Wyniki wyszukiwania - Biblioteka Nauki

1

Václav Černý a strukturalismus

100%

Pelán J.

Svět literatury – Časopis pro novodobé literatury (World of Literature – Journal for Modern Literatures)

|

2017

|

tom 55

22-45

EN

The essay mentions Černý’s hostile relationship to Jan Mukařovský, sums up its causes, and recapitulates the texts in which Černý comments on Mukařovský’s works and on structuralism in general. On the basis of these texts, the author concludes that Černý’s contributions on the topic of “structuralism” betray an a-priori polemic bias and show that his reading of structuralist works was slightly superficial. However, these texts should not be interpreted purely as an expression of personal antipathy. Černý’s critique of structuralism points out its resignation on value judgement. According to Černý, this lack leads to the inability of structuralism to turn to criticism or literary history. The author analyzes Černý’s understanding of these two disciplines, and tries to point out the deeper causes of the polemics. The core of the dispute still seems valid today.

2

Strukturalistická stopa Olgy Srbové

100%

Stehlíková E.

Theatralia: Revue současného myšlení o divadelní kultuře (Theatralia: The revue of contemporary thought on theatre culture)

|

2016

|

tom 19

|

nr 1

181-200

EN

The name of Olga Srbová (16. 7. 1914–14. 4. 1987) has almost fallen into oblivion, as she stopped to use her maiden surname after she entered into marriage with actor Jaromír Spal, being known as Olga Spalová since then. Therefore, she is mostly known for her later, post-war engagement in radio; but the first stop in her career, and her life’s love, was theatre. Olga Srbová started her university studies in 1933, receiving Ph.D. degree from Czech and French Language and Literature at the Faculty of Arts, Charles University in 1937 (dissertation: “The Characteristics of the new Czech historical novel”). Among her teachers were, according to her student’s record book, J. Mukařovský, A. Pražák, F. X. Šalda, M. Weingart, V. Tille and others. Firstly, she thought of devoting herself to theatre theory; while only a few theoretical studies can be found in the scope of her works, they nevertheless testify that Srbová mastered the methods of her teachers with skill and understanding: “The Character in New Drama” (Word and Verbal Art 3 (1937): 4: 221–226) contributes to the changes of the concept of a character in the contemporary theatre; in the “Authorial Stage Directions” (Life 15 (1937): 3–4: 98) she explores the influence of the contemporary stage practice on the nature of stage directions. As many others of her generation she admired the new media – film and radio; to the latter she devoted a booklet Radio and Verbal Art (Praha: Vyšehrad, 1941), even now valued as one of the most important works of the time. Until 1946 she wrote mostly theatre reviews, having started publishing in the renowned Students’ Journal in 1927. There she published her first poems and short stories, and in a short time (from 1930 on) also essays on theatre and theatre reviews. She published in other periodicals too (in more than 30 between 1931 and 1976), the height of her career as a critic being the cooperation with the daily newspaper Práce (after 1945). Being well versed in the whole of the contemporary theatre, both Czech and European one, she could comment with equal expertise on drama, stage speech, verse speaking, character building, direction, set design, actors training, and theatre theory. However, the most interested she was in actors’ work; the indisputable top of her attempts at portraying actor is the Theatre or the Book of Dreams (Praha: Odeon, 1975), the story of the actor’s career of Eduard Kohout.

3

Od propozic k systému? aneb „Historisovati“ Jiřího Veltruského...

100%

Drozd D.

Theatralia: Revue současného myšlení o divadelní kultuře (Theatralia: The revue of contemporary thought on theatre culture)

|

2016

|

tom 19

|

nr 1

86-128

EN

Based on careful study of archival materials the study presents the research, newspaper writing and political activities of Jiří Veltruský, covering especially the years of his studies at university and after the WWII. The author pinpoints, for example, Veltruský’s theatre activities with secondary-school students in the Avant-Garde Theatre Group of the Youth, his political engagement, and close relations to Záviš Kalandra and Karel Teige, and the Surrealists. The gist of the study represents an analysis of as yet unpublished introductory paragraphs of the renowned lecture by Veltruský, published as ‘Dramatický text jako součást divadla’ (Dramatic text as a Component of Theatre, 1941), which include a relevant polemic discussion with the previous structural theatre theories (esp. the ones by Honzl and Bogatyrev). The author of the study, therefore, suggests a reinterpretation of the decade between 1930 and 1940 when the interest of Prague Structuralists in theatre theory culminated as a period of negotiating and re-thinking the structuralist ideas over theatre performance. The historical circumstances, especially Veltruský’s emigration to Paris in 1948, then prevented a satisfactory conclusion of the discussions and caused petrification of texts which may not have originally been meant to become a canon.

4

Poezie jako hlavolam: Saussure o anagramu

100%

Koblížek T.

Svět literatury – Časopis pro novodobé literatury (World of Literature – Journal for Modern Literatures)

|

2015

|

tom 52

199-205

EN

The text provides a commentary regarding Ferdinand de Saussure‘s research in anagrammatic poetry. The author first describes three phases of Saussure’s research (1906–1907, 1907–1908, 1908–1909) and explains various changes in his approach. Secondly, the author introduces the main tendencies in reception of Saussure’s “anagrammatic work” (Tel Quel, linguistics, psychoanalysis). Finally, a comparison is drawn between Saussure’s analysis of anagrams and his Course in General Linguistics.

5

Theorie-Kulturen. Ein Erfahrungsbericht

80%

Weinberg M.

Slovo a smysl - Word & Sense

|

2015

|

tom 12

|

nr 24

15-24

EN

From the biographical perspective of a scholar of German studies with positions formerly at the German universities of Bonn and Constance and now Charles University in Prague, the article describes the discussions about theory and literary studies since the 1980s. It focuses primarily on exchange processes among various (theoretical) cultures and at the end examines the reasons why certain obvious theory transfers had not taken place.

CS

Článek popisuje z životopisného stanoviska germanisty s dřívějším působištěm v Německu (Bonn a Kostnice) a nyní na Karlově univerzitě diskuze o literární vědě a teorii, jež se v germanistice vedly od osmdesátých let. Hlavním tématem jsou směnné procesy mezi různými kulturami (teorie). Na závěr zkoumá důvody, proč k některým nabízejícím se přenosům teorie naopak nedošlo.

6

Naše živá i mrtvá minulost po padesáti letech : (Imprese nad osmi eseji z roku 1967)

80%

Čornej P.

Český časopis historický (The Czech Historical Review)

|

2018

|

tom 116

|

nr 2

402-425

EN

This study was written for the occasion of the fiftieth anniversary of the publication of Naše živá i mrtvá minulost/Our Living and Dead Past (Praha, Svoboda 1968), which was instigated by then leading historian František Graus, and in which eight key essays on core problems of Czech history were published, mainly written by younger talented researchers. The study combines a reader witness approach and an analysis of the wider context of the book’s publication which in many regards (its criticism of dogmatic Marxism and its erosion of the traditional picture of Czech history) is one of Czech historiography’s milestones. It characterises and assesses all eight papers (with particular focus on Graus’s introductory essay), looks at its reception at the time, which was not wholly positive, and endeavours to answer the question of whether the team of authors’ work fulfilled the tasks it had set itself.

7

Dva základní analytické koncepty strukturalistického myšlení

80%

Müller R.

Svět literatury – Časopis pro novodobé literatury (World of Literature – Journal for Modern Literatures)

|

2015

|

tom 51

146-155

EN

Both texts present a systematic survey of two elementary analytical categories of Structuralist thought — binarity and opposition, especially in their semionarratological implications. In “Binarity”, one structuralist version of binary analysis is described as a decomposition “of the continuum of the observed world along universal relational axes constituting logical oppositions (contradictions). An inventory of elementary binary oppositions is established, which form a paradigmatic matrix of the observed area and structure is as a relational system or network”. Within this method an apriori aspect can be sometimes distinguished when an elementary binary logical structure is assumed as a universal principle underlying the multiplicity of observable phenomena. According to another, yet different conception, used in the context of artificial linguistic simulations and computing, binarity is understood as a principle of reversible de/composition of code based on two elementary signals or elements (formalized, for instance, as +/- or 0/1), which makes further combinatorial descriptions and operations of the system possible. The genesis of binary method, beginning with G. W. Leibniz’s binary code on one hand and Ferdinand de Saussure’s structural linguistics on the other, is followed, including Trubetzkoy’s and Jakobson’s phonology, Claude Lévi-Strauss’s ethnology, Greimas’s structural semantics and ending with the fundamental critique of binarism formulated by Jacques Derrida through his notion of différance and his descriptions of temporalization of structure. In “Opposition”, Trubetzkoy’s non-binary oppositions (gradual, equipollent, isolated, ternary, n-ary oppositions) within phonology, Greimas’s semiotic square (two types of binary oppositions: contradiction, contrariety or Mukařovský’s notions of dynamic antinomies within functionalstructuralist aesthetics are further taken into account.

8

První debata o arbitrárnosti jazykového znaku

80%

Krásová E.

Slovo a slovesnost: časopis pro otázky teorie a kultury jazyka (Slovo a slovesnost: A journal for the theory of language and language cultivation)

|

2016

|

tom 77

|

nr 1

23-46

EN

The article examines the debate on the arbitrariness of linguistic sign, which took place between 1939–1949, mostly in Acta linguistica in Copenhagen, and was provoked by Émile Benveniste’s article “The nature of the linguistic sign” (1939). I deal with Benveniste’s three main statements: (1) that the thesis of the arbitrariness of linguistic sign is in contradiction with the formality of language, (2) that the relationship between signifiant and signifié is in fact necessary, and (3) the consequences of the latter for the radical relativity of linguistic values. These three positions are contextualized and examined in the frame of the Copenhagen School’s conception of linguistics and its place among other sciences. I then observe how the problem was formulated by Benveniste’s predecessors E. Pichon and J. Damourette and examine the debate occurring after the publication of Benveniste’s article, which, in addition to the editors of the Course in General Linguistics, included E. Lerch, A. Gardiner. E. Buyssens, N. Ege and A. Martinet. Their positions and criticisms are summarized and evaluated in the scope of the contemporary state of research based on the manuscript sources for the Course.

9

O vědě, ideologii a strukturalismu

80%

Hana Š.

Slovo a smysl - Word & Sense

|

2015

|

tom 12

|

nr 23

105-114

EN

The paper starts from a consideration of two variant critiques of structuralism: in 1935, Marxistoriented historians polemicized with Mukařovský’s concept of the development of literature; in 1951, Mukařovský himself presented a critique based in the ideology of the totalitarian regime. A comparison between the state of the scholarly debate in the 1930s and the latter event allows us to develop some more general characteristics of the ingerence of power ideology into scientific discourse and its paradigm. The focus of our inquiry is the question as to what allowed Mukařovský to perform this radical turn and adopt an ideological doctrine. What we find is that a link between the topics pursued in our argument — i.e. between the structuralist theory, an ideology in the service of power and the deformation of the scholarly paradigm — is provided by the position of the individual in history, in both artistic and social discourse. The gist of the matter is that with the weakening or even elimination of the individual’s role disappears the ethical dimension of the human relating to the world, disappears individual responsibility as an essential, irreducible part of one’s identity.

10

Miroslav Kouřil a jeho cesta ke strukturalismu jako metodě i programu

80%

Havlíčková Kysová Š.

Theatralia: Revue současného myšlení o divadelní kultuře (Theatralia: The revue of contemporary thought on theatre culture)

|

2016

|

tom 19

|

nr 1

144-158

EN

The study explores theoretical works and managing activities of Czech set-designer Miroslav Kouřil (1911–1984). First part is devoted to two crucial periods in Kouřil’s professional life: his career of a stage designer, and the following involvement in theoretical reception of theatre and practical organization of theatre life in the then Czechoslovakia. In the second part, attention is drawn to Kouřil’s presidency over the Czech Scenographic Institute, and to the project of the Encyclopaedia of the Set Design managed by him. In the third part, the author concerns with Kouřil’s theoretical works, especially the way in which he used structuralist methodology to analyse theatre productions.

11

Poetika a estetika českého strukturalismu v pojetí Herty Schmidové

80%

Jankovič M.

Česká literatura (Czech Literature)

|

2012

|

tom 60

|

nr 5

737-754

EN

3_The final study defends references to the specific nature of the work of art, as found e.g. in Czech structuralism, against levelling tendencies in present-day culturology. Works of art and their interpretation may effectively contend with conventional stereotypes that impoverish man and his culture.

12

K estetickému myšlení Roberta Kalivody : Kapitola z archeologie českého marxismu

70%

Kanda R.

Česká literatura (Czech Literature)

|

2014

|

tom 62

|

nr 4

527-548

EN

Using the method of archeological description and inspired by the ideas of Michel Foucault, the author of this study presents the aestethics thinking of Marxist theorist Robert Kalivoda (1923-1989). This study focuses particularly on an analysis of Kalivoda´s text „Dialektika strukturalismu a dialektika estetiky“ – „The dialectic of structuralism and the dialectic of aesthetics“, which makes up the first part of his book „Moderní duchovní skutečnost a marxismus“ – „Modern intellectual reality and Marxism“ (1968). Together with Karel Kosík and Ivan Sviták, Robert Kalivoda belonged to a generational group of Marxist philosophers who from the latter half of the 1950s endeavoured to open up Marxism to critical stimuli as well as to other non-Marxist methodologies over the course of time. Kalivoda´s aesthetic thinking developer at the crossroads of two discourses: Marxist and structuralist. Using structuralism Kalivoda criticizes the Hegelian foundation of Marxist aesthetics and the principle of „reflective reading“ – while stressing the semiotic nature of the artistic work. On the other hand Kalivoda also uses Marxism as an instrument for criticizing structuralism wherever he believes that Jan Mukařovský diverges from a radically formalistic standpoint and espouses phenomenological inspiration in an undesirable manner. Kalivoda was not attempting a historical reconstruction of the theoretical development of structuralism, but he was presenting his own interpretation of this scholalry view. Kalivoda´s efforts were motivated by the philosophical aim of destroying metaphysics and creating a post-metaphysical dialectical theory. This study attempts to set Kalivoda´s aesthetic thought in context inter alia by means of short comparisons with 1960s structuralist thinking, particularly with the ideas of Květoslav Chvatík and Milan Jankovič.

CS

Autor studie metodou archeologické deskripce, inspirované koncepcí Michela Foucaulta, přibližuje estetické myšlení marxistického teoretika Roberta Kalivody (1923−1989). Studie se soustředí zvláště na analýzu Kalivodova textu „Dialektika strukturalismu a dialektika estetiky“, který tvoří první část jeho knihy Moderní duchovní skutečnost a marxismus (1968). Kalivoda patřil spolu s Karlem Kosíkem či Ivanem Svitákem ke generační skupině marxistických filozofů, kteří od druhé poloviny 50. let usilovali o otevření marxismu kritickým podnětům a postupně také jiným, nemarxistickým metodologiím. Estetické uvažování R. Kalivody se rozvíjelo na křižovatce dvou diskurzů: marxistického a strukturalistického. Prostřednictvím strukturalismu Kalivoda kritizuje hegelovské založení marxistické estetiky a princip „odrazového čtení“ − zdůrazňuje znakovou povahu uměleckého díla. Z druhé strany marxismus slouží Kalivodovi jako nástroj kritiky strukturalismu tam, kde se podle Kalivody koncepce Jana Mukařovského odklání od radikálně formalistického hlediska a přimyká se – nežádoucím směrem − k inspiracím fenomenologickým. Kalivoda neusiloval o historickou rekonstrukci teoretického vývoje strukturalismu, nýbrž předložil vlastní interpretaci tohoto vědeckého názoru. Kalivodovo úsilí bylo neseno filozofickým záměrem destrukce metafyziky a vytvoření postmetafyzické dialektické teorie. Studie se snaží Kalivodovo estetické myšlení zařadit do kontextu mimo jiné pomocí krátkých komparací s dobovým strukturalistickým myšlením 60. let, konkrétně s pojetími Květoslava Chvatíka a Milana Jankoviče.

13

Spojité nádoby: Etnologie, pražský strukturalismus a česká divadelní avantgarda

61%

Šlaisová E.

Theatralia: Revue současného myšlení o divadelní kultuře (Theatralia: The revue of contemporary thought on theatre culture)

|

2016

|

tom 19

|

nr 1

65-85

EN

The study explores the exchange of impulses and ideas between the three fields indicated in the title, presenting Petr Bogatyrev as their mediator. It is concerned, among other things, with Bogatyrev connecting the findings of French sociologically-oriented ethnologists, such as Emil Durkheim and Luciene Lévy-Bruhl, and German ethnologists (Hans Neumann) to the theories of the Prague Linguistic Circle and their influence of Jan Mukařovský’ sociology of art. The author focuses on the way in which Bogatyrev combines the formal and sociological perspectives, and applies them on different cultural phenomena (folk beliefs, folk art, high art) as they move between different cultural strata. Another point of inquiry is the collaboration of Bogatyrev and theatre director E. F. Burian, whose montage of folk poetry is presented in the paper as a theatrical enactment of Bogatyrev’s structural-functional method, i.e. the transformation of function, structure, and meaning in transition between folk and high art.

14

Projekty spolupráce, formy propagace : Pražský lingvistický kroužek a německojazyčný tisk v meziválečném Československu

51%

Bernátek M.

Theatralia: Revue současného myšlení o divadelní kultuře (Theatralia: The revue of contemporary thought on theatre culture)

|

2016

|

tom 19

|

nr Supplementum

7-34

EN

This volume aims at presenting several newspapers written in German, specifically the Prager Presse, Slavische Rundschau, Germanoslavica and Prager Rundschau, that were established in the interwar Czechoslovak Republic under the cooperation of members of both the German and Czech ethnic groups. The relation of these newspapers towards the Prague Linguistic Circle, which was covered especially by the Prager Presse, is discussed in detail in the main study, as well as the activities of the German members of the Circle who contributed to the given periodicals on regular basis, and of Antonín Stanislav Mágr, a paragon of scientific journalism as the members of the Circle called him. The author argues that the publishing and other activities of the newspapers and the Circle not only represent one step on the path towards the institution of modern scholarship, but also a means of its promotion and popularization. The study is supplemented by an annotated bibliography of the articles on the activities of the Circle in the Prager Presse, Slavische Rundschau, Germanoslavica and Prager Rundschau.