Ta kompromisna utajitev vednosti v imenu verovanja torej ostane - in vztraja kakor vsak fetis (ki je, kot pravi Freud, »zlahka dostopen« 2012: 405). Tako se skoraj vsako poglavje, ki ga ne ...zaposlujejo posledice bodisi Kvasovih pisem bodisi Marijanovega strela, zacne z vsaj minimalnim avtopoetskim komentarjem, ki tako ali drugace ohranja konflikt med vednostjo in verjetjem o slovenskem gradivu za roman. 1 In prav vsako poglavje se nadaljuje s prozaizacijo verznega citata iz mota, ki je slogovna, a ne romaneskna, kakor da so citirani Shakespeare, Lermontov, Preseren, S. Jenko, Levstik, Valjavec, Vilhar, Kancnik, Zupan in ljudsko slovstvo brez izjeme del kanona, ki naj ga ne profanira romaneskna prozaizacija. Ta kompromisna resitev konflikta med vednostjo in verjetjem torej vztraja - in postane celo tematika romana. Ta pa se s koncno izenacitvijo desetega brata z napisom »DESETI BRAT« na njegovem nagrobniku, ki ponavlja napis na samem romanu, spet konca z avtopoetskim komentarjem. A ze pred tem koncem je tematika kompromisa avtopoetska vsaj toliko, kolikor je tovrstna kompromisna utajitev znacilna tudi za »moderno estetisko uravnanost« (Mocnik 2006: 7). Deseti brat torej avtopoetsko tematizira kompromisni mehanizem estetske recepcije celo tam, kjer brez avtopoetskih ambicij upodablja kompromisni, odcarani svet kompromisnega, srednjega razreda. V tem svetu se spodletelemu ljubezenskemu srecanju, kakrsno uprizorita Onjegin in Tatjana, ali celo Miss Bennet in Mr. Darcy, se najbolj priblizata Lovre Kvas in deseti brat; ljubezen, ki ju zene, pa je se najblize epistemofiliji (je le originalen ali tudi izviren? je le Kvasov ali tudi Kavesov?).2 Se pravi, avtopoetski komentarji, slogovna prozaizacija verznega mota, tematika specificno estetskega kompromisa - vse to je zelo blizu dejanskemu romanu: tako blizu kakor perilo goloti. »Dialoska naravnanost besede med tujimi besedami ... ustvarja nove in pomembne umetniske moznosti besede, njeno posebno prozno umetniskost, ki se je najbolje in najgloblje izrazila v romanu.« Ta Bahtinova ideja (1982: 57) je bistvena za zgornje pojmovanje romana. Juriju Lotmanu (1999: 411) pa se zdi bistvena tudi »za razumevanje umetniske narave Jevgenija Onjegina«, Puskinovega romana, ki ga Lotman analizira na podlagi Bahtinove navedene ideje, Bahtin sam (1982: 103) pa ga omenja kot »enciklopedijo stilov in jezikov dobe« (s cimer, kot pravi Ivan Verc 2010: 119 op. 86, »nekoliko popravi« oceno Belinskega in pozneje, kot dodaja Aleksander Skaza 2001: 182, »polemizira« tudi s samim Lotmanom). Se pravi, Bahtinova teorija romana je relevantna za roman, kakrsen je v Rusiji nastal pri Puskinu, piscu, ki naj z bahtinovskega vidika ne bi bil neprimerljiv z nekim piscem v slovenscini, namrec Presernom (Skaza 2001; Javornik 2002). Se vec, celo Jevgenij Onjegin naj bi bil kot roman primerljiv vsaj z zadnjim delom Krsta pri Savici (Skaza 2001: 182-84; Kos 2002: 10-11). Josip Jurcic torej ni bil brez zgleda, ko je vpeljeval roman v slovenscino. Vsiljuje se torej vprasanje, zakaj Jurcic ni dosegel niti Puskinovega romana, kaj sele romana Dostojevskega, ki je v letu Desetega brata izdal Zlocin in kazen. Po Matjazu Kmeclu je Deseti brat upodobitev t. i. prvotne akumulacije kapitala. Slovenski roman je mogel nastati sele v casu prvega nacionalnega politicnega programa, prvega razmaha slovenske periodike in prve akumulacije kapitala pri slovenski burzoaziji (Kmecl 1981: 21-22). Zgodnji slovenski roman je s tega gledisca »nadvse natancen potresomer« (22) tezav slovenske burzoazije pri formiranju nacije - Presernov nacrt novele ali romana pa prezgoden (19), saj je mogel dosezke njegove poezije v prozi ponoviti sele Jurcic (120). Urednik prvega slovenskega casnika in avtor prvega slovenskega romana v tem romanu svoj alter ego, Lovreta Kvasa, upodobi po modelu nastajajoce slovenske inteligence, »parvenijskih izobrazencev« (Kmecl 2009: 79), ki - kakor ze Preseren (Kmecl 1981: 20) in vajevci (Kmecl 1975: 70) - studij teologije ali filologije zamenjujejo s studijem prava (Kmecl 2009: 64) in se poskusajo prizeniti na posestvo (Kmecl 1981: 115). Deseti brat torej vpelje »osrednji zgodnjemescanski mit o strastni prizenitvi na posestvo« (prav tam), ki ga odpravi sele roman Med dvema stoloma, s tem ko prenese talionsko pravo iz Jurcicevega »historicnega« romana v »izvirnega« in vpelje dobo Jare gospode, kritike slovenske burzoazije (109- 11). Kakor omenjeni prepis s teologije na pravo se namrec tudi prizenitev izkaze zgolj za prvotno akumulacijo kapitala (Kmecl 2009: 81-82). Se pravi, sele sodobni junak romana Med dvema stoloma pade v stendhalovski ljubezenski trikotnik in propade na nacin, ki ga od modernega romana pricakuje Dusan Pirjevec. Prvi stavki »opisujejo«, »razkrivajo« in »nakazujejo«, implicitni avtor »izravnava « in »razveljavlja« - vsi ti glagoli so nedovrsni. Po utajitvi, ki organizira prva dva stavka Desetega brata, protislovjih, ki povezejo naslednja dva navznoter in navzven, ter romanom, kakrsen sledi, drugacni niti ne bi mogli biti. Tezko bi rekli, da Jurcicevi prvi stavki navedeno zares opisejo, razkrijejo in nakazejo ali da implicitni avtor dejansko kaj izravna in razveljavi. Marko Juvan (196) z navedenim zavrne Morettijevo »kompromisno spajanje globalnega ('zahodnega formalnega vpliva') z lokalnim (perifernimi 'gradivi', 'lokalnimi znacaji' in 'lokalnim pripovednim glasom')«. Sam Moretti to razmerje med globalnim in lokalnim povzame po Fredricu Jamesonu, kjer se mu zdi »nacelno binarno«, medtem ko sam meni, da je »bolj podobno trikotniku: tuja forma, lokalno gradivo - in lokalna forma. Malo poenostavljeno receno: tuj size, lokalni liki in nato lokalni pripovedni glas; in zdi se, da so prav v tej tretji razseznosti ti romani najbolj nestabilni, najbolj nemirni« (Moretti 2011: 20). Nestabilnost, nemir - uvodoma analizirana utajitev in tukajsnji nedovrsni glagoli ju vsekakor poznajo. In prav v tem niso zvedljivi ne na tujo formo ne na lokalno gradivo: v tem je implicitni avtor Desetega brata lokalna forma, specificno literarni vpis kompromisa med scottovskim romanom in slovensko krcmo. Tuja, scottovska forma tako ne more vec biti argument za slovensko zamudnistvo, lokalno, slovensko gradivo pa ne za slovensko izvirnost. Deseti brat je kompromis med scottovsko formo in slovenskim gradivom - in v tem ni prav nic drugacen od Starinarja, saj, kot priznava Moretti (36), tudi globalna forma nastane kot kompromis. Razlika je drugod: Starinar je, potem ko je nastal kot kompromis, tudi sam izsilil kak kompromis, na primer samega Desetega brata, medtem ko ta ni imel taksnega vpliva na svetovno knjizevnosti. V tem je Scottova lokalna forma tudi globalna, Jurciceva pa ne.
Conceived 51 years after the global workers’ and student revolt of May 1968, this Focus will break down the theoretical and literary legacy of May into three intervals of 17 years. In 1985, 17 years ...after 1968, Luc Ferry and Alain Renaut published a book, La pensée 68, in which they canonized the view that the theoretical underpinning of May ’68 was provided by French structuralist thinkers, notably Michel Foucault, Jacques Derrida, Pierre Bourdieu and Jacques Lacan (see Ferry and Renaut 1985; for the English translation, see Ferry and Renaut 1990). Seventeen years later, in 2002, Kristin Ross’s book May ’68 and its Afterlives effectively replaced this canonical image with the notion that French structuralists were all either completely absent or showed at least great reserve during the events of May and that, moreover, the closest theoretical allies of the protesters and strikers were in fact the main philosophical targets of structuralist anti-humanists, namely Jean-Paul Sartre and Herbert Marcuse with their schools of humanist Marxism (see Ross 2002). Seventeen years after Ross’s seminal book, it may be time to negate both the thesis from 1985 and Ross’s antithesis from 2002, and ask the following simple question: why, despite the massive presence of Sartre and Marcuse, and the equally massive absence of Foucault, Derrida, Bourdieu and Lacan, but also Gilles Deleuze and Louis Althusser, has the memory politics of May ’68 during the past half-century included the canonization of structuralism and post-structuralism at the expense of none other than humanism, be it Marxist or non-Marxist?
Članek umešča Pot, knjigo slovenskega alpinista Nejca Zaplotnika iz leta 1981, v kanon alpinistične avtobiografije, v za ta namen razvit graf tega žanra in v Zaplotnikovo biografijo. Na kanoničnost ...knjige pokaže s pomočjo omemb, ki jih je deležna v drugih predstavnicah žanra, in s pomočjo citiranosti, ki jih je določen odlomek iz Poti deležen v alpinistični literaturi ter v njeni kritiški in znanstveni refleksiji. Osrednje mesto Zaplotnikove knjige v slovenski alpinistični literaturi, primerljivo z mestom knjige Hermanna Buhla Achttausend drüber und drunter (Nanga Parbat) v svetovnem merilu, članek razlaga s tem, da kronotop Poti realizira celotno pripovedno strukturo svojega žanra. To strukturo v članku rekonstruira graf, utemeljen v opoziciji med vertikalno (paradigmatsko, metaforično) in horizontalno (sintagmatsko, metonimično) potjo. Nazadnje to strukturo članek zasleduje tudi v biografiji Nejca Zaplotnika, ki se je po izidu Poti lotil pisanja reportaže za Teleks in romana Peter Simsen, med katerima (in znotraj katerih) lahko znova odkrijemo strukturo, utemeljeno na opoziciji med vertikalno in horizontalno potjo.
Knjige in gore (predgovor) Habjan, Jernej
Primerjalna književnost,
01/2022, Letnik:
45, Številka:
1
Journal Article
...the canon is questioned both for what it includes and for what it does not. A similar relation between a physical and a metaphysical adventure is at work in Mount Analogue (Le Mont Analogue, ...1952), René Daumal's unfinished novel about a group of mountaineers who set out to find an invisible mountain, the Analogue; the genesis of the novel is provided by Martina Kopf. The second article, by Marek Pacukiewicz, adds to Kaliszuk's focus on modernism a case study on contemporary Polish mountaineering literature, as it develops a Latourian reading of the final diary of one of the most accomplished climbers in the Himalaya, Jerzy Kukuczka. The editorial work on this cluster of essays has been funded by the Slovenian Research Agency in the framework of the research project Mountaineering Literature: Slovenia and Beyond J6-1808) and the research program Studies in Literary History, Literary Theory and Methodology (P6-0024), both of which have been hosted at the ZRC SAZU Institute of Slovenian Literature and Literary Studies.
A good half-century after the events, May ’68 is still viewed as a generational countercultural revolt. Granted, this Cold War notion was rejected after 1989 from positions as diverse as those of ...Braudelian world-systems analysis and Rancièrian theory of political subjectivation. Moreover, both of these approaches demythologized the Cold War May by expanding the spatiotemporal perspective. Yet such a contextualization of the events enables us not only to replace the counterculture with economy or politics, but also to conceptualize it. With the counterculture no longer isolated in space from culture in general, no longer separated in time from the overall conjuncture condensed by May, we can look at the long sixties beyond 1968, and at 1968 beyond France; we can read the world movement with world literature; and we can resist the period’s obsession with the New (from the New Left to the New Philosophers) to see that the real aesthetic and conceptual innovations could only have come from anti- and postcolonial discourses. These are the main goals of this cluster of essays on May ’68.
A good half-century after the events, May '68 is still viewed as a generational countercultural revolt. Granted, this Cold War notion was rejected after 1989 from positions as diverse as those of ...Braudelian world-systems analysis and Rancièrian theory of political subjectivation. Moreover, both of these approaches demythologized the Cold War May by expanding the spatiotemporal perspective. Yet such a contextualization of the events enables us not only to replace the counterculture with economy or politics, but also to conceptualize it. With the counterculture no longer isolated in space from culture in general, no longer separated in time from the overall conjuncture condensed by May, we can look at the long sixties beyond 1968, and at 1968 beyond France; we can read the world movement with world literature; and we can resist the period's obsession with the New (from the New Left to the New Philosophers) to see that the real aesthetic and conceptual innovations could only have come from anti- and postcolonial discourses. These are the main goals of this cluster of essays on May '68.
Habjan discusses lesson from philosopher Jacques Ranciere. A thinker whose interventions dedicated to the specific twentieth-century link between art and politics have only intensified since 2005, ...Ranciere is also a contributor to the famous Leninist reading of Das Kapital that Althusser and his students published in 1965, a student activist by May 1968, and an early critic of Althusser's Leninism by 1974. In this sense, Ranciere's work on art and politics, and the way this work has been read in terms of speech and the act, seems to provide a relevant backdrop against which Marxism can be approached today, when, a hundred years after the Left seized power, and 50 years after it seized speech instead of power, the US shows the global Right how to seize, if not power, then at least power-as-speech.
This article looks at cultural studies as an alternative to literary studies. To cofound cultural studies, Stuart Hall had to abandon literary studies. Later development, however, enabled cultural ...studies itself to engulf literary studies. Today, with radical approaches such as Franco Moretti‘s distant reading, literary studies has itself started to approach cultural studies. But it is no longer the dominant kind of cultural studies; it is something much closer to Hall's initial project. Moretti's literary studies is not mimicking the cultural studies that is subsuming literary studies anyway; on the contrary, it is proposing a repoliticization similar to Hall's original intervention. Thus Moretti is effectively following up on Hall's own critique of the depoliticized cultural studies that came to dominate early cultural studies as well as literary studies. At stake, then, is not only literary studies vis-à-vis cultural studies but the politics of cultural studies itself.
PDF
