Canlit近期(再)展望:部分盘点

Q2 Arts and Humanities Studia Anglica Posnaniensia Pub Date : 2020-12-01 DOI:10.2478/stap-2020-0013
A. Rzepa
{"title":"Canlit近期(再)展望:部分盘点","authors":"A. Rzepa","doi":"10.2478/stap-2020-0013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article approaches recent discussions on the state of contemporary CanLit as a body of literary texts, an academic field, and an institution. The discussion is informed primarily by a number of recent or relatively recent publications, such as Trans.CanLit. Resituating the Study of Canadian Literature (Kamboureli & Miki 2007), Refuse. CanLit in Ruins (McGregor, Rak & Wunker 2018), Luminous Ink: Writers on Writing in Canada (McWatt, Maharaj & Brand 2018), and the discussions and/or controversies some of those generated – expressed through newspaper and magazine articles, scholarly essays, but also through tweets, etc. The texts have been written as a response to the current state and – in some cases – scandals of CanLit. Many constitute attempts at starting or contributing to a discussion aimed at not only taking stock of, but also reinterpreting and re-defining the field and the institution in view of the challenges of the globalising world. Perhaps more importantly, they address also the challenges resulting from the rift between CanLit as implicated in the (post)colonial nation-building project and rigid institutional structures, perpetuating the silencings, erasures, and hierarchies resulting from such entanglements, and actual literary texts produced by an increasingly diversified group of writers working with a widening range of topics and genres, and creating often intimate, autobiographically inspired art with a sense of responsibility to marginalised communities. The article concludes with the example of Indigenous writing and the position some young Indigenous writers take in the current discussions.","PeriodicalId":35172,"journal":{"name":"Studia Anglica Posnaniensia","volume":"55 1","pages":"273 - 289"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Recent (Re)Visions of Canlit: Partial Stock-Taking\",\"authors\":\"A. Rzepa\",\"doi\":\"10.2478/stap-2020-0013\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract This article approaches recent discussions on the state of contemporary CanLit as a body of literary texts, an academic field, and an institution. The discussion is informed primarily by a number of recent or relatively recent publications, such as Trans.CanLit. Resituating the Study of Canadian Literature (Kamboureli & Miki 2007), Refuse. CanLit in Ruins (McGregor, Rak & Wunker 2018), Luminous Ink: Writers on Writing in Canada (McWatt, Maharaj & Brand 2018), and the discussions and/or controversies some of those generated – expressed through newspaper and magazine articles, scholarly essays, but also through tweets, etc. The texts have been written as a response to the current state and – in some cases – scandals of CanLit. Many constitute attempts at starting or contributing to a discussion aimed at not only taking stock of, but also reinterpreting and re-defining the field and the institution in view of the challenges of the globalising world. Perhaps more importantly, they address also the challenges resulting from the rift between CanLit as implicated in the (post)colonial nation-building project and rigid institutional structures, perpetuating the silencings, erasures, and hierarchies resulting from such entanglements, and actual literary texts produced by an increasingly diversified group of writers working with a widening range of topics and genres, and creating often intimate, autobiographically inspired art with a sense of responsibility to marginalised communities. The article concludes with the example of Indigenous writing and the position some young Indigenous writers take in the current discussions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":35172,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Studia Anglica Posnaniensia\",\"volume\":\"55 1\",\"pages\":\"273 - 289\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Studia Anglica Posnaniensia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2478/stap-2020-0013\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studia Anglica Posnaniensia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/stap-2020-0013","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要本文探讨了当代CanLit作为一个文学文本体、一个学术领域和一个机构的状态。讨论主要由一些最近或相对较新的出版物提供,如Trans.CanLit.Resituating The Study of Canadian Lit(Kamboureli&Miki,2007),Reject。CanLit in Ruins(McGregor,Rak&Wunker,2018),Luminous Ink:Writers on Writing in Canada(McWatt,Maharaj&Brand,2018)以及其中一些讨论和/或争议——通过报纸和杂志文章、学术文章以及推特等表达。这些文本是为了回应CanLit的现状,在某些情况下,还包括丑闻。许多都是为了开始或推动一场讨论,其目的不仅是评估,而且是鉴于全球化世界的挑战,重新解释和定义这一领域和机构。也许更重要的是,他们还解决了(后)殖民国家建设项目中涉及的CanLit与僵化的制度结构之间的裂痕所带来的挑战,使这种纠缠所导致的沉默、抹去和等级制度永久化,以及由越来越多样化的作家群体创作的实际文学文本,他们的主题和流派范围越来越广,创作的艺术往往是亲密的、自传体的,对边缘化社区有责任感。文章最后以土著写作为例,介绍了一些年轻的土著作家在当前讨论中的立场。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Recent (Re)Visions of Canlit: Partial Stock-Taking
Abstract This article approaches recent discussions on the state of contemporary CanLit as a body of literary texts, an academic field, and an institution. The discussion is informed primarily by a number of recent or relatively recent publications, such as Trans.CanLit. Resituating the Study of Canadian Literature (Kamboureli & Miki 2007), Refuse. CanLit in Ruins (McGregor, Rak & Wunker 2018), Luminous Ink: Writers on Writing in Canada (McWatt, Maharaj & Brand 2018), and the discussions and/or controversies some of those generated – expressed through newspaper and magazine articles, scholarly essays, but also through tweets, etc. The texts have been written as a response to the current state and – in some cases – scandals of CanLit. Many constitute attempts at starting or contributing to a discussion aimed at not only taking stock of, but also reinterpreting and re-defining the field and the institution in view of the challenges of the globalising world. Perhaps more importantly, they address also the challenges resulting from the rift between CanLit as implicated in the (post)colonial nation-building project and rigid institutional structures, perpetuating the silencings, erasures, and hierarchies resulting from such entanglements, and actual literary texts produced by an increasingly diversified group of writers working with a widening range of topics and genres, and creating often intimate, autobiographically inspired art with a sense of responsibility to marginalised communities. The article concludes with the example of Indigenous writing and the position some young Indigenous writers take in the current discussions.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Studia Anglica Posnaniensia
Studia Anglica Posnaniensia Arts and Humanities-Literature and Literary Theory
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
7
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊最新文献
Aesthetic Pleasure and Negative Aesthetic Experience in the Old English Martyrology Review: Forgeries and Historical Writing in England, France, and Flanders, 900–1200 By Robert F. Berkhofer III. The Boydell Press, 2022. Pp. xi, 348 EmCat-Eng: A catalogue of 1,759 basic emotion terms in English What’s in a Title? Some Remarks on the Semantic Features of Kenning-Like Titles in George R. R. Martin’s A Song of Ice and Fire Series Urban Imagery in the Old English Exodus and its Hermeneutics
×
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