Between policing and literary criticism: Habsburg censorship of literature in Lombardy-Venetia

IF 0.2 4区 文学 0 LITERATURE NEOHELICON Pub Date : 2023-10-18 DOI:10.1007/s11059-023-00711-y
Daniel Syrovy
{"title":"Between policing and literary criticism: Habsburg censorship of literature in Lombardy-Venetia","authors":"Daniel Syrovy","doi":"10.1007/s11059-023-00711-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The article looks at censors’ statements from the Venice State Archive and asks whether the parallels between censors speaking on literary texts and the mode of literary criticism can be productively analyzed with the help of these archival materials. The Venetian censorship bureau, established in 1814/15 in the context of the Kingdom of Lombardy-Venetia and forming part of Habsburg Empire, is a welcome source given the comparative paucity of censors’ statements in other parts of the Empire in the early nineteenth century and during the pre-revolutionary Vormärz period. In particular, the paper examines a set of censors’ statements from 1818, containing on the whole arguments in favor of the publication of manuscripts (or circulation of foreign books). Among them figure a number of justification strategies employed by the censors, which point beyond the usual censorship categories of offences against religion, the authorities and morals. The paper looks at various statements on “modern classical” texts (e.g. Schiller’s “Song of the Bell”, Ossian, James Thomson), as well as the ways censors developed in order to engage with contemporary literature. The main case study in this respect is dedicated to the Italian translation of a historical novel by Jane Porter, The Scottish Chiefs (1810), published as I capi scozzesi in 1822–23. The way censors reflected critical discourses on the one hand, and reacted to materials from the books on the other, immediately situates them in the context of literary criticism and the statements themselves are found to constitute a valuable source for book history, the history of reading, as well as for the development of censorship in the nineteenth century.","PeriodicalId":54002,"journal":{"name":"NEOHELICON","volume":"9 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"NEOHELICON","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11059-023-00711-y","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LITERATURE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract The article looks at censors’ statements from the Venice State Archive and asks whether the parallels between censors speaking on literary texts and the mode of literary criticism can be productively analyzed with the help of these archival materials. The Venetian censorship bureau, established in 1814/15 in the context of the Kingdom of Lombardy-Venetia and forming part of Habsburg Empire, is a welcome source given the comparative paucity of censors’ statements in other parts of the Empire in the early nineteenth century and during the pre-revolutionary Vormärz period. In particular, the paper examines a set of censors’ statements from 1818, containing on the whole arguments in favor of the publication of manuscripts (or circulation of foreign books). Among them figure a number of justification strategies employed by the censors, which point beyond the usual censorship categories of offences against religion, the authorities and morals. The paper looks at various statements on “modern classical” texts (e.g. Schiller’s “Song of the Bell”, Ossian, James Thomson), as well as the ways censors developed in order to engage with contemporary literature. The main case study in this respect is dedicated to the Italian translation of a historical novel by Jane Porter, The Scottish Chiefs (1810), published as I capi scozzesi in 1822–23. The way censors reflected critical discourses on the one hand, and reacted to materials from the books on the other, immediately situates them in the context of literary criticism and the statements themselves are found to constitute a valuable source for book history, the history of reading, as well as for the development of censorship in the nineteenth century.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在警察和文学批评之间:伦巴第-威尼斯的哈布斯堡文学审查制度
摘要:本文以威尼斯国家档案馆的审查者言论为研究对象,探讨在这些档案资料的帮助下,审查者对文学文本的言论与文学批评模式之间的相似之处是否能够得到有效的分析。威尼斯审查局于1814/15年在伦巴第-威尼斯王国的背景下成立,是哈布斯堡帝国的一部分,考虑到19世纪早期和革命前Vormärz时期帝国其他地区审查者的声明相对较少,威尼斯审查局是一个受欢迎的来源。特别是,本文研究了1818年以来的一组审查者的声明,其中包含了赞成出版手稿(或流通外国书籍)的总体论点。其中包括审查员所采用的一些辩护策略,这些策略超越了通常的审查类别,即违反宗教、当局和道德的罪行。本文着眼于对“现代古典”文本(如席勒的“钟之歌”,奥西安,詹姆斯·汤姆森)的各种陈述,以及为了与当代文学接触而发展起来的审查方式。这方面的主要案例研究致力于简·波特的历史小说《苏格兰酋长》(1810)的意大利语翻译,该小说于1822-23年以I capi scozzesi出版。审查员一方面反映批评话语,另一方面对书中的材料作出反应的方式,立即将它们置于文学批评的背景中,而这些陈述本身被发现构成了书籍历史、阅读历史以及19世纪审查制度发展的宝贵来源。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
NEOHELICON
NEOHELICON LITERATURE-
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
41
期刊介绍: Neohelicon welcomes studies on all aspects of comparative and world literature, critical theory and practice.  In the discussion of literary historical topics (including literary movements, epochs, or regions), analytical contributions based on a solidly-anchored methodology are preferred.
期刊最新文献
Future present: cli-fi’s representational challenge Representing stream of consciousness in comics: definition and categorization Electronic literary creation: dialogues through cultural recycling The time of data. theoretical thinking, statistical thinking Past present: Coal and Hard Times
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1