Univerzalnost kot stalnica v primerjalni književnosti: v smeri celostne teorije kulturnih stikov

  • Mihaela Ursa
Ključne besede: primerjalna književnost, nacionalne književnosti, kulturni stiki, literarni vplivi, univerzalnost, romunska literarna veda, Wellek, René, Munteanu, Basil, Marino, Adrian

Povzetek

V drugi polovici 20. stoletja sta v primerjalni književnosti prevladovali dve teoriji, po katerih so utemeljevali razloge za primerljivost: prva je zagovarjala dejstvo, da je primerjanje mogoče zato, ker je med dvema ali več kulturami prišlo do določene oblike kulturnega stika (vpliva, skladnosti ali odvisnosti), po drugi pa obstajajo določene univerzalije, ki se kažejo v obliki invariant ali konstant pri različnih književnostih, kulturah in avtorjih, pri čemer ni sledu o kakršnem koli vplivu ali stiku. V članku so na kratko predstavljeni argumenti teh dveh teorij, avtorica pa predstavi tudi teorijo o tem, da ju lahko razumemo kot celostni rešitvi. Eno glavnih vprašanj, obravnavanih v prvem delu članka, je vprašanje nacionalnega (ponazorjeno z romunskimi razpravami iz obdobja med 60. in 80. leti 20. stoletja) kot nasprotujočemu ali sestavnemu vidiku univerzalnega. Drugi del članka se osredotoča na razprave o ideji univerzalnih invariant, ki se v različnih kulturah kažejo neodvisno od kulturnega stika. V romunskem kontekstu ta teorija izhaja iz del Basila Munteanuja in Adriana Marina. Več kot očitno je, da so epifenomeni globalizacije tisti, ki zahtevajo nov, celostni pogled na nekdanji polarizirani odnos med lokalnim, zgodovinskim in kontekstualnim na eni strani ter univerzalnim, splošnim in množično skupnim na drugi.

Literatura

Arghezi, Tudor. “Eminescu.” Conference at the Romanian Athenee, the 27th of February and 6th of March 1943. Eminescu. Bucharest: Editura Academiei Romane, 2000.

Baldensperger, Fernand and Werner P. Friederich, eds. Bibliography of Comparative Literature. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina, 1950. (Studies in Comparative Literature).

Bassnett, Susan. Comparative Literature. A Critical Introduction. Oxford, UK, and Cambridge, USA: Blackwell, 1993.

Booker, M. Keith. Joyce, Bakhtin, and the Literary Tradition: Toward a Comparative Cultural Poetics. Michigan: University of Michigan Press, 1997.

Casanova, Pascale. The World Republic of Letters. Trans. M. B. DeBevoise. Cambridge, MA: Harvard UP, 2004.

Cornea, Paul. “La littérature comparée en Roumanie.” Comparative Literature Worldwide: Issues and Methods. Ed. Tania Franco Carvalhal. Porto Alegre: L&PM Editores, 1997. 99–137.

D’haen, Theo. “Major Histories, Minor Literatures, and World Authors.” CLCWeb: Comparative Literature and Culture 15.5 (2013). http://dx.doi.org/10.7771/1481-4374.2342.

Damrosch, David. What Is World Literature? New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 2003.

Ďurišin, Dionýz. Čo je svetová literatúra? [What Is World Literature?]. Bratislava: Obzor, 1992.

− − −. Theory of Interliterary Process. Trans. Jesse Kocmanová and Zdenek Pistek. Bratislava: Slovak Academy of Sciences, 1989.

− − −. Theory of Literary Comparatistics. Trans. Jessie Kocmanova. Bratislava: Slovak Academy of Sciences, 1984.

Etiemble, René. Comparaison n’est pas raison. Paris: Gallimard, 1963.

Gálik, Marián. “Concepts of World Literature, Comparative Literature and a Proposal.” CLCWeb: Comparative Literature and Culture 2.4 (2000). http://dx.doi.org/107771/1481-4374.1091.

Juvan, Marko. “Towards a History of Intertextuality in Literary and Culture Studies.” CLCWeb: Comparative Literature and Culture 10.3 (2008). http://dx.doi.org/10.7771/1481-4374.1370.

− − −. “Worlding Literatures Between Dialogue and Hegemony.” CLCWeb: Comparative Literature and Culture 15.5 (2013). http://dx.doi.org/10.7771/1481-4374.2343.

Lovejoy, Arthur O. The Great Chain of Being. New York: Harper & Brothers, 1960.

Marino, Adrian. Biografia ideii de literatură [A Biography of the Idea of Literature] II. Cluj: Editura Dacia, 1992.

− − −. Comparatisme et Théorie de la Littérature. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1988.

− − −. Etiemble ou le comparatisme militant. Paris: Galimard, 1982.

Mecu, Nicolae. “Specific național” [“The National Specific”]. Dicționarul Literaturii Române [Dictionary of Romanian Literature] II. Ed. Eugen Simion. Bucharest: Univers Enciclopedic Gold, 2012. 511–522.

Merian-Genast, Ernst. “Voltaire und die Entwicklung der Weltliteratur.” Romanische Forschungen XL (1927): 1–226. [Trans. in Herder and the Beginnings of Comparative Literature. Ed. Robert S. Mayo. Chapel Hill, NC: The University of North Carolina Press, 1969.]

Miner, Earl Roy. Comparative Poetics: An Intercultural Essay on Theories of Literature. Princeton University Press, 1990.

Moretti, Franco. “Conjectures on World Literature.” New Left Review 1 (2000): 207–227.

Munteano, Basil. “Conclusion provisoire. Orientations en littérature comparée.” Revue de littérature comparée 27 (1935): 50–58.

Munteano, Basil. Constantes dialectiques en littérature et en histoire. Problèmes. Recherches. Perspectives. Paris: Librairie Marcel Didier, 1967. (Études de littérature étrangère et comparée).

Nemoianu, Virgil. “‘National Poets’ in the Romantic Age: Emergence and Importance.” Romantic Poetry. Ed. Angela Esterhammer. A Comparative History of Literatures in European Languages XVII. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2002. 249–255.

Orr, Mary. Intertextuality: Debates and Contexts. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press, 2003.

Terian, Andrei. “National Literature, World Literatures, and Universality in Romanian Cultural Criticism 1867–1947.” CLCWeb: Comparative Literature and Culture 15.5 (2013). http://dx.doi.org/10.7771/1481-4374.2344.

Van Tieghem, Paul. La littérature comparée. Paris: André Brullliard, 1931.

Wellek, René. “The Crisis of Comparative Literature.” Proceedings of the Second Congress of Comparative Literature. Eds. Fernand Baldensperger and Werner P. Friederich. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina, 1960. (Studies in Comparative Literature). 149–159.

Objavljeno
2017-11-01
Rubrike
Tematski sklop