as a tool for approaching the timelessness of his style and the value of his work. The answers were not intended to imitate; they were aimed at conveying a way of thinking.

3.2 Audio Evidence – Recording of a Voice

In order to enhance the experientiality of the project, it was decided to include an audio document in the presentation. The writer and translator Irkos Apostolidis offered to lend his voice to "Engonopoulos", interpreting with absolute respect the selected excerpts from the interview. His choice was not accidental; he is a man with a broad literary background, who has worked for decades on language and its interpretation.

The voice that was recorded was not intended to represent the real Engonopoulos vocally. There was no imitation or dramatization. On the contrary, the choice of style was consciously austere, thoughtful, almost impersonal: to allow the words to "speak" and not the voice to impress. This unity was projected in the flow of the presentation immediately before the poetic dialogue, acting as a bridge from rational "public" expression to the internal and personal.

The audio document was received with special attention by the audience; it functioned not merely as an addition, but as an internal "pause", as a moment of invitation to reflection. We believe it has contributed substantially to the work atmosphere, offering a sense of a tangible presence.

3.3 Poetic Dialogue with Lena

The third pillar of the presentation concerned a brief dialogue between Nikos and Lena, the woman with whom the poet lived an important personal relationship. This rendering was based on authentic phrases, sentences and expressive techniques that we drew from the book "... and I love you madly", which includes letters from Engonopoulos to Lena.

The dialogue was not presented as historical evidence; it was a literary rendition, a dramatized but deeply faithful text, which highlighted the kindness, love, and everyday magic that characterized their communication. Examples of quotes:

Nikos: "You are my soil, Lena. I want to water you as rain waters the roots."

Lena: "I don't feel proud of your title. I feel lucky for your look."

Lena is presented not as a "muse", but as a co-central person; she maintains her voice, she stands equally, she points out the difficulties, the closeness, the uncertainty. In this dialogue, Engonopoulos' tenderness and emotional sincerity unfold unpretentiously – at a time when the word of love has given way to irony or oversimplification.

The dialogue served as the culmination of the presentation; from the concept of the public voice (interview) we moved on to the completely personal field. And from there, we returned to the conclusions that concern everyone: that art does not need overexposure, that love is an internal act, and that important things are always said in a low voice.

3.4 Collaboration and Planning

The work was carried out through a collaborative process, where each and every one of the team undertook different stages: from finding sources and selecting excerpts, to writing, recording, and finally orchestrating the presentation. The combination of theoretical analysis and creative performance was a challenge, as we had to balance between documentation and imagination.

We believe that the result not only highlighted the complexity of Engonopoulos' personality, but also proved that creative work can function as a form of research method, when executed with respect, precision and interpretative consistency.

4. Conclusions and Personal Reflection

Our creative and research engagement with the work of Nikos Engonopoulos was an experience deeper than a simple university presentation. It was not only about understanding a literary current or approaching a biography, but mainly about the process by which an author is activated in the present — through us, his performers and interlocutors.

Our work did not aim to highlight Engonopoulos as a visual artist or poet in the traditional sense of analysis; but to provoke imagination, empathy and reflection, posing questions about the essence of art, communication and public image in an age of hyper-information. We sought to avoid literary distance and to move boldly in the midst of creative risk: to give a voice to someone who is no longer here, without "using" or simplifying them.

The fictional interview did not function as a script or an invention. It was the result of careful research, analysis of style, understanding of personality and deepening of his language. The fact that we managed to formulate answers that were accepted by the audience of the conference as "possible" or even touching, constitutes a moral confirmation that our way of studying was methodical and respectful.

On the other hand, the dialogue with Lena allowed our team to discover a more human, perhaps less known, side of Engonopoulos. Behind the thoughtful, surrealist artist there was a man who loved deeply, with verbal tenderness, with contemplation, with a sense of everyday poetry. Imagining the way he would talk to his partner forced us to focus not only on the words but also on the silences: on what is implied and not just what is said. With this dialogue, we felt that we were interpreting Engonopoulos on something more than an aesthetic level; we approached him as a human being.

The sound representation gave an extra dimension. When we heard the recording with the voice of Irkos Apostolidis for the first time, we felt that our text had acquired a body. The voice – not as an imitation, but as an interiority – reminded us that art is not only meaning, but also rhythm, tone, pauses. In the presentation, this moment served as a climax. Some of our audience commented on it to the point where they felt that "the poet did speak".

This experience also highlighted the power of the voice in the educational process. At a time when writing dominates, the decision to "listen" to Engonopoulos taught us that orality can create experiential memory. Narrative — when it is alive, authentic, embodied — becomes as powerful a medium as the substantiated argument. The voice is not just a storytelling tool; it is a carrier of emotion and meaning.

The modern era bombards us with images, rhetoric, repeated messages. In this environment, Engonopoulos' speech works almost prophetically: his silence, his withdrawal from the limelight, his refusal to expose the artist's face, are acts that today acquire a new, almost revolutionary, interpretation. We have discovered, then, that resistance to over-projection is not a weakness, but an attitude; it is a choice of form and substance.

As Public Relations and Advertising students, we found ourselves on a paradoxical path: to honor a creator who would likely reject any notion of "campaign" or personal "promotion." And yet, that's exactly what made the challenge deeper. To talk about Engonopoulos means to reconsider how we talk about art, creators, presence in public space in general. It brought us before questions: how can the essence be communicated without being lost? What is the boundary between propagation and deformation?

On an educational level, we learned to combine documentation with creativity. Creating an imaginary project based on real facts requires precision, aesthetic awareness and a sense of responsibility. We incorporated bibliography, archival material, theatricality, and recording technique into our work — all in an attempt to deliver something that was not just a presentation, but a personal testimony.

Our work, in the end, was not a "lesson for Engonopoulos", but a lesson from Engonopoulos. About how you keep silent when you have to. About how you insist on your own style. About how you love without a mouthful. About how you leave behind words that deserve to be returned.

The phrase we chose as our title – "not to be seen, to be remembered" – sums up the deeper message of our work. It's a reminder that art, when it's real, doesn't have to scream. That creativity can also be a form of precision, not just freedom. And that, even if we never met Engonopoulos, we had the opportunity to talk to him — and that conversation changed us.

ANAGNOSTAKI MARIA AGATHI 41210051

GOUVA VAGIA SPYRIDOULA 41210141

FOURTOUNI EUPHORSINI 41210033

WINTER MAVROGENI EVGENIA 41210123

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Engonopoulos, N. (2007). ... and I love you madly. Ikaros Publications.

Gonatas, E.C. (2021). Two letters to Nikos Engonopoulos. STIGMI Publications.

ERT Cultural Archive. (2022). Tribute to Nikos Engonopoulos – 115 years since his birth.