前言:本手册的概念

Martina Wagner-Egelhaaf
{"title":"前言:本手册的概念","authors":"Martina Wagner-Egelhaaf","doi":"10.1515/9783110279818-202","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This handbook on ‘Autobiography/Autofiction’ is a challenge – and a risk. When Manuela Gerlof from de Gruyter proposed to edit a handbook on autobiography, I hesitated at first. As I had already conducted quite a bit of research in the field of autobiography in the German speaking world and on the theory of autobiography, it did not seem all that attractive to undertake another book on autobiography. However, the project started to intrigue me when Dr. Gerlof suggested we publish the handbook in English and place it on the international book market. Having previously dealt mostly with German autobiographies and being familiar mainly with the Western tradition of the genre, the idea of thinking about autobiography in a global and hence transcultural perspective became more and more fascinating. I realized that I did not know anything about autobiographical forms in non-Western cultures and I started to reflect on the question of the extent to which the notion of ‘autobiography,’ at least in the way we perceive of it in the West, can be considered as a specific Western product. Of course, autobiographies have been and are being written all over the world. Being aware that cultural exchange and hybridity are common features of a globalized world, one has to ask what this means for the genre of autobiography, its different cultural contexts and historical features. These and other enthralling questions finally got the upper hand of my initial scepticism. So I accepted the challenge, although I have always been aware that it will be impossible to represent a genre as mutable as autobiography in a transhistorical global perspective. The idea that this project will allow and necessitate intensive collaboration with autobiography researchers from all over the world allayed the fears of failure. And of course, such a handbook combining all these different approaches – theory, history, and analyses of individual texts – does not yet exist and will be an invaluable tool for students and researchers alike. The handbook presents the historical and conceptual variety of the autobiographical genre in three volumes. The outline of volume one is theoretical and systematic. Its first section looks at autobiography from the perspective of different disciplines and theoretical approaches. Although literary studies have been investigating the form and historical appearance of autobiography extensively, other disciplines such as history, psychology, religious studies, etc. use autobiographies as sources and have developed their own concepts of the genre. In order to foster the interdisciplinary discussion on autobiography it seems to be important to represent the views and concepts of different disciplines. If a reader has the impression that an article on literary studies is missing from the list of disciplines in the section on “Theoretical Approaches,” however, this is certainly due to the blind spot of the editor’s own disciplinary background. For a literary scholar, the literary studies perspective constitutes the ‘norm,’ whereas ‘other’ fields are ‘added’ to make the picture complete. This unavoidable disciplinary centrism may be excused by referring to the different methodological approaches that are explained in this first section of volume one as well. They indicate, of course, not only the heterogeneity of approaches within literary","PeriodicalId":202667,"journal":{"name":"Handbook of Autobiography / Autofiction","volume":"30 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Preface: The Concept of this Handbook\",\"authors\":\"Martina Wagner-Egelhaaf\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/9783110279818-202\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This handbook on ‘Autobiography/Autofiction’ is a challenge – and a risk. When Manuela Gerlof from de Gruyter proposed to edit a handbook on autobiography, I hesitated at first. As I had already conducted quite a bit of research in the field of autobiography in the German speaking world and on the theory of autobiography, it did not seem all that attractive to undertake another book on autobiography. However, the project started to intrigue me when Dr. Gerlof suggested we publish the handbook in English and place it on the international book market. Having previously dealt mostly with German autobiographies and being familiar mainly with the Western tradition of the genre, the idea of thinking about autobiography in a global and hence transcultural perspective became more and more fascinating. I realized that I did not know anything about autobiographical forms in non-Western cultures and I started to reflect on the question of the extent to which the notion of ‘autobiography,’ at least in the way we perceive of it in the West, can be considered as a specific Western product. Of course, autobiographies have been and are being written all over the world. Being aware that cultural exchange and hybridity are common features of a globalized world, one has to ask what this means for the genre of autobiography, its different cultural contexts and historical features. These and other enthralling questions finally got the upper hand of my initial scepticism. So I accepted the challenge, although I have always been aware that it will be impossible to represent a genre as mutable as autobiography in a transhistorical global perspective. The idea that this project will allow and necessitate intensive collaboration with autobiography researchers from all over the world allayed the fears of failure. And of course, such a handbook combining all these different approaches – theory, history, and analyses of individual texts – does not yet exist and will be an invaluable tool for students and researchers alike. The handbook presents the historical and conceptual variety of the autobiographical genre in three volumes. The outline of volume one is theoretical and systematic. Its first section looks at autobiography from the perspective of different disciplines and theoretical approaches. Although literary studies have been investigating the form and historical appearance of autobiography extensively, other disciplines such as history, psychology, religious studies, etc. use autobiographies as sources and have developed their own concepts of the genre. In order to foster the interdisciplinary discussion on autobiography it seems to be important to represent the views and concepts of different disciplines. If a reader has the impression that an article on literary studies is missing from the list of disciplines in the section on “Theoretical Approaches,” however, this is certainly due to the blind spot of the editor’s own disciplinary background. For a literary scholar, the literary studies perspective constitutes the ‘norm,’ whereas ‘other’ fields are ‘added’ to make the picture complete. This unavoidable disciplinary centrism may be excused by referring to the different methodological approaches that are explained in this first section of volume one as well. They indicate, of course, not only the heterogeneity of approaches within literary\",\"PeriodicalId\":202667,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Handbook of Autobiography / Autofiction\",\"volume\":\"30 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-01-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Handbook of Autobiography / Autofiction\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110279818-202\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Handbook of Autobiography / Autofiction","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110279818-202","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

这本关于“自传/自传体小说”的手册是一个挑战,也是一个风险。当德格吕特公司的曼努埃拉·格洛夫提议编辑一本自传手册时,我起初犹豫了。因为我已经在德语世界的自传领域和自传理论方面做了相当多的研究,所以再写一本自传的书似乎并没有那么吸引人。然而,当格洛夫博士建议我们用英语出版这本手册并将其投放到国际图书市场时,这个项目开始引起我的兴趣。由于之前主要研究的是德国自传,而且主要熟悉的是西方的自传流派传统,因此从全球和跨文化的角度来思考自传的想法变得越来越吸引人。我意识到我对非西方文化中的自传形式一无所知,我开始思考“自传”的概念,至少以我们在西方所理解的方式,在多大程度上可以被视为一种特定的西方产品。当然,全世界都在写自传。意识到文化交流和混杂是全球化世界的共同特征,人们不得不问这对自传类型,其不同的文化背景和历史特征意味着什么。这些以及其他一些引人入胜的问题最终战胜了我最初的怀疑。所以我接受了这个挑战,尽管我一直意识到,在一个跨历史的全球视角下,要表现像自传这样多变的体裁是不可能的。这个项目将允许并需要与来自世界各地的自传研究人员密切合作,这一想法减轻了对失败的恐惧。当然,这样一本结合了所有这些不同方法的手册——理论、历史和对个别文本的分析——目前还不存在,它将成为学生和研究人员的宝贵工具。该手册介绍了历史和概念的多样性的自传体体裁在三卷。第一卷的大纲是理论性和系统性的。第一部分从不同学科和理论方法的角度考察自传。虽然文学研究一直在广泛地研究自传的形式和历史出现,但其他学科,如历史、心理学、宗教研究等,都以自传为来源,并形成了自己的流派概念。为了促进关于自传的跨学科讨论,代表不同学科的观点和概念似乎很重要。然而,如果读者在“理论方法”部分的学科列表中缺少一篇关于文学研究的文章,这肯定是由于编辑自己的学科背景的盲点。对于一个文学学者来说,文学研究的视角构成了“规范”,而“其他”领域则被“添加”以使画面完整。这种不可避免的学科中心主义可以通过参考在第一卷的第一节中解释的不同的方法方法来原谅。当然,它们不仅表明了文学研究方法的异质性
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Preface: The Concept of this Handbook
This handbook on ‘Autobiography/Autofiction’ is a challenge – and a risk. When Manuela Gerlof from de Gruyter proposed to edit a handbook on autobiography, I hesitated at first. As I had already conducted quite a bit of research in the field of autobiography in the German speaking world and on the theory of autobiography, it did not seem all that attractive to undertake another book on autobiography. However, the project started to intrigue me when Dr. Gerlof suggested we publish the handbook in English and place it on the international book market. Having previously dealt mostly with German autobiographies and being familiar mainly with the Western tradition of the genre, the idea of thinking about autobiography in a global and hence transcultural perspective became more and more fascinating. I realized that I did not know anything about autobiographical forms in non-Western cultures and I started to reflect on the question of the extent to which the notion of ‘autobiography,’ at least in the way we perceive of it in the West, can be considered as a specific Western product. Of course, autobiographies have been and are being written all over the world. Being aware that cultural exchange and hybridity are common features of a globalized world, one has to ask what this means for the genre of autobiography, its different cultural contexts and historical features. These and other enthralling questions finally got the upper hand of my initial scepticism. So I accepted the challenge, although I have always been aware that it will be impossible to represent a genre as mutable as autobiography in a transhistorical global perspective. The idea that this project will allow and necessitate intensive collaboration with autobiography researchers from all over the world allayed the fears of failure. And of course, such a handbook combining all these different approaches – theory, history, and analyses of individual texts – does not yet exist and will be an invaluable tool for students and researchers alike. The handbook presents the historical and conceptual variety of the autobiographical genre in three volumes. The outline of volume one is theoretical and systematic. Its first section looks at autobiography from the perspective of different disciplines and theoretical approaches. Although literary studies have been investigating the form and historical appearance of autobiography extensively, other disciplines such as history, psychology, religious studies, etc. use autobiographies as sources and have developed their own concepts of the genre. In order to foster the interdisciplinary discussion on autobiography it seems to be important to represent the views and concepts of different disciplines. If a reader has the impression that an article on literary studies is missing from the list of disciplines in the section on “Theoretical Approaches,” however, this is certainly due to the blind spot of the editor’s own disciplinary background. For a literary scholar, the literary studies perspective constitutes the ‘norm,’ whereas ‘other’ fields are ‘added’ to make the picture complete. This unavoidable disciplinary centrism may be excused by referring to the different methodological approaches that are explained in this first section of volume one as well. They indicate, of course, not only the heterogeneity of approaches within literary
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
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信