The article interprets literary history as a discourse involved in the identity policies of nations. From this point of view, the author presents the relations between national and comparative ...literary history in Slovenia. The paper outlines the origin and development of both disciplines, especially with regard to their implicit or explicit ideological underpinnings–cultural nationalism and cosmopolitanism. Until the end of the 20th century, national literary history as a “great genre” has interiorized the 19th century thrust of cultural nationalism, which also marked the institutionalization of literary historiography as a university discipline after 1919. Even though comparative literature has countered the apparently autarkic national conceptions of literary and cultural development, it produced another kind of “master narratives” through which it affirmed national identity–by providing records on the participation of Slovene literature in the “general European” currents and developmental stages. In this context, the article draws attention to the problem of belatedness of so‑called small literatures, especially in relation to the world literary system. In conclusion, the article addresses current dilemmas of literary historiography in Slovenia, which are partly specific (reticence to attempts to “reform” the discipline) and partly connected with the changes of literature and literary studies in the era of postmodern and globalization.
Cet article interprète l’histoire littéraire comme un discours impliqué dans les politiques identitaires des nations. De ce point de vue, l’auteur présente les relations entre l’histoire littéraire nationale et l’histoire littéraire comparée en Slovénie. Sont ainsi mis en lumière l’origine et le développement de ces deux disciplines, en particulier en ce qui concerne leurs fondements idéologiques implicites ou explicites : le nationalisme culturel et le cosmopolitisme. Jusqu’à la fin du xxe siècle, l’histoire littéraire nationale en tant que « grand genre » a intériorisé l’élan du nationalisme culturel du xixe siècle, qui a également marqué l’institutionnalisation de l’historiographie littéraire comme discipline universitaire après 1919. Bien que la littérature comparée ait contré les conceptions nationales apparemment autarciques du développement littéraire et culturel, elle a produit un autre type de « récits maîtres » à travers lesquels elle a affirmé l’identité nationale – en fournissant des documents sur la participation de la littérature slovène aux courants et aux stades de développement « européens généraux ». Dans ce contexte, l’article attire l’attention sur le problème de la tardiveté de ce que l’on appelle les petites littératures, en particulier par rapport au système littéraire mondial. En conclusion, l’article aborde les dilemmes actuels de l’historiographie littéraire en Slovénie, qui sont en partie spécifiques (réticence aux tentatives de « réforme » de la discipline) et en partie liés aux changements de la littérature et des études littéraires à l’ère postmoderne et de la mondialisation.
Literarna zgodovina je v tem članku obravnavana kot diskurz, vpleten v identitetne politike narodov. S tega vidika so predstavljena razmerja med nacionalno in primerjalno literarno zgodovino na Slovenskem. Orisan je nastanek in razvoj obeh disciplin, zlasti glede na njuni implicitni ali eksplicitni ideološki podlagi – kulturni nacionalizem in kozmopolitizem. Nacionalne literarne zgodovine kot »veliki žanr« so vse do konca 20. stol. ohranile izvorno podlago kulturnega nacionalizma, značilno za 19. stol. in začetno fazo univerzitetne institucionalizacije te discipline. Toda tudi primerjalna književnost, ki je vsaj od srede 30. let 20. stol. polemizirala z avtarkičnimi pojmovanji slovenskega literarnega in kulturnega razvoja, je oblikovala svoje velike pripovedi, ki pa nacionalno identiteto afirmirajo drugače – prek evidenc o udeleženosti slovenske literature v »splošnoevropskih« tokovih in razvojnih stopnjah. V tem kontekstu članek opozarja na problem zamudništva t. i. malih literatur, zlasti v razmerju do svetovnega literarnega sistema. Na koncu so nakazane aktualne dileme literarnega zgodovinopisja na Slovenskem, ki so deloma specifične (zadržanost do poskusov »reformiranja« stroke), deloma pa povezane s spremembami, ki zadevajo literaturo in vedo o njej v dobi postmoderne in globalizacije.
Članek na primeru Cankarjevega Mojega življenja (1914/1920) in njegove medbesedilne navezave na Rousseaujeve Izpovedi obravnava protislovje med singularnostjo in generičnostjo ubeseditve "življenja" ...v avtobiografiji. Avtobiografija se s tega vidika ponovno izkaže kot žanr, ki problematizira zvrstnost in zvrstne sisteme.
Za sodobno humanistiko je znacilno, da poudarja vlogo jezika kot sistema znakov, ki omogoca ne le komuniciranje, razpravljanje, izrazanje mnenj, temvec prek rab, aktualizacij tega sistema vzpostavlja ...druzbene vezi, pripadnosti, identitete, oblikuje modele za pojmovanje sveta, prostora. Postrukturalisticni4 »jezikovni obrat«, ki je v humanistiki izpostavil ontolosko prvenstvo teksta in diskurza ter ju povezal z razmerji moci in strukturami vednosti, se v geografiji najjasneje kaze v metafori pokrajina je besedilo (Hoelscher 2009b). Razumevanje pokrajine kot besedila sicer samo na sebi ni iznajdba postmoderne geografije, saj je zaznamovalo ze nemsko Landschaftsgeographie in njeno hermenevticno razbiranje antropogenih sledi in objektivizacij druzbenosti v fizicnosti pokrajine, koreninilo pa je se v starejsem izrocilu krscansko-humanisticnega tolmacenja prostora v stari geografiji 19. stoletja (Hard 2008: 271-272, 279-284). Toda prvotno zgolj metaforicna analogija med tekstom in prostorom se je zdaj tako rekoc leksikalizirala in terminologizirala, s tem da je bila vpeljana v okviru razclenjenega lingvo-semioticnega pojmovnega instrumentarija, ki je preplavil postmoderno humanistiko. Na splosno lahko besedilo opredelimo kot komunikacijski pojav, ki nastane z uporabo jezikovnih znakov za predstavitev (reprezentacijo) neke vednosti, stalisca in/ali uresnicevanje nekega namena, cilja (Marko Juvan 2006: 120). Besedilo sestavljajo povedi in druge jezikovne prvine, ki so oblikovno in vsebinsko povezane ter soodvisne, tako da je besedilo zaokrozena celota. Ta celota predstavlja posebno raven pomena, to je smisel, ki ima med drugim posebno komunikacijsko vlogo. Tako besedilni smisel kakor omenjena vloga sta odvisna tudi od situacije oz. konteksta, v katerem besedilo nastane, polozaja, v katerem ga naslovnik sprejema, in intenc akterjev, ki elemente materialnega sveta - z njihovim razmejevanjem od okolja in vzpostavljanjem pomenotvornih razmerij med njimi - kot besedilo vzpostavijo ali dojamejo (Juvan 2006: 120-121). Besedilo je »pojav, ki je vseskozi vpet v proces pisanja, razumevanja, interpretiranja in reinterpretiranja konvencionalnih znakov« (Juvan 2006: 133), zato ni le kulturni izdelek, ampak tudi simbolni prostor, kjer socasno potekata dva procesa: predstavljanje sveta in druzbena interakcija. Besedilo je ne samo temeljna enota literature, ampak je, kot je opozoril Bahtin, »temeljna danost ... vsega humanisticno-filoloskega misljenja« (Bahtin 1999: 285), kar pomeni, da je humanisticnim znanstvenikom sodobna in pretekla kultura s svojimi praksami vred dostopna in pomenljiva samo prek tekstov (izjav), materializiranih v najrazlicnejsih oblikah; teksti kot izhodisce in glavni predmet humanistike pa so ne samo pisni ali ustni, temvec tudi nebesedni, denimo vedenje neke skupine v ritualih ali simbolna govorica arhitekture in urbanizma (prim. Juvan 2000: 7-14). Pojem tekst, razumljen v sirsem semioticnem pomenu, je mogoce prenesti na zivljenjski prostor in pokrajino, kolikor v njuni fizicnosti opazovalec prepozna znakovnost (znake, indekse, sledi, simptome itn.), prek katere lahko prostoru prisodi neki pomen, sporocilnost. Geografija je pri preucevanju prostora segla se po dveh literarnoteoretskih koncepcijah, povezanih s pojmom tekst. Konstitutivna lastnost tekstov je medbesedilnost, saj vsako besedilo vsebuje sledi drugih besedil in znakovnih sistemov kulture oz. se nanje nanasa, sklicuje, te predloge pa spet predpostavljajo, evocirajo in predelujejo nove in nove tekstualne plasti sodobnega in preteklega kulturnega prostora (prim. Juvan 2008). V luci pojma medbesedilnost lahko preucujemo slojevitost pejsaza ali mestnega tkiva, ki v sleherni sedanjosti nosi v sebi sporocila ostalin iz minulih dob naravne in kulturne zgodovine, pa tudi clovekovo orientacijo v prostoru ter njegovo kognitivno urejanje, clenjenje in opomenjanje neposrednega zivljenjskega okolja prek mentalnih podob in shem, spominsko akumuliranih z recepcijo mnogovrstnih, zlasti zanrsko ponovljivih besedilnih imaginacij prostora (Juvan 2006: 255-258). Drugi izraz, ki je pritegnil geografe, je diskurz, tj. raba jezika v konkretnih situacijah, v katere izjavljanje umesca svoje subjekte in vzpostavlja vezi z aktanti, ki so naslovniki izjave ali pa so z njo predstavljeni, predpostavljeni, zlasti kot nosilci predhodnih, naknadnih ali moznih izjav (prim. Juvan 2006: 47-51; Koron 2004/2005). V geografiji je diskurz razumljen kot niz reprezentacij, praks in predstav, ki oblikujejo pomene, jih povezujejo v omrezja in jih osmisljajo.
Jameson’s concept of modern third-world literature as national allegory is also pertinent for the 19
-century peripheries of the first-world literature. Aware of their dependence on imperial powers, ...the protagonists of (semi)peripheral national movements longed for the recognition of their nascent collective identity by the lawgiving Other – the symbolic order of ‘universal’ tradition. The figures of “national poets” (Nemoianu) were invented to represent their respective nations to the gaze of the Other, symbolized by the emerging world literature and empowered through the inter-state system dominated by the core countries. In a secular parallel to the canonization of saints in the Catholic Church, “worlding” (Kadir) a national poet was crucial in the (unfulfilled) longing for his/her universal acknowledgment as belonging to the hyper-canon. While several national poets involved in national movements showed a “vernacular” tendency (Terian), Schiller and Goethe represented the more “cosmopolitan” model of a national classic. Such ‘affiliation’ to the universal aesthetic canon is also characteristic of the politics of Slovenian romantic movement and its poet, France Prešeren. Although Prešeren’s poetry, which was exposed to Austrian censorship, only sparsely employs an explicit political discourse, his imaginary worlding and intertextual transfer of universal aesthetic repertoires from the established literatures into a Habsburg periphery fashioned a cosmopolitan strategy of cultural nationalism. Prešeren has been venerated in Slovenia since the late 19
-century as the singular national classic whose oeuvre compensates for the apparent lack of classical and modern traditions in Slovenian and deserves to be recognized worldwide.
Rejecting Eurocentrism of the world literature concept, perspectivism promises an alternative to the center/periphery model. Although perspectivism tends to deny the world-systemic asymmetries, it ...rightly claims that peripheral cultural interaction may bypass global centers, establishing its networks and centers (e.g., the twentieth-century avant-gardes). Moreover, peripheries enable the reproduction and evolution of global metropolises, even though their contribution is exoticized and anonymized. The modernist poetry of Srečko Kosovel (1904–26) illustrates peripheral productivity and its response to evolutionary processes in the center. It also highlights the systemic obstacles that prevent this information from being globalized.
In his article "Worlding Literatures between Dialogue and Hegemony" Marko Juvan claims that during its late capitalist renaissance, the Goethean idea of Weltliteratur is interpreted either in terms ...of intercultural dialogism or hegemony embodied in the asymmetrical structure of the world literary system. Launching the concept of Weltliteratur during the emergence of the early industrial globalization, Goethe initiated a long-lasting transnational meta-discourse that influenced the development of transnational literary practices. In his aristocratic, cosmopolitan humanism, Goethe expected world literature to open up an equal dialogue between civilizations and languages encouraging cross-national networking of the educated elite. However, his notion of dialogue is marked by the hegemony of Western aesthetic and humanistic discourse based on the European classics. Marx and Engels exposed aesthetic and humanist cosmopolitanism as the ideology masking European bourgeoisie's global economic hegemony and the worldwide expansion of Western geoculture. It is within this ambivalence of dialogism and hegemony that the process of "worlding" (Kadir) and nationalizing of European literatures has taken place since the early nineteenth century.
In this book (' The Spaces of Slovenian Literature'), a team of researchers from the ZRC SAZU and the Faculty of Arts in Ljubljana led by Marko Juvan develops a new discipline, which is formed at the ...intersection between the analysis of the literary system and geography and relies on geographic information systems. Based on the spatial humanities approach presented in the introductory chapters, the following analyses, thematic maps and graphs try to explain how the “national space” was formed both ideologically and materially due to the interaction between geographical factors and literary practices in Slovenian from 1780 to 1940. The argument is based on spatial statistical analysis of data sets of biographies of literary actors, development of the press, publishing, literary clubs and theaters, the places represented in historical novels, and a constellation of memorial objects and designations dedicated to Slovenian writers. Systemic treatment is supplemented with discussions on the depicted and living spaces of selected writers from the 17th to the 21st century.
PDF
