首页> 外文期刊>International Gramsci Journal >Walter Benjamin, Antonio Gramsci and the Problem of Elitist Traditions
【24h】

Walter Benjamin, Antonio Gramsci and the Problem of Elitist Traditions

机译:Walter Benjamin,Antonio Gramsci和Elitist传统的问题

获取原文
       

摘要

The article sheds light on Walter Benjamin’s and Antonio Gramsci’s treatments of elitist traditions. It provides a historical contextualization and brief comparison of the theoretical and political developments of the two contemporaries under this aspect. In the Origin of the German Trauerspiel (1924/25), Benjamin’s historical-philosophical aesthetics are enriched by a history of concepts which increasingly takes up socio-historical aspects. This approach goes beyond Benjamin’s programmatic formulations at the beginning of the 1920s, in which he regarded the work of art as a privileged medium of historical insight that, in theory and method, had to be isolated from history. As for Gramsci, the article elaborates an increasing mediation between social and literary history. This is done, on the one hand, by comparing Gramsci’s statements on Italian Futurism between 1913 and 1922 and, on the other hand, by tracing and examining Gramsci’s criticism of Benedetto Croce’s assessment of the reasons leading to World War I in his History of Europe in the Nineteenth Century (1932) in the Prison Notebooks (Quaderno 10). Despite their differences, the examination of these developments in Benjamin and Gramsci shows three common features in their works of the 1930s: Firstly, both of them change their relation to radical democratic, Jacobin traditions. Secondly, they both display an increasingly historical understanding of concepts of literary intelligence under the aspect of their relationship to the reading public. Thirdly, this understanding led both of them to analyze the rise of fascism in Italy and Germany with regard also to ‘elitist traditions’ in which intellectuals distance themselves from the public for various reasons and motives, but with the consequence that an understanding of their participation in discourses and traditions becomes impossible.
机译:文章揭示了沃尔特本杰明和安东尼奥·格兰奇的精英传统的治疗。它提供了在这方面的两个同时代人的理论和政治发展的历史背景化和简短比较。在德国Trauerspiel(1924/25)的起源中,本杰明的历史哲学美学富裕地富裕,历史越来越多地占社会历史方面。这种方法超出了20世纪20年代初的Benjamin的程序化制剂,其中他认为艺术的工作作为历史识别的特权媒体,理论和方法必须与历史隔离。至于GRAMSCI,本文阐述了社会和文学史之间的增加。一方面,通过比较1913年至1922年之间的意大利未来主义的陈述,通过追查和审查克拉姆斯科的批评对欧洲历史上的原因的评估来追踪和审查Gramsci对欧洲历史上的原因的批评。在19世纪(1932年)在监狱笔记本(Quaderno 10)中。尽管他们的差异,但对本杰明和克拉姆奇的这些发展的审查显示了20世纪30年代作品中的三个共同特征:首先,他们都改变了与激进民主的雅各布传统的关系。其次,他们对与阅读公众的关系方面的文学智慧概念表现出越来越历史的理解。第三,这种理解导致他们介绍了意大利和德国的法西斯主义的兴起,关于“精英传统”,其中知识分子距离公众的距离是各种原因和动机,但结果是对他们的参与的理解在Discours和传统中变得不可能。

著录项

获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号