Filtern
Dokumenttyp
- Wissenschaftlicher Artikel (5) (entfernen)
Sprache
- Englisch (5) (entfernen)
Volltext vorhanden
- ja (5)
Schlagworte
- Rezeption (5) (entfernen)
Benjamin's early reception in the United States can be broken into eight phases: 1) a few notices of his work in the 1930s; 2) the appearance of two major works, without translation, in the 'Zeitschrift für Sozialforschung', when it was published in New York and mimeographed in Los Angeles; 3) several reports of his suicide along with the death of other Jewish and left-wing writers who fell victim to Nazi terror; 4) scattered use of his work in the late 1940s and 1950s; 5) a growing realization in the early 1960s that American literary and cultural criticism was missing something of significance by neglecting Benjamin's work; 6) the appearance in the 1960s of competing portraits of Benjamin by four of his surviving friends, including Hannah Arendt, who edited and introduced the first collection of his writings in English; 7) an uncanny repetition of the earlier neglect, as a significant number of Benjamin's texts are published in Great Britain during the 1970s and early 1980s but remain unavailable in the States; 8) the beginning of a sustained critical engagement with Benjamin in the late 1970s.
Borges : philology as poetry
(2018)
The titles of many of Borges's poems refer to canonical texts of world literature. One poem, for example, deals with the ending of the Odyssey and is simply called "A scholion"; others are called "Inferno V, 129" and "Paradise XXXI, 108", referring both to Dante's "Divine Comedy". These titles indicate that in his poems, Borges often keeps his distance from traditional poetical matters such as love, or, more generally, immediate emotions. Instead, he writes poems that gloss other texts, some of which actually relate love stories. Thus, Borges's poems stage themselves as philological commentaries rather than as poetry in its own right. In a similar vein and on a more general level, Borges likes to present himself in poems, interviews, and essays as a fervent reader of world literature, playing down his role as an original author. [...] In the following two sections of his paper, Joachim Harst tackles this question by commenting on two of Borges's philological poems, namely, the two texts on Dante's "Comedy". A ready objection to the idea of "philological poetry" is that despite Borges's selfstaging as reader, his texts obviously aren't philological in any academic sense. [...] The fundamental role of love for Dante's cosmological vision leads Harst to another understanding of the term "philology," namely, its more or less literal translation as "love of the lógos," the "lógos" being the cosmic principle and the divine word. Dante's Comedy can be considered a "philological" text in the sense that it is fueled by the "love of the lógos," and it discusses this love by citing, glossing and correcting other texts on love. Returning to Borges, Harst suggests that his two "philological" poems on Dante refer to this understanding of "philology." But by modifying the epic's theological underpinnings, they work to integrate Dante into a larger system which Borges calls "universal literature." Harst claims that this notion of literature, just like Dante's cosmos, is also centered on a lógos—albeit differently structured—and in this sense "philological."
In the age of globalization, we cannot reflect about Comparative Literary Studies and "Languages of Theory" without contemplating how cross-liminality and transculturality might be lived in a mobile, medialized and rapidly changing world. Art and literature have always mirrored, transmitted and evaluated critically social, moral, and aesthetical values. How, then, can this task be fulfilled on a transnational literary and cultural level in a rapidly growing world community of letters, authors and readers? In this paper, Dagmar Reichardt promotes the notion of "transculturality", first proposed as a basic model of conviviality by the Cuban sociologist Fernando Ortiz (1881-1969) in the 1940s and then, from the 1990s onwards, taken up and adapted, both terminologically and conceptually, to Third Millennium culture by the German philosopher and theorist of postmodernity Wolfgang Welsch (b. 1946). Reichardt argues that at this moment in history, in the interest of peacemaking and sustainability and for the sake of humanity, transcultural skills and a shared understanding of transcultural coexistence, both theoretical and practical, are indispensable. From a methodological point of view that is related to the History of Knowledge, Reichardt begins chronologically by introducing the work of Fernando Ortiz and then briefly tracing the reception of his most crucial cultural analysis in order to connect, in a second sub-chapter, its theoretical interests to Wolfgang Welsch's publications. In a third step, Reichardt briefly demonstrates the potential of the transcultural approach by showing paradigmatically its applicability to a colonial (Italian) novel, reread, as it were, through a transcultural lens, before coming to her conclusions.
The reception of Reinhart Koselleck's oeuvre in Scandinavia has not been unified. This differences are due in part to the different languages and the rather different academic cultures in the Nordic countries. While German is widely read and understood in Denmark, it is less popular in Finland, Norway, and Sweden. The need for translations and mediation through other languages differs from country to country, which makes a common Nordic reception hard to assess. Moreover, the scholars who have been instrumental in the reception and elaboration of Koselleck's thought have not typically worked within a single, delineated national space, making the notion of national receptions itself difficult to defend. This trouble with national and regional reception might even lead one to ask if the foundation of the History of Political and Social Concepts Group (known since 2012 as the History of Concepts Group) at the Finnish Institute in London in 1998 was a specifically Finnish endeavor or a Nordic one. Although the meeting was co-initiated by Kari Palonen and hosted by Henrik Stenius, the director of the Institute at the time, the group’s outlook was from the very beginning an international one. Similarly confounding are the conditions surrounding the only intellectual biography about Koselleck to date. It was written by the Danish scholar Niklas Olsen as his PhD thesis at the European University Institute and later published as a book by an American publishing house. In this respect, it can hardly be seen as a distinctly Danish or Scandinavian effort. Still, there has been a strong Scandinavian element within the international reception of Koselleck and 'Begriffsgeschichte'. As a result, scholars have produced translations of Koselleck's writings, publications inspired by his 'Geschichtliche Grundbegriffe', and theoretical projects that attempt to expand the limits of conceptual history. Institutionally, conceptual history has been very visible in the Nordic countries. The History of Concepts Group has held conferences in Copenhagen (2000), Tampere (2001), Uppsala (2006), and Helsinki (2012). The international summer school in conceptual history took place in Helsinki (2005–2012) and since then has convened in Aarhus and Copenhagen. By contrast, the irst conference in Germany did not take place until 2014 in Bielefeld.
Though one should be very careful with reaching conclusions about the social views conveyed in 'The Beach of Falesá', and there are many opinions on the story's social message, one of them is "the exposure of white racism" (Menikoff 1984,57) and imperialism. The logical question, why this country, which is declaring itself a bulwark against the world's imperialism, would disapprove of such novel, reasonably appears. And the censoring of it could seem a complete non sequitur. Which 'ideas' could make this novel not suitable for an average Soviet reader in the eyes of the Soviet censorship?