从笛福到库切的《敌人/敌人

Andreia-Irina Suciu, Mihaela Culea
{"title":"从笛福到库切的《敌人/敌人","authors":"Andreia-Irina Suciu, Mihaela Culea","doi":"10.22364/bjellc.11.2021.08","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article investigates the concept of authorship in the works of two authors separated by three centuries, namely, Daniel Defoe and J. M. Coetzee, both concerned, in different ways, with aspects regarding the origin and originators of literary works or with the act of artistic creation in general. After a brief literature review, the article focuses on Coetzee’s contemporary revisitation of the question of authorship and leaps back and forth in time from Defoe’s Robinson Crusoe (1719) to Coetzee’s Foe (1986). The purpose is that of highlighting the multiple perspectives (and differences) regarding the subject of authorship, including such notions and aspects as: canonicity related to the act of writing and narrating, metafiction, self-reflexivity and intertextuality, silencing and voicing, doubling, bodily substance and the substance of a story, authenticity, (literary) representation and the truth, authoring, the author’s powers, the relation between author and character or between narrator and story, authorial self-consciousness, agency, or ambiguity. The findings presented in the article show that both works are seminal in their attempts to define and redefine the notion of authorship, one (Defoe) concerned with the first literary endeavours of establishing the roles of professional authorship in England, while the other (Coetzee), intervenes in existing literary discussions of the late twentieth century concerning the postmodern author and (the questioning of or liberation of the text from) his powers.","PeriodicalId":55896,"journal":{"name":"Baltic Journal of English Language Literature and Culture","volume":"27 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"From Defoe to Coetzee’s Foe/Foe through Authorship\",\"authors\":\"Andreia-Irina Suciu, Mihaela Culea\",\"doi\":\"10.22364/bjellc.11.2021.08\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The article investigates the concept of authorship in the works of two authors separated by three centuries, namely, Daniel Defoe and J. M. Coetzee, both concerned, in different ways, with aspects regarding the origin and originators of literary works or with the act of artistic creation in general. After a brief literature review, the article focuses on Coetzee’s contemporary revisitation of the question of authorship and leaps back and forth in time from Defoe’s Robinson Crusoe (1719) to Coetzee’s Foe (1986). The purpose is that of highlighting the multiple perspectives (and differences) regarding the subject of authorship, including such notions and aspects as: canonicity related to the act of writing and narrating, metafiction, self-reflexivity and intertextuality, silencing and voicing, doubling, bodily substance and the substance of a story, authenticity, (literary) representation and the truth, authoring, the author’s powers, the relation between author and character or between narrator and story, authorial self-consciousness, agency, or ambiguity. The findings presented in the article show that both works are seminal in their attempts to define and redefine the notion of authorship, one (Defoe) concerned with the first literary endeavours of establishing the roles of professional authorship in England, while the other (Coetzee), intervenes in existing literary discussions of the late twentieth century concerning the postmodern author and (the questioning of or liberation of the text from) his powers.\",\"PeriodicalId\":55896,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Baltic Journal of English Language Literature and Culture\",\"volume\":\"27 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Baltic Journal of English Language Literature and Culture\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.22364/bjellc.11.2021.08\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Baltic Journal of English Language Literature and Culture","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22364/bjellc.11.2021.08","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本文考察了相隔三个世纪的两位作家——丹尼尔·笛福和j·m·库切的作品中作者身份的概念,他们都以不同的方式关注文学作品的起源和发起人,或者一般的艺术创作行为。在简要的文献回顾之后,本文将重点放在库切当代对作者身份问题的重新审视上,并在笛福的《鲁滨逊漂流记》(1719)和库切的《敌人》(1986)之间进行时间的跳跃。其目的是强调关于作者身份主题的多种观点(和差异),包括以下概念和方面:与写作和叙述行为相关的正规性,元小说,自我反思和互文性,沉默和发声,双重,身体物质和故事的物质,真实性,(文学)表现和真相,创作,作者的权力,作者和角色之间或叙述者和故事之间的关系,作者的自我意识,代理或模糊性。文章中提出的研究结果表明,这两部作品在定义和重新定义作者身份的概念方面都具有开创性,其中一部(笛福)关注的是在英国建立专业作者角色的第一次文学努力,而另一部(库切)则介入了20世纪后期关于后现代作家及其权力(对文本的质疑或解放)的现有文学讨论。
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
From Defoe to Coetzee’s Foe/Foe through Authorship
The article investigates the concept of authorship in the works of two authors separated by three centuries, namely, Daniel Defoe and J. M. Coetzee, both concerned, in different ways, with aspects regarding the origin and originators of literary works or with the act of artistic creation in general. After a brief literature review, the article focuses on Coetzee’s contemporary revisitation of the question of authorship and leaps back and forth in time from Defoe’s Robinson Crusoe (1719) to Coetzee’s Foe (1986). The purpose is that of highlighting the multiple perspectives (and differences) regarding the subject of authorship, including such notions and aspects as: canonicity related to the act of writing and narrating, metafiction, self-reflexivity and intertextuality, silencing and voicing, doubling, bodily substance and the substance of a story, authenticity, (literary) representation and the truth, authoring, the author’s powers, the relation between author and character or between narrator and story, authorial self-consciousness, agency, or ambiguity. The findings presented in the article show that both works are seminal in their attempts to define and redefine the notion of authorship, one (Defoe) concerned with the first literary endeavours of establishing the roles of professional authorship in England, while the other (Coetzee), intervenes in existing literary discussions of the late twentieth century concerning the postmodern author and (the questioning of or liberation of the text from) his powers.
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
自引率
50.00%
发文量
11
期刊最新文献
POWER AND MANIPULATION DEPICTED BY MILES BRON IN GLASS ONION (2022) ELICITATION TECHNIQUE EMPLOYED BY EFL TEACHERS IN MOTIVATING JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS TO SPEAK A SOCIOPRAGMATIC ANALYSIS OF THE SPEECH ACT OF REQUESTING IN LOCAL ENGLISH COURSEBOOKS THE CULTURAL IDENTITY OF NUSANTARA IN A MOVIE "RAYA AND THE LAST DRAGON “ FUNCTIONS OF SPEECH ACTS IN AUSTRALIAN MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS SPEECH AT UNGA
×
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