{"title":"拟态预设:论玛琳·范·尼克尔克两首英文诗的外延反应","authors":"Reinhardt Fourie","doi":"10.1080/02564718.2021.1887651","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Summary In this article, I consider two fairly recent English poems by Marlene van Niekerk: “Mud school” (2013) and “Fallist art (in memory of Bongani Mayosi)” (2018). Specifically, I explore the context surrounding the production of these poems, and what we can possibly glean from their limited (and not exclusively literary) reception in order to understand how this part of Van Niekerk’s (English) authorship has thus far been read in more limited ways by critics and scholars. By focusing on the epitextual responses surrounding these poems, I show how they are symptomatic of what Jahan Ramazani calls the “mimetic presuppositions” that often take shape in critical readings of postcolonial literature (2004). Considering the especially politically engaged nature of Van Niekerk’s novels in particular, I argue that the oversight of Van Niekerk’s poetry, both residing in the dearth of translation of her poetry and in the critical blind spot writ large in studies of her work in English, comes as a result of what Emma Bird (2018) calls poetry’s “distinctly peripheral position” in postcolonial literary studies – a critical lens that has in various ways directed readings of Van Niekerk’s English work.","PeriodicalId":43700,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Literary Studies","volume":"1264 1","pages":"36 - 52"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Mimetic Presuppositions: On the Epitextual Responses to Two Poems in English by Marlene van Niekerk\",\"authors\":\"Reinhardt Fourie\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/02564718.2021.1887651\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Summary In this article, I consider two fairly recent English poems by Marlene van Niekerk: “Mud school” (2013) and “Fallist art (in memory of Bongani Mayosi)” (2018). Specifically, I explore the context surrounding the production of these poems, and what we can possibly glean from their limited (and not exclusively literary) reception in order to understand how this part of Van Niekerk’s (English) authorship has thus far been read in more limited ways by critics and scholars. By focusing on the epitextual responses surrounding these poems, I show how they are symptomatic of what Jahan Ramazani calls the “mimetic presuppositions” that often take shape in critical readings of postcolonial literature (2004). Considering the especially politically engaged nature of Van Niekerk’s novels in particular, I argue that the oversight of Van Niekerk’s poetry, both residing in the dearth of translation of her poetry and in the critical blind spot writ large in studies of her work in English, comes as a result of what Emma Bird (2018) calls poetry’s “distinctly peripheral position” in postcolonial literary studies – a critical lens that has in various ways directed readings of Van Niekerk’s English work.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43700,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Literary Studies\",\"volume\":\"1264 1\",\"pages\":\"36 - 52\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Literary Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1092\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/02564718.2021.1887651\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LITERARY THEORY & CRITICISM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Literary Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1092","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02564718.2021.1887651","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LITERARY THEORY & CRITICISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
摘要
在这篇文章中,我考虑了Marlene van Niekerk最近的两首英文诗:《Mud school》(2013)和《Fallist art (In memory of Bongani Mayosi)》(2018)。具体来说,我探索了这些诗歌创作的背景,以及我们可以从它们有限的(而不仅仅是文学的)接受中收集到什么,以便理解到目前为止,批评家和学者是如何以更有限的方式阅读Van Niekerk(英语)作者的这一部分的。通过关注围绕这些诗歌的外延反应,我展示了它们是贾汉·拉马扎尼(Jahan Ramazani)所说的“模仿预设”的症状,这种预设通常在后殖民文学的批判性阅读中形成(2004)。考虑到范尼克尔克的小说尤其具有政治参与的性质,我认为,对范尼克尔克诗歌的忽视,既存在于她的诗歌翻译的缺乏,也存在于对她的英语作品的研究中明显存在的批评盲点,这是艾玛·伯德(Emma Bird, 2018)所说的诗歌在后殖民文学研究中“明显处于边缘地位”的结果——这一批评视角以各种方式指导了对范尼克尔克英语作品的阅读。
Mimetic Presuppositions: On the Epitextual Responses to Two Poems in English by Marlene van Niekerk
Summary In this article, I consider two fairly recent English poems by Marlene van Niekerk: “Mud school” (2013) and “Fallist art (in memory of Bongani Mayosi)” (2018). Specifically, I explore the context surrounding the production of these poems, and what we can possibly glean from their limited (and not exclusively literary) reception in order to understand how this part of Van Niekerk’s (English) authorship has thus far been read in more limited ways by critics and scholars. By focusing on the epitextual responses surrounding these poems, I show how they are symptomatic of what Jahan Ramazani calls the “mimetic presuppositions” that often take shape in critical readings of postcolonial literature (2004). Considering the especially politically engaged nature of Van Niekerk’s novels in particular, I argue that the oversight of Van Niekerk’s poetry, both residing in the dearth of translation of her poetry and in the critical blind spot writ large in studies of her work in English, comes as a result of what Emma Bird (2018) calls poetry’s “distinctly peripheral position” in postcolonial literary studies – a critical lens that has in various ways directed readings of Van Niekerk’s English work.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Literary Studies publishes and globally disseminates original and cutting-edge research informed by Literary and Cultural Theory. The Journal is an independent quarterly publication owned and published by the South African Literary Society in partnership with Unisa Press and Taylor & Francis. It is housed and produced in the division Theory of Literature at the University of South Africa and is accredited and subsidised by the South African Department of Higher Education and Training. The aim of the journal is to publish articles and full-length review essays informed by Literary Theory in the General Literary Theory subject area and mostly covering Formalism, New Criticism, Semiotics, Structuralism, Marxism, Poststructuralism, Psychoanalysis, Gender studies, New Historicism, Ecocriticism, Animal Studies, Reception Theory, Comparative Literature, Narrative Theory, Drama Theory, Poetry Theory, and Biography and Autobiography.