Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 7

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1

NÁČRT PREMIEN SLOVENSKEJ LITERÁRNEJ KRITIKY OD POLOVICE 60. DO ZAČIATKU 70. ROKOV (DOKONČENIE)

100%
Barborík V.
Slovenská literatúra (Slovak Literature)
|
2015
|
vol. 62
|
issue 4
306 – 318
EN
This literary history paper is concerned with the changes of the Slovak literary criticism over a certain period of time. It reconstructs the process of the criticism becoming temporarily emancipated, i.e. the autonomous field of literary criticism was established in the mid-1960s, and, subsequently, it ceased to exist during the social and cultural „normalization“ in the early years of the following decade. The paper consists of three chapters; the first one presents two polemic articles by critic Milana Hamada (the argument with Vladimír Mináč and a polemic over Miroslav Válek´s collection of poems Milovanie v husej koži /Lovemaking with Goose Pimples on/), which made a significant contribution to forming the autonomous field of literary criticism in the mid-1960s. It defined its territory against the contemporary power structures as well as the literary field: criticism stopped serving and became, for the first time after 1948, an autonomous factor of the social context in those times. The second half of the 1960s was thus a short period of time when the relative emancipation of domestic literary criticism influenced by the external limits of the Socialist regime was finalized. The contemporary structure of the literary field, i.e. the genres and other forms of critical discourse, is discussed in the second chapter of the paper. The changes in the social situation after the invasion of Czechoslovakia in August 1968 had a dramatic impact on culture and the humanities. A number of decisions made in the name of power severely affected the domestic literary criticism. Several of the significant critics were ousted from public life. Some of the cultural and literary magazines providing space for reflection on literature were banned while other ones went through significant transformations. It was a gradual process, the outline of which is reconstructed in the final part of the paper. As a result of the interventions, literary criticism lost its autonomy and again came under control of political power just like in the 1940s and 1950s, although the new conditions were different.
2

ŠIBOLET SOCIALISTICKÉHO REALIZMU (APLIKOVANIE TECHNICKÉHO TERMÍNU V REFLEXII LITERATÚRY PÍSANEJ V PRVEJ POLOVICI 70. ROKOV 20 STOROČIA

100%
Barborík V.
Slovenská literatúra (Slovak Literature)
|
2016
|
vol. 63
|
issue 1
1 – 15
EN
The paper deals with applying Socialist Realism as a technical term in the domestic reflection of literature written in the first half of the 1970s, i.e. at the outset of cultural normalization as a part of social normalization. As opposed to the previous decade, the field of literature underwent fundamental changes; literature and its reflection were subjected to power. At that time the technical term Socialist Realism was brought back into use as a part of both conception and literary criticism. It was restored by the regime as a part of ideological control of literary field. Socialist Realism as a dominant direction paradigm was inaugurated and established as the only obligatory norm in literary practice at the turn of the 1950s. Re-establishing the concept after two decades posed a paradox as there was disproportion between the frequent use of the term in the contemporary thinking and the results of the creative practice at that time. Little of what has been preserved to date can be labelled as Socialist Realism. As opposed to the 1950s, the functional content of the term changed. A variety of methods became acceptable within its framework, therefore Socialist Realism could no longer represent the only method (like it did in the first half of the 1950s), as a result of which it stopped functioning as the binding guideline in terms of technique or subject – and lost a clear meaning. It was quite a frequent expression used in critical practice, however, none of those who used it tried to define it by means of the language immanent in literary reflection. The term thus lost its value as a criterion and therefore also its practicality, but it maintained its symbolic value with regard to the contemporary regime. It became a shibboleth in both meanings of the word: „as an outdated idea, principle or phrase, which are no longer accepted by most people as important or adequate for present“ as well as a „rule, convention, word, which sets one group of people apart from another“, i.e. the writers and critics in the period of normalization who were at least on the outside willing to declare their loyalty to the regime, and those who did not do so.
3
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Memory and History: A Comparison of the Past in Slovak Prose of the Post-2000 Period

100%
Barborík V.
Porównania
|
2020
|
vol. 27
|
issue 2
77-99
PL
Artykuł poświęcony jest sposobom, w jakich dwie podstawowe formy pamięci – historyczna i indywidualna – przejawiają się w części słowackiej prozy ostatnich dwóch dziesięcioleci. Pamięć indywidualna stanowi podstawę różnych odmian autobiografii oraz nawiązującej do tego gatunku prozy stylizowanej na biografię. Pamięć historyczna zaś cechuje gatunki historyczne, przede wszystkim powieść. W latach dziewięćdziesiątych XX w. dominowały opisy współczesności, a historyzujące ujęcia przeszłości były poddawane radykalnej subwersji parodyzującej w prozach Petera Pišťanka i Igora Otčenáša. Na początku nowego tysiąclecia ponownie pojawia się proza obrazująca i komentująca przeszłość. Bardziej sugestywne okazuje się pisanie o pamięci, które opiera się na jednostce znajdującej się wewnątrz historii lub poza nią. Znalazło ono zastosowanie w różnych formach pisarstwa autobiograficznego, w ramach literatury pięknej przyjęło zaś postać stylizacji biograficznej (np. Vilikovský, Kopcsay i Rozner). W ostatnich dziesięciu–piętnastu latach w literaturze słowackiej pojawiło się ponowne zainteresowanie historią, głównie tą sprzed roku 1989 (np. Rankov, Krištúfek i Lavrík), fałszowanej w literaturze sprzed 1989 r. i pomijanej lub wypieranej w latach dziewięćdziesiątych XX w. W tamtym czasie pamięć historyczna wychodziła naprzeciw oczekiwaniom społecznym. Wyjątkiem był Silvester Lavrík, który w swojej twórczości łączył dwa podstawowe podejścia do przeszłości (indywidualne i historyczne) w formie ich dialogu.
EN
This study focuses on how two kinds of memory: historical and personal are reflected in a section of Slovak literature of the past two decades. A variety of autobiographical genres and biographically-stylised fictional prose draw on personal memory, and history, is the domain of historical genres, particularly the novel. After the 1990s, the present was deemed important and historical presentations of the past were parodiedin the prose of Peter Pišťanek and Igor Otčenáš. At the beginning of the new millennium, however, prose portraying and reflecting on the past reappeared. Memory- based writing which is concerned with an individual situated within history, or outside of it, is more persuasive. Memory-based writing is used in different forms of autobiographical writing: within fiction it takes a form of biographical stylisation (e. g. Vilikovský, Kopcsay and Rozner). In the past ten to fifteen years, there has been a renewed interest in history in Slovak literature, mainly in pre-1989 history (e. g. Rankov, Krištúfek and Lavrík), which had been mistreated in pre-1989 Slovak literature, and later there was no interest in it or it was even rejected in the 1990s.During that time, historical memory was exploited to meet societal requirement. Silvester Lavrík was an exception-he was able to marry the two basic approaches to the past (personal history and historical) in a form of a dispute between them.
4

POVEDAŤ VIAC (SEBA-KONŠTRUKCIA: PODOBA V. ŠIKULU V AUTOBIOGRAFICKÝCH TEXTOCH)

100%
Barborík V.
Slovenská literatúra (Slovak Literature)
|
2013
|
vol. 60
|
issue 3
209 – 232
EN
The study deals with the autobiographical writings by the Slovak prose writer Vincent Šikula. It tracks the development and the contemporary transformations of the author´s self-image from the beginning of his career as a writer in the 1960s until the end of his life in 2001. It builds on widely available sources, i.e. Šikula´s non-fiction writings of memoir nature, such as reflections on him and the others, biographical sketches, essays, the answers in interviews, articles and surveys and so on. The author approaches them as a Modern subjective and therefore biased representation. The individual phases of his creative life show that Šikula saw his past and present in different ways. The form of his self-presentation was defined by the inner, in the course of time changing motivations and ambitions that is the efforts to take a certain place in the contemporary literary and public cultural environment, as well as the outer conditions and constraints, which underwent changes, too. Šikula began to create his own „portrait of the artist“ meant for the public as early as he embarked on his career as a writer in the mid-1960s, then in the following two decades he presented his modified version adjusted to the times, and in the period of time after the year 1990 the image became somehow completed and after his death definite. However, none of the depictions of his life in any of the periods of time mentioned contradicts what he had said about himself previously or would say later, the individual versions of him did not rule out the others, although in each of them he placed weight on a different aspect of his writer life.
5

NÁČRT PREMIEN SLOVENSKEJ LITERÁRNEJ KRITIKY OD POLOVICE 60. DO ZAČIATKU 70. ROKOV (2. ČASŤ)

100%
Barborík V.
Slovenská literatúra (Slovak Literature)
|
2015
|
vol. 62
|
issue 3
231 – 243
EN
This paper is concerned with the changes of Slovak literary criticism over a certain period of time. It reconstructs the process of the criticism becoming temporarily emancipated, i.e. the autonomous field of literary criticism was established in the mid-1960s, and, subsequently, it ceased to exist during the social and cultural „normalization“ in the early years of the following decade. The paper consists of three chapters; the first one presents two polemic articles by critic Milan Hamada (the argument with Vladimír Mináč and a polemic over Miroslav Válek´s collection of poems Milovanie v husej koži /Lovemaking with Goose Pimples on/), which made a significant contribution to forming the autonomous field of literary criticism in the mid-1960s. It defined its territory against the contemporary power structures as well as the literary field: criticism stopped serving and became, for the first time after 1948, an autonomous factor of the social context in those times. The second half of the 1960s was thus a short period of time when the relative emancipation of domestic literary criticism influenced by the external limits of the Socialist regime was finalized. The contemporary structure of the literary field, i.e. the genres and other forms of critical discourse, is discussed in the second chapter of the paper. The changes in the social situation after the invasion of Czechoslovakia in August 1968 had a dramatic impact on culture and the humanities. A number of decisions made in the name of power severely affected the domestic literary criticism. Several of the significant critics were ousted from public life, some of the cultural and literary magazines providing space for reflection on literature were banned while other ones went through significant transformations. It was a gradual process, the outline of which is reconstructed in the final part of the paper. As a result of the interventions, literary criticism lost its autonomy and again came under control of political power just like in the 1940s and 1950s, although the new conditions were different.
6

NÁVRATY: VARIÁCIE NA VÝCHODISKOVÉ TÉMY (PROZAICKÁ TVORBA V. ŠIKULU OD POLOVICE SEDEMDESIATYCH ROKOV)

100%
Barborík V.
Slovenská literatúra (Slovak Literature)
|
2012
|
vol. 59
|
issue 5
393 – 427
EN
The study deals with the whole Šikula´s prose (except the novel cycles), which was written for the adult reader from the mid-1970s to the author´s death in the year 2001. It is the second period of the writer´s creative life (the first one being set in the 1960s). The attention is paid to the shorter prosaic genres, to that part of the author´s creative efforts which is placed within the short story, the sketch (the collections of short proses such as Pastierska kapsička /Shepherd´s Purse/ or Pôstny menuet /Fast Minuet/) and the novella (the best works of the period include the novella Liesky /Hazels/). The rare attempt of a historical novel (Matej) is within the given context more or less an exception. The characteristic feature of Šikula´s works in this particular period is focusing on the past, which takes two forms. It is the narrator´s personal past reconstructed by the individual memory as well as the historical past preserved in the super individual memory of the national community. Three basic narration variants based on the works of the 1960s have been identified in the second period of Šikula´s creative work: (1.) the biographical narration of other people motivated by the effort to capture in a short epic genre (sometimes only a few pages) the essence that could represent „the whole life“ of the protagonist or what has „remained“ of him/her in the memory for the others; (2.) the narration with the narrator´s autobiographical role-taking; (3.) the narration based on a historicizing story plan (the protagonists´ life stories are „woven into history“), mostly using the archetype of journey and the related protagonist type (wanderers, vagabonds, beggars...), moving on a changeable horizon of the setting plan, which allows him to „be there“, that is in history or at least on the edge of it. The three used approaches to the theme combine and overlap in individual works.
7

NÁČRT PREMIEN SLOVENSKEJ LITERÁRNEJ KRITIKY OD POLOVICE 60. DO ZAČIATKU 70. ROKOV

100%
Barborík V.
Slovenská literatúra (Slovak Literature)
|
2015
|
vol. 62
|
issue 2
96 – 114
EN
This literary history paper is concerned with the changes of Slovak literary criticism over a certain period of time. It reconstructs the process of the criticism becoming temporarily emancipated, i.e. the autonomous field of literary criticism was established in the mid-1960s, and, subsequently, it ceased to exist during the social and cultural „normalization“ in the early years of the following. The paper consists of three chapters; the first one presents two polemic articles by critic Milana Hamada (the argument with Vladimír Mináč and a polemic over Miroslav Válek´s collection of poems Milovanie v husej koži /Lovemaking with Goose Pimples on/), which made a significant contribution to forming the autonomous field of literary criticism in the mid-1960s. It defined its territory against the contemporary power structures as well as the literary field: criticism stopped serving and became, for the first time after 1948, an autonomous factor of the social context in those times. The second half of the 1960s was thus a short period of time when the relative emancipation of domestic literary criticism influenced by the external limits of the socialist regime was finalized. The contemporary structure of the literary field, i.e. the genres and other forms of critical discourse, is discussed in the second chapter of the paper. The changes in the social situation after the invasion of Czechoslovakia in August 1968 had a dramatic impact on culture and the humanities. A number of decisions made in the name of power severely affected the domestic literary criticism. Several of the significant critics were ousted from public life and some of the cultural and literary magazines providing space for reflection on literature were banned while other ones went through significant transformations. It was a gradual process, the outline of which is reconstructed in the final part of the paper. As a result of the interventions, literary criticism lost its autonomy and again came under control of political power just like in the 1940s and 1950s, although the new conditions were different.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.