Anstelle einer Autobiographie? Schreiben über die Shoah in Stanisław Lems "Apokryfy"

A. Gall
{"title":"Anstelle einer Autobiographie? Schreiben über die Shoah in Stanisław Lems \"Apokryfy\"","authors":"A. Gall","doi":"10.31648/pl.9075","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper focuses on Lem’s transition from autobiographical writing to paratextual discourses.This shift is discussed as reaction to the delegitimized position of the subject, especiallyafter the Shoah and wartime experiences. When Lem deals with wartime experiences he doesn’tresort to autobiographical writing and, hence, won’t write a sequel to the self-portrait about hischildhood and adolescence in Wysoki Zamek (The High Castle, 1966). Instead, the writer createsin some of his works paratextual narratives that reflect the new, distorted subjectivity whichemerged in the aftermath of the Shoah. With this rupture of civilisation in mind Lem’s paratextualwriting represents a criticism of subjectivity as well as the autobiographical foundations in memoirs.In his approach Lem outlines the profile of a modern subjectivity that echoes the critical reassessmentof the subject in Critical Theory (Adorno, Horkheimer, Marcuse). This article tries to shed some light on this intriguing correspondence and attempts to highlight Lem’s understanding as well as literary practice of post-autobiographical writing about the subject.","PeriodicalId":112997,"journal":{"name":"Papers in Literature","volume":"544 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Papers in Literature","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31648/pl.9075","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper focuses on Lem’s transition from autobiographical writing to paratextual discourses.This shift is discussed as reaction to the delegitimized position of the subject, especiallyafter the Shoah and wartime experiences. When Lem deals with wartime experiences he doesn’tresort to autobiographical writing and, hence, won’t write a sequel to the self-portrait about hischildhood and adolescence in Wysoki Zamek (The High Castle, 1966). Instead, the writer createsin some of his works paratextual narratives that reflect the new, distorted subjectivity whichemerged in the aftermath of the Shoah. With this rupture of civilisation in mind Lem’s paratextualwriting represents a criticism of subjectivity as well as the autobiographical foundations in memoirs.In his approach Lem outlines the profile of a modern subjectivity that echoes the critical reassessmentof the subject in Critical Theory (Adorno, Horkheimer, Marcuse). This article tries to shed some light on this intriguing correspondence and attempts to highlight Lem’s understanding as well as literary practice of post-autobiographical writing about the subject.
而不是自传?写关于浩劫的Stanisł哇Lems Apokryfy”
本文关注的是莱姆从自传体写作到超文本话语的过渡。这种转变是作为对主题的非合法性地位的反应来讨论的,特别是在大屠杀和战争经历之后。当莱姆描写战时经历时,他不会诉诸自传体写作,因此,他不会为《高堡》(1966年)中关于他童年和青春期的自画像写续集。相反,这位作家在他的一些作品中创造了超文本叙事,反映了大屠杀后出现的新的、扭曲的主体性。带着这种文明的破裂,莱姆的超文本写作代表了对主体性的批评,以及回忆录中的自传体基础。在他的方法中,莱姆概述了现代主体性的轮廓,这与批判理论(阿多诺,霍克海默,马尔库塞)中对主体的批判性重新评估相呼应。本文试图揭示这些有趣的通信,并试图突出莱姆对这一主题的理解和后自传写作的文学实践。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信