Wyniki wyszukiwania - Biblioteka Nauki

1

Olbrachtův Golet v údolí ve světle románu Josef a bratří jeho Thomase Manna

100%

ZItová O.

Česká literatura (Czech Literature)

|

2013

|

tom 61

|

nr 6

831-853

EN

During the 1930s, when Olbracht wrote all his Subcarpathian novels, he started to become involved in literary translation (basically to earn a living in all probability), translating exclusively from German and mostly from the work of Thomas Mann. This study carries on from the the work of Jiří Opelík from 1967, which for the first time put forward the proposition that Olbracht´s approach to translation work was very active, so these translations acted as catalysts to hasten the qualitative transformation in Olbracht´s work. The study compares the collection of prose works Golet v údolí (1937) with Thomas Mann´s tetralogy of novels Joseph and his brothers (1926-1942), from which Olbracht translated a total of three works during the 1930s (the first two in collaboration with Helena Malířová). A comparison of both authors´poetics (the nature of the fictional world, their specific conceptions of myth, the narrator and the characters) indicates that between the two works there are several analogies supporting and in many respects complementing Opelík´s theory. A look at Golet v údolí in the light of Mann´s tetralogy opens up new ways of interpreting this crowning achievement by Olbracht.

CS

Ivan Olbracht se začal ve třicátých letech 20. století, v době, kdy vznikly všechny jeho podkarpatské prózy, věnovat literárnímu překladu (pravděpodobně zvláště z existenčních důvodů). Překládal přitom výhradně z němčiny a nejvíce z díla Thomase Manna. Studie navazuje na práci Jiřího Opelíka z roku 1967, který poprvé vyslovil tezi, že Olbracht k překladům přistupoval velmi aktivně, a ty tak sehrály roli katalyzátoru, jenž uspíšil kvalitativní proměnu Olbrachtova díla. Ve studii srovnáváme soubor próz Golet v údolí (1937) s tetralogickým románem Thomase Manna Josef a bratří jeho (1926-1942), z něhož Olbracht ve třicátých letech přeložil celkem tři díly (první dva ve spolupráci s Helenou Malířovou). Na základě srovnání poetik obou autorů (charakter fikčního světa, specifické pojetí mýtu, vypravěč, postavy) se ukazuje, že mezi díly existuje řada analogií, které Opelíkovu tezi podporují a v mnohém doplňují. Pohled na Golet v údolí ve světle Mannovy tetralogie otevírá nové možnosti interpretace tohoto Olbrachtova vrcholného díla.

2

Počátkové českého básnictví a německá metrika : K proměnám českého verše v nadnárodním kontextu

80%

Dobiáš D.

Česká literatura (Czech Literature)

|

2012

|

tom 60

|

nr 3

355-367

EN

The work Počátkové českého básnictví, obzvláště prozódie (The principles of Czech verse, with special reference to prosody, 1818) by Pavel Josef Šafařík (1795-1861) and František Palacký (1798-1876) (and Jan Blahoslav Benedikti [1796-1847]) and its influence on early-nineteenth discussions about the character of Czech verse have till now usually been considered in the context of Czech (and Slovak) literature. By contrast, this article, after a characterization of the work, considers its relation to the German concepts of prosody and meter (Friedrich Gottlieb Klopstock, Gottfried Hermann, and Johann August Apel), and also to Josef Jungmann´s (1773-1847) no-longer extant Nepředsudné mínění o prozódii české (An impartial opinion on Czech prosody, 1804). This article explores Šafařík and Palacký´s treatment of those relationships. Although the authors of Počátové turned it only selectively, Hermann´s work appears to have been an important intellectual basis for Šafařík and Palacký´s endeavour to develop a complex delineation of modern Czech verse, which had much in common with the principles of music. In its conclusions, the article thus follows on from Miroslav Červenka´s later ideas that it would be useful to study the history of Czech verse in its European context, without detracting from what made Czech verse special.

3

Koncept humanismu v marxisticky formované paleobohemistice (1956-1996)

51%

Voit P.

Česká literatura (Czech Literature)

|

2018

|

tom 66

|

nr 6

777-812

EN

This article presents a retrospective view of the activities of six scholars (Josef Hrabák, Jaroslav Kolár, Milan Kopecký, Eduard Petrů, Emil Pražák and Zdeňka Tichá), who between 1956 and 1996 took an interest in the Renaissance and Humanism in the Czech lands. It might appear that the Marxist ideology of the time must inevitably have distorted the researchers’ professionalism to varying degrees, but this article convincingly proves that this was not entirely unavoidable at least for an interpretation of the period between Hussitism and the Battle of the White Mountain, as in 1956, thanks to Hrabák’s “programme”, this research orientation acquired a strong focus on Josef Dobrovský, and thus on a patriotic assessment of the meaning of Czech history, as had been required by the First Republic. Because postwar Communist doctine paradoxically intersected the same milestones as Masaryk’s nation-building programme, based on the ethos of Hus, Palacký and Havlíček, none of the six scholars under review needed to resort to the political vocabulary that was characteristic of the latter half of the 20th century. Marxist ideology required the emphasis to be at best on progressive trends and the people, the latter term being understood ad hoc to mean both the townspeople and the rural population. On the other hand, the religious question was brought down to just the anti-Habsburg and anti-Rome sentiments of the Unity of Brethren, so that politically deferential research into the 16th century must have missed the most valuable aspects, i.e. the reconceptualization of the inherited canon, whereby the patriotic (i.e. the sole correct) interpretation of literary development was enhanced by dual Catholic-Utraquist and all non-conformist literature. The actual term humanism was overused as need required but without a strict definition, implying identification with humanity in the modern sense of the word. Curiously, this interpretational vagueness then allowed the term humanism to be confused with the Renaissance (and vice versa), thus covering the entire period between Hussitism and the White Mountain within these categories. This sleight of hand was based on a Marxist interpretation of Hussitism, which beyond the obvious positive aspects did not allow for an examination of the negative effects of this revolutionary movement on the subsequent development of bourgeois society (in particular). Hence what was known as the first, Hussite Reformation was declared to be the primary basis for the Renaissance and Humanism in the Czech lands. From the 1980s Eduard Petrů devoted himself to an alternative conception of Humanism. Its alternative and seemingly apolitical nature stemmed from the fact that this conception was not associated with the politically topical interpretation of Hussitism, but then in contrast the Humanism of the Czech lands was enthusiastically found to include a seemingly special feature known as the information explosion. Basically, however, this was a final stage of Humanism for popular consumption (involving its diffusion and imitation), strongly influenced by the printers’ economic standpoint, and inevitably responding to human knowledge and development in all 16th century European literatures.