Wyniki wyszukiwania - Biblioteka Nauki

1

Українська література: між Україною і літературою

100%

Галета О.

|

nr 1

273-287

PL

W artykule dokonana została analiza antologii Czerwona Gwiazda Salomonowa (2012), która zawiera 25 esejów, poświęconych 25 regionam współczesnej Ukrainy. Stosowane przez autorów różne strategie retoryczne są rozpatrywane w perspektywie metodologicznej postkolonializmu. Elementami najważniejszymi narracji postkolonialnej okazują się ujęcie literatury jako zwierciadła rzeczywistości, a także rozumienie wypowiedzi jako travelogue, kiedy autor działa jako przewodnik, a czytelnik jako turysta. Wypowiedź postkolonialna, przenosząca uwagę od przyszłości do przeszłości, stoi przed wyzwaniem narratywu historycznego, który nie jest spójny ani kompletny. Wreszcie, oparta na stereotypach narracja postradziecka jest zastępowana przez poetykę mitologiczną jako narzędzie stworzenia nowej tożsamości lekturowej.

EN

This article is dedicated to the anthology Solomon’s Red Star (2012), which contains 25 essays describing 25 administrative regions of contemporary Ukraine. Different rhetorical strategies presented by authors are analyzed from a postcolonial perspective. The most important elements of the postcolonial narrative are a notion of a literature as a mirror of reality and understanding of a narrative as a kind of a travelogue, when the author acts as a guide and the reader is supposed to be a tourist. A narrative is mostly past-oriented but not future-oriented and the main challenge to the authors is that a history is neither coherent nor complete. A post-soviet stereotype-based narrative is opposed by a mythological poetics as a means of creating a new cultural identity.

2

A WRITER OR A CREATOR OF THE TEXTUAL WORLD: ANTHOLOGY AS A MIRROR OF THE POST-WWII UKRAINIAN LITERATURE

80%

Haleta O.

|

nr 2

47-62

PL

Po II wojnie światowej antologia literacka staje się jednym z najważnejszych sposobów reprezentacji literatury ukraińskiej, który zmienia się w zależności od definiowania i redefiniowania statusu pisarza. Podczas gdy w literaturze radzieckiej pod opieką Akademii Nauk pojawiają się wydania wielotomowe, konstruujące postać pisarza jako uczestnika socjalistycznej reorganizacji rzeczywistości, antologie emigracyjne rozwijają mit o pisarzu jako twórcy świata słów, stającego się nową „przestrzenią spotkania” dla całej wspólnoty kulturowej.Antologie literackie opublikowane po upadku Związku Radzieckiego (których liczba rośnie wielokrotnie) odzwierciedlają wszystkie problemy transformacji tożsamości autorów od wieszcza do gracza w niepewnej rzeczywistości, a także różne modele mitologizacji twórczości od romantyzmu do postmodernizmu. W tym kontekście szczególnie widoczna staje się zmiana natury gatunkowej antologii, która stopniowo przechodzi z kolekcji do projektu. Z jednej strony zauważalny jest efekt komercjalizacji literatury w warunkach rynkowych, przekształcenie pisarza w „producenta” towaru tekstowego. Z drugiej strony, obok klasycznego pisarza, który w uznawany przez czytelników sposób reprezentuje wartości estetyczne, powstaje postać pisarza jako intelektualisty publicznego, podejmującego wyzwanie tworzenia nowych zmysłów i nowych formwypowiedzi na aktualne tematy.

EN

After the II World War, literary anthology has become one of the most important means of representing Ukrainian literature, and it has changed depending on the definition and redefinition of the writer’s status. In the meantime, in the Soviet literature under the supervision of the Academy of Sciences, there appear multi-volume editions constructing the figure of the writer as a participant in the socialist reorganization of reality, emigration anthologies develop the myth of the writer as the creator of the textual world, becoming a new “common place” for the entire cultural community. Literary anthologies published after the collapse of the USSR (whose number has grown manyfold) reflect all the problems of transforming the identity of the author from the prophet to the player in an uncertain reality, as well as various models of mythologizing creativity from romanticism to postmodernism. In this context, the change in the genre of anthology becomes especially noticeable; it gradually moves from the collection to the project. On the one hand, commercialization of literature in market conditions and the transformation of the writer into a “producer” of textual goods are visible. On the other hand, next to the classic writer who, in a manner recognized by readers, represents aesthetic values, there emerges the figure of a writer as a public intellectual who undertakes the challenge of creating new meanings and new forms of expression on current issues.

3

Paradoksy antologizacji poezji polskiej w przekładach na język bułgarski

80%

Kovacheva A.

Przekłady Literatur Słowiańskich

|

2013

|

tom 4

|

nr 1

208-223

BG

В настоящата статия разглеждам два парадокса, свързани с редакцията на антологията Съвременни полски поети, които са свързани със съществуващите сред българските читатели и изследователи-специалисти стереотипи за полската поезия. Първият е свързан с утвърждаването на приетия още от Боян Пенев в неговата антология от 1921 година модел на въобразения читател, който ограничава възможностите за сравнителен прочит на предлагания материал. Вторият парадокс е несъответствието между декларираното в увода на антологията желание да се изяснят взаимовръзките между литературните явления от периода преди и след Втората световна война и действителното премълчаване на ролята на авангарда за развитието на полската поезия. Този парадокс е предизвикан от опита да се наложат стереотипизирани представи за поетиката и идеологията на литературния авангард като историческо яваление.

EN

This article explores two paradoxes related to the concept of the Anthology of Contemporary Polish Poets that are associated with stereotypes about Polish poetry which exists amongst Bulgarian readers and researchers. The first paradox is related to the establishment of a model of the reader, introduced by Boyan Penev in his anthology from 1921, which limits opportunities for comparative reading of the proposed anthologized material. The second paradox is the discrepancy between the statements made in the introduction to the anthology that the relationships between literary phenomena of the periods before and after the Second World War will be clarified and elaborated and the actual omission of the role of the vanguard in the development of the Polish poetry. This paradox is caused by attempts to impose stereotyped notions of poetics and ideology of the literary avant-garde in the time the anthology was published.