首页> 外文OA文献 >Pegasus ja puuhobune. James Joyce’i „Kunstniku noorpõlveportree” ja Friedebert Tuglase „Felix Ormusson”. Pegasus and the Wooden Horse: James Joyce’s Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man and Friedebert Tuglas’ Felix Ormusson
【2h】

Pegasus ja puuhobune. James Joyce’i „Kunstniku noorpõlveportree” ja Friedebert Tuglase „Felix Ormusson”. Pegasus and the Wooden Horse: James Joyce’s Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man and Friedebert Tuglas’ Felix Ormusson

机译:飞马座和木马。詹姆斯·乔伊斯(James Joyce)的《青年艺术家肖像》和弗里德伯特·图格拉斯(Friedebert Tuglas)的《费利克斯·奥姆森(Felix Ormusson)”。飞马和木马:詹姆斯·乔伊斯的青年画家肖像和弗里德伯特·图格拉斯的费利克斯·奥姆森

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Friedebert Tuglas’ Felix Ormusson and James Joyce’s Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man were finished in the same year – 1914, but the writing of both novels took the writers almost a decade, a time of searching and exile for both of them. Joyce completely rewrote the initial draft of his novel, entitled Stephen Hero, experimenting with basic forms, such as the short prose piece he called the ”epiphany”. Tuglas’ Felix Ormusson was initially conceived as a three-volume picaresque novel, which was distilled into a single volume of prose fragments arranged as a diary novel: the rest was left unfinished, and exists only in the form of two novella-length fragments. A comparative juxtaposition of the two novels is suggestive, not just because of parallels between the authors’ life trajectories and creative biographies, nor because of similarities between the protagonists, not even by the somewhat deceptive placement in the rubric of the 'Künstlerroman'. Both novels partake of ironic autobiography, and both resonate with the subgenre of the ”diary novel”, increasingly in vogue in European literature of the fin-de-siècle, modelled in turn on the published journal intime. Felix Ormusson and Stephen Dedalus were their authors’ long-time fictional fellow travellers, alter ego’s, in whose confessions one can read the pressing desire to emerge from the provinces and peripheries of Europe toward broader, metropolitan cultural horizons. The protagonists’ quests open onto the problematics of modernism – the split between life and literature, and the burden of ”overreflexivity” which obstructed literary creation and sentimental education. Behind the aesthetic polemics of both novels are shadows of the politics of the era: for Felix Ormusson, the aftermath of the 1905 revolution and political exile, and in the milieu of young Stephen Dedalus, the entanglement of national politics and the Catholic church. In the first part of the article, both Tuglas’ and Joyce’s novels are considered in terms of their swerving away from the genre of the 'Künstlerroman', and the representation of the problem of the self. The language of Felix Ormusson’s diary is a conflicted mixed style, full of quotations, cliches and images that move restlessly back and forth between the registers of the ”country hick” (mats) and the imitated ”city slicker” (vurle). The opposition of ”hick” and ”slicker” is also played out in the love triangle with the two sisters Helene and Marion, and Felix’s opposition to his friend Johannes. ”Over-reflexivity” culminates in Felix’ banal flight from the scene of his abortive summer romances at the end of the novel. For Joyce’s Stephen Dedalus, rebellion and self-creation grow out of the painful initiation experience of the Jesuit retreat in the centre of the novel, which catalyzes his rejection of church and faith, and the embracing of a secular aesthetic quest through the obird-girl” episode on the beach near Dublin. The second part of the article frames both novels generically in relation to the modern diary novel: if Felix Ormusson could be considered an imitation of the journal intime form, Stephen Dedalus arrives at the diary at the threshold of self-defining exile. The third part of the article compares the meanings of exile, nationalism and aesthetic cosmopolitanism in Tuglas’ and Joyce’s novels.
机译:弗里德伯特·图格拉斯(Friedebert Tuglas)的费利克斯·奥姆森(Felix Ormusson)和詹姆斯·乔伊斯(James Joyce)的《青年艺术家肖像》均于同年(1914年)完成,但两部小说的写作都花费了将近十年的时间,这是他们两人寻找和流放的时间。乔伊斯完全改写了他的小说《斯蒂芬·英雄》的初稿,尝试了一些基本形式,例如他称之为“主显节”的短文。图格拉斯的费利克斯·奥姆森(Felix Ormusson)最初被认为是三册皮克式的小说,被精炼成一本散文形式的日记本(散文):其余未完成,仅以两个中篇小说的片段形式存在。这两部小说的比较并置是有启发性的,这不仅是因为作者的生活轨迹和创造性传记之间的相似之处,还是因为主角之间的相似之处,甚至不是因为在“昆斯特勒罗曼”(Künstlerroman)的表述中有某种欺骗性的位置。这两部小说都具有讽刺意味的自传,并且都与“日记小说”的子类产生共鸣,后者在欧洲文学中越来越流行,后来以已出版的期刊为蓝本。费利克斯·奥姆森(Felix Ormusson)和史蒂芬·达达鲁斯(Stephen Dedalus)是他们的小说创作者,他们都是小说的长期旅行者,而他们的自白则可以使他们读懂从欧洲各省和周边地区向更广阔的大都市文化视野崛起的迫切愿望。主角们的探索向现代主义问题敞开了大门:生活与文学之间的分裂,以及“过度反思”的负担,阻碍了文学创作和情感教育。这两部小说的美学论辩的背后都隐藏着那个时代的政治阴影:对费利克斯·奥姆松(Felix Ormusson)来说,是1905年革命和政治流亡的余波,而在年轻的斯蒂芬·德达勒斯(Stephen Dedalus)的环境中,国家政治与天主教的纠缠。在文章的第一部分中,从他们转向“昆斯特勒罗曼”的流派以及对自我问题的表示出发,来考虑图格拉斯和乔伊斯的小说。费利克斯·奥姆森(Felix Ormusson)日记的语言是一种相互矛盾的混合风格,充满了各种报价,陈词滥调和图像,它们在“乡村远足”(mats)和模仿的“城市滑坡”(vurle)的记录之间来回移动。在“三角恋”和“忽悠”中的对立也与两姐妹海琳娜和马里恩以及费利克斯对他的朋友约翰内斯的对立在爱情三角中表现出来。小说结尾处的费利克斯(Felix)堕落的夏季恋情场面平淡无奇,最终导致“过度反思”。对于乔伊斯的斯蒂芬·德达勒斯(Stephen Dedalus)而言,叛逆和自我创造源于小说中心的耶稣会静修会的痛苦启蒙经历,这催化了他对教堂和信仰的拒绝,并通过o鸟女郎拥抱世俗美学追求都柏林附近的海滩上的一集。本文的第二部分从现代日记小说的角度来概括这两种小说:如果可以将Felix Ormusson视为对时间日志形式的模仿,则斯蒂芬·达达拉斯(Stephen Dedalus)会在自我定义流放的门槛下到达日记。本文的第三部分比较了图格拉斯和乔伊斯小说中流亡,民族主义和审美世界主义的含义。

著录项

  • 作者

    Kirss, Tiina Ann;

  • 作者单位
  • 年度 2012
  • 总页数
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类

相似文献

  • 外文文献
代理获取

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