{"title":"韦格兰的《致云杉》之争。理想主义、现代主义、现实主义","authors":"Erik Bjerck Hagen","doi":"10.18261/ISSN.1500-1989-2021-01-03","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this article, I discuss different readings of Henrik Wergeland’s well-known poem “Til en Gran” (1833) as they fall into line with the three main currents that have dominated Norwegian literary scholarship generally and the recep-tion of Norwegian Romanticism specifically: idealism, realism, and modernism. Idealistic interpretations from Fredrik Paasche to Per Thomas Andersen, as well as a modernist reading found in Jørgen Sejersted’s and Eirik Vas-senden’s Lyrikkhåndboken , are discarded as being too dependent on the theoretical premises constituting idealism and modernism respectively. A realistic interpretation is suggested as an alternative, in dialogue with a somewhat neglected study by Leif Johan Larsen (2002). In a final section, I discuss the theoretical problems that may befall even a realistic reading.","PeriodicalId":56248,"journal":{"name":"Edda","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Striden om Wergelands «Til en Gran». Idealisme, modernisme, realisme\",\"authors\":\"Erik Bjerck Hagen\",\"doi\":\"10.18261/ISSN.1500-1989-2021-01-03\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In this article, I discuss different readings of Henrik Wergeland’s well-known poem “Til en Gran” (1833) as they fall into line with the three main currents that have dominated Norwegian literary scholarship generally and the recep-tion of Norwegian Romanticism specifically: idealism, realism, and modernism. Idealistic interpretations from Fredrik Paasche to Per Thomas Andersen, as well as a modernist reading found in Jørgen Sejersted’s and Eirik Vas-senden’s Lyrikkhåndboken , are discarded as being too dependent on the theoretical premises constituting idealism and modernism respectively. A realistic interpretation is suggested as an alternative, in dialogue with a somewhat neglected study by Leif Johan Larsen (2002). In a final section, I discuss the theoretical problems that may befall even a realistic reading.\",\"PeriodicalId\":56248,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Edda\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-03-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Edda\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.18261/ISSN.1500-1989-2021-01-03\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Edda","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18261/ISSN.1500-1989-2021-01-03","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
在这篇文章中,我讨论了对Henrik Wergeland著名诗歌《Til en Gran》(1833)的不同解读,因为它们符合主导挪威文学学术和挪威浪漫主义最近发展的三大主流:理想主义、现实主义和现代主义。弗雷德里克·帕什(Fredrik Paasche)到佩尔·托马斯·安徒生(Per Thomas Andersen)的理想主义解读,以及Jørgen Sejersted和Eirik Vas senden的Lyrikkhåndboken中的现代主义解读,都被认为过于依赖于分别构成理想主义和现代主义的理论前提而被抛弃。在与Leif Johan Larsen(2002)的一项被忽视的研究对话中,提出了一种现实主义的解释作为替代方案。在最后一节中,我讨论了即使是现实主义阅读也可能遇到的理论问题。
Striden om Wergelands «Til en Gran». Idealisme, modernisme, realisme
In this article, I discuss different readings of Henrik Wergeland’s well-known poem “Til en Gran” (1833) as they fall into line with the three main currents that have dominated Norwegian literary scholarship generally and the recep-tion of Norwegian Romanticism specifically: idealism, realism, and modernism. Idealistic interpretations from Fredrik Paasche to Per Thomas Andersen, as well as a modernist reading found in Jørgen Sejersted’s and Eirik Vas-senden’s Lyrikkhåndboken , are discarded as being too dependent on the theoretical premises constituting idealism and modernism respectively. A realistic interpretation is suggested as an alternative, in dialogue with a somewhat neglected study by Leif Johan Larsen (2002). In a final section, I discuss the theoretical problems that may befall even a realistic reading.