Književni
opus Daše Drndić pripada zasebnom kanonu književnih tekstova koji autorica sama
afirmira svojim pisanjem u potrazi za
vlastitom interpretativnom zajednicom odmaknutom od kanona kojim ...vladaju hijerarhije utemeljene na nacionalnim i
ideološkim kategorijama. Njezin se kanon oblikuje iz
autobiografske diskurzivne pozicije, odnosno iz pozicije autorice koja
centripetalno „uvlači“ u svoj narativni prostor pripovjedačke glasove drugih autora/ica, najčešće onih koji su pisali o
Holokaustu ili su bili žrtve Holokausta. Nadopisujući svoj tekst na njihovo
svjedočenje ili traumu, ona stvara polifonijske prozne kompozicije u kojima se, pored autorice Daše Drndić,
koja istodobno postaje i objekt reprezentiranja i subjekt posredovanja,
pripovijedanju priključuju Danilo Kiš, Bruno Schulz, Aharon Appelfeld, Paul
Celan, Primo Levi, Wisława Szymborska, Witold Gombrowicz, Walter Benjamin i
drugi. Tretirajući biografije autora/ica i njihove književne tekstove kao
podjednako (ne)pouzdane dokumente, izabrani se autori/ice njezinom tekstu priključuju
ponekad posredstvom svojih književnih tekstova, a ponekad izravno, kao
sudionici naracije. U radu se analiziraju tri postupka u funkciji oblikovanja zasebnog kanona
književnih tekstova: postupak fikcionalizacije biografija autora, postupak multipliciranja implicitnih autora i postupak
fikcionalizacije autobiografskog subjekta. Dok se fikcionalizacijom autora kao
stvarnih povijesnih osoba, multipliciraju književni likovi, multipliciranjem
implicitnih autora, osnažuje se i podupire autobiografska pozicija pripovjednog subjekta, da bi se postupkom
fikcionalizacije autobiografskog subjekta, oslabila prethodno stečena autorska
pripovjedačka pozicija.
Daša Drndić’s literary oeuvre belongs to a separate canon of literary texts that the authoress herself affirms with her writing in search of her own interpretative community away from the canon ruled by hierarchies based on national and ideological categories. Her canon is shaped from an autobiographical discursive position, that is, from the perspective of an authoress who “draws” into her narrative space the voices of other authors and authoresses, most frequently those who wrote about the Holocaust or were victims of the Holocaust. In her writing, she conveys someone else’s testimony or trauma and creates polyphonic prose compositions in which the authoress at the same time becomes the object of representation and the subject of mediation. So, the authoress’s narration is joined by other narrators – Danilo Kiš, Bruno Schulz, Aharon Appelfeld, Paul Celan, Primo Levi, Wisława Szymborska, Witold Gombrowicz, Walter Benjamin and others. By treating the authors’ biographies and their literary texts as equally (un)reliable documents, the selected authors are sometimes joined to her text through their literary texts and sometimes directly as participants in the narrative. The paper analyses three procedures in the function of shaping a separate canon of literary texts: the procedure of fictionalizing authors’ biographies, the procedure for multiplying the implied authors, and the procedure of fictionalizing an autobiographical subject. While by fictionalizing the authors as real historical figures literary characters are multiplied, by multiplying the implied authors the autobiographical position of the narrative subject is strengthened and supported, but in order to weaken the previously acquired authorial narrative position through the process of fictionalizing the autobiographical subject.
Beginning with the concept of "nesting orientalism" introduced by Milica Bakić-Hayden in the sense of patterns of representation used to describe the Other by all ethnic groups in former Yugoslavia, ...this paper examines four views of "nesting balkanism" in post-Yugoslav literature. First, there is a chronotopic view from the post-Yugoslav exile back to the past, in which the Balkans function as a contextual synonym for the "former homeland," always used in a context of "war," "violence," "primitivism," "disorder" and "cruelty". The second view refers to several Slovenian authors, starting with Slavoj Žižek, Aleš Debeljak and the young novelist Goran Vojnović, who show specific balkanistic representation connected with sevdah and turbofolk music. The third view is connected with travelling and trains, as a frequent topic of orientalistic representation inherited from the Orient Express novels. Finally, the fourth view draws on examples from Dubravka Ugrešić’s descriptions of her "fellow-countrymen." Almost all analyzed examples show that using the name Balkan in post-Yugoslav literature is connected with the "logic of displaced racism," a practice regarded by Žižek as a kind of inverted racism which is allowed when comparing "tolerant" Europe to Balkan Otherness.
Since the (re)structuring collective memory always implies particular political processes, in the case of Ivan Goran Kovačić and his narrative poem The Pit (Jama), the fundamental text of the ...Partisan canon of Croatian literature, it may be divided into two periods with a transitional watershed of the 90s (or the disintegration of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia) as a historical turning point. Post-Yugoslav revisionist processes of the memory of World War II, which then started, inevitably had to influence the “myth about Goran”, up to that time in the conventional memory constructed around three key points. The first was his leaving Zagreb, together with Vladimir Nazor, to join the Partisans; the second was the revelation of Ustasha crimes in the epic poem The Pit and third his death by a “chetnikʼs knife”, which he prophetically hinted at in his poem “My Tomb”. Furthermore, the critical reception of The Pit from its first edition takes place on two plans of expression – artistic (fine arts) and literary. These “two lives” of one epic poem had different destinies and also attached to themselves different memories including forgetting strategies of (re)structuring collective memory.
In the historical circumstances of the post-Yugoslav era, class solidarity was regarded as the dominant ideological characteristic of the abandoned self-management socialism. Therefore, ...transition-related discursive practices which excluded the notion of the worker were common on all levels. This ranged from the Croatian 1990s newspeak which introduced the more neoliberal term djelatnik “employe” into the lexicon, to disempowering the worker within the newly-introduced value system dominated by entrepreneurs as the epitome and the driving force of the new society. In this way, workers were first transformed from self-managers and producers into ideological Others, and then into actual “former workers”, relocated from being the vital segment of the creative present and representing utopian projections of progress into a retired past. Given all this, it is significant to note that the worker is once again being used in book titles and as a literary character in contemporary literature – in 2014, the return of the worker is notable in Goran Ferčec’s play Radnice u gladovanju (Female Workers on Hunger Strike, 2014), and in Viktor Ivančić’s prose stories Radnici i seljaci (Workers and Peasants, 2014). Literary representations of workers in these texts are contextualized within a framework of a new utopian desire and in revolt against the monstrously inverted logic of corporate capitalism which transforms humanity into a serious deviation. Special attention is given to the representation of the space of rebellion taking into consideration the notion of heterotopia: a nursing home, a prison or a hospital are counter-places where the transition-related reality played its cruel game with the “former” worker and the destroyed potentials that it created in his/her projections of the future.
Kronotop egzila u postjugoslavenskom romanu Levanat-Peričić, Miranda
Bosanskohercegovački slavistički kongres. Zbornik radova (Online),
2019, Letnik:
II, Številka:
2
Journal Article
Odprti dostop
Although the chronotopic approach to the novels of exile is almost self-explanatory, certain specifics expressed by post-Yugoslav exile narrations evoke a separate chronotope interpretation. First ...and foremost, post-Yugoslav literature is additionally encumbered with the identity issue because the abandoned areas of the nineties for the exiled writer do not disappear at a metaphorical level, by turning into a mnemotope, but in the actual break-up of the political entity, the imaginary supranational heritage transforms itself into a kind of counterculture, mostly affirmed by exile writers. Therefore, returning to the abandoned place often becomes possible only as a return to the past. In this paper, the literary theme of exile will be followed comparatively, starting from the reflective nostalgia in the prose of Dubravka Ugrešić (The Ministry of Pain), through a global exile which reflects the history of the relationship between European persecutions and America as an unfair homeland, which breaks all identity support in the novels of Aleksandar Hemon (The Nowhere Man; The Lazarus Project), to the intra-Yugoslav, “hereditary” exile in the novels of Goran Vojnović (Chefurs Raus!; Yugoslavia, My Homeland), which fathers left to their sons like a curse of the genus. In the texts mentioned above, the chronotope of exile is dealt with at the level of genre, as the major, supreme chronotope, which includes or opens space to a series of specific local chronotopes, which are fundamental to exile narration. These motifs are also encountered in other genres, but in exile narration they are the bearing pillars of the genre. They are, by their nature, chronotopic because they are realised through the binary spatial-temporal categories of presence and absence, affiliation and non-affiliation, anchoring and nomadism. In this paper, I will look at three such chronotope motifs: 1) the motif ofhome as a non-place or a place of absence; 2) the motif of other/mirror country and other/“mirror” history; 3) the motif of return and travel (by train), which regularly invokes the stereotypical representation of the place and the past.
U ovom se članku prikazuju tri teorije koje smatramo relevantnim za definiranje aktivne rečenične konstrukcije.
U uvodnom dijelu obrazlaže se Dixonovo razlikovanje split–S i fluid–S obrazaca kao ...dvaju temeljnih tipova rascjepa ergativnosti izazvanog semantičkom prirodom glagola. Buduči da se na tu razliku referira večina autora, moćemo je smatrati opčim mjestom ove teme.
Drugi dio posvečen je globalnoj tipologiji Johanne Nichols koja je, polazeći od Klimovljeve pretpostavke da se određena jezična obilježja grupiraju tvoreći tipove, ispitala korelacije rečeničnog ustrojstva, tipova morfološkog obilježavanja, morfološke složenosti i rečeničnog poretka, te korelacije između tih jezičnih obilježja i drugih kategorija. Otkriće korelacijskog lanca HM morfologije, niže složenosti i ustrojstva tipa split–S, te korelacijskog lanca DM morfologije, visoke složenosti i ustrojstva tipa fluid–S, za nas je bitno iz dva razloga. Prvo, u svjetlu novih spoznaja mogučnost definiranja tzv. ’aktivnog jezičnog tipa’ ne izgleda više uvjerljivom. Drugo, potvrđuje se tipološka razlika fluid–S i split–S obrazaca.
U trećem dijelu prikazuje se rad Marianne Mithun. Iako i ostali autori ističu semantičku utemeljenost sintaktičkih obrazaca o kojima je riječ, jedino se Marianne Mithun posvetila analizi raznovrsnosti semantičkih kriterija temeljem kojih se javljaju specifične gramatičke razlike među konstrukcijama u pojedinim jezicima. Pritom je uočila dva osnovna sistema – jedan koji je utemeljen prvenstveno na leksičkom aspektu glagola ona naziva aktiv/stativ ili aktivni obrazac, a drugi koji se temelji na semantičkim obilježjima sudionika (vršitelja i trpitelja) ona naziva agens/pacijens ili agentivni obrazac.
U zaključku na kraju članka, osvrtom na sličnosti i razlike u pristupu ovoj temi, otkrivaju se i načelne razlike između formalno sličnih konstrukcija koje autorice i autor opisuju. Dixonov split–S i Mithunin aktivni obrazac motivirani su glagolskom semantikom, jer gramatikaliziraju leksičke kategorije glagola, dok su Dixonov fluid–S i Mithunin agentivni obrazac motivirani imenskom semantikom, jer kodiraju imenske semantičke uloge.
Grafički prikaz na kraju ovoga rada ujedno je i njegov slikovni sažetak.
Publication of a book of literary reviews Romani krize (The Novels of Crisis) by Igor Mandić in Belgrade in 1996, as well as the book promotion in Serbia, have been the subject of sharp attacks on ...its author in the Croatian media. In this “case,” which Mandić himself called “the chase of the collegial choir of elite commentators” for an “insignificant book of literary reviews,” several peripheral levels that are attempted to impose as dominant or to compete for a more favorable discursive position can be distinguished. First of all, the complex of peripheral is in the very status of literary criticism, the marginal letter, inferior to the prestigious discourses of belletristic and literary theory. However, as Mandić underlined in the foreword to The Novels of Crisis, this “by status wholly devalued writing, no matter how small, could always be used as a ‘symptom’ to raise some sort of ward-heeler’s alarm.” Regardless of the ironic modus of this attitude, the “ward-heeler alarm” that followed completely departed from the subject of this Mandić’s collection, or a decade of Serbian and Croatian literary productions, from the 80’s to the 90’s. Finally, precisely this literary period, which Mandić defined as a decade after the death of J. B. Tito and M. Krleža until the break-up of the SFRY, as the last decade of literary and cultural life in a common state, after its disintegration remained on the historical periphery of newly established national canons. However, the most important peripheral level of the whole of this “case” is concerned with the approach to the body of texts that this book deals with, i.e. a comparative study of Serbian and Croatian literature. At the time it was published in 1996, from peripheral cultural positions the comparative approach to the Croatian and Serbian literature was perceived as a radical political provocation that comes from the common past, in the wake of its renewal. In this work special attention is given to Mandić’s choice of Serbian and Croatian literary titles, hence to the very content of the Novels of Crisis. However, since the cultural context of this book goes beyond the literary criticism of the decade to which it relates, its significance is looked into from the aspect of polemical discourses this book produced, even at the periphery of the Croatian nineties.
This paper gives an outline of researches conducted by three authors we found most relevant for description of so-called "active syntactic construction. Since it seems to be universally accepted, we ...start from Dixon's distinguishing split-S and fluid-S patterns as two basic types of the split systems caused by the semantic nature of the verb. Second part of the paper refers to the Johanna Nichol's research into global typology. Starting from the Klimov's observation that certain features cluster together and are associated with certain types, she has tested correlations among clause alignment, morphological marking type, morphologycal complexity and word order, as well as correlations between these and the other categories. On the big sample of the world languages she follows distribution of these language features with an aim to find some statistically significant pattern which could confirm areal or typological correlations between these features. Correlation chain of head-marking morphology, lower complexity and split-S type of alignment, as well as correlation chain of dependent-marking morphology, higher complexity and fluid-S type of alignment, we found the most stimulating foe the subject of this paper, because it confirms basic typological differences among languages with split-S and fluid-S patterns, Third part of the paper presents Marianne Mithun's work., Although everyone emphasizes semantic bases of these syntactic patterns, only Mithun researches rich variety of semantic distinctions underlying different construction. It leads her to detection of two systems: first one which is based primarily on the lexical aspect of the verb she calls "active/stative" or "active" and the other one which is primarily based on the semantic features of the participants (actor and undergoer) she calls "agent/patient" or "agentive". Finally, in the light of presented works, we give an conclusion mostly regarding differences between split-S and fluid-S types of constructions. Although these constructions show certain formal similarities, they are basically different in terms of what they grammaticalize: Dixon's split-S and Mithun's active patterns are motivated by verbal semantics, as it grammaticalizes lexical categories on verbs, whereas Dixon's fluid-S and Mithun's agentive are motivated by nominal semantic, as it codes nominal semantic roles.
PDF
