Literatura in cenzura - Društvo za primerjalno književnost - ZRC SAZU

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Literature and Censorship: Who is Afraid of the Truth of Literature?focuses on nostalgic preservation from oblivion – of a community destinedfor decline. The “guilt” – which Camus in principle is well aware of– remains unspoken. This strategy of self-censorship has deeper roots inhis philosophy and the utopian humanist project that through (selective)memory would only enable peaceful future coexistence.In her analysis of the “Handke Affair”, Louise Lambrichs poses an importantquestion: was it censorship when the director of Comedie Françaiseremoved Handke’s play from the programme after his notorious speechat Milošević’s funeral? The “censorious” act was clear and explicit, and itsbackground was ethical; intervention in the arts was justified by the “immorality”in the political sphere. Nevertheless, it was radically individualized,and the shift away from the systemic regulation may be a state-of-theartsymptom. Lambrichs’ text might not show so evidently how “denialof reality” is manifest in (Handke’s) literature, but she definitely managesto point to the problem of defining censorship and to the strained relationshipbetween ethics and the arts. Simona Škrabec opens up similarethical dilemmas in her paper on poetic license. Literature is not necessarya herald of privileged truth, she claims; it can also be a means of manipulation.As contemporary Catalan cases show, freedom of speech is oftenunderstood as a freedom to say things that would be inadmissible outsideof literature. We are confronted with the question of the autonomy ofliterature regarding ethics: is freedom without any limits the very freedomEurope has been striving for from the age of Enlightenment on?At this point, when space for further reflection on post-totalitariancensorship has been well opened – even though ultimate answers couldnot have been offered – the final word is given to its seeming “objects,”the convicted Slovenian writers Matjaž Pikalo and Breda Smolnikar. Theyhave rationalized their painful judicial experiences in very different ways,and their answers demonstrate that an interdisciplinary analysis of bothcases would be a highly intriguing task. At the same time, this appears tobe the area that shows most unequivocally that the present publication hasonly marked the beginning of a possible voyage. I would be very pleased if italso demonstrated that this voyage is also one that is worth setting out on.164NOTES1These fierce polemics were treated most consistently in last year’s special edition ofDialogi (Dialogues), edited by philosopher Boris Vezjak. The journalists were critical of thecensorial interventions in the media (e.g., new legislation, changes in editorial boards, etc.)and pleaded for freedom of speech, while the media owners defended their interference aslegitimate, internal, and therefore non-censorial.
Marijan Dović:Literature and Censorship, Truth and Fear2See more in Jovićević and Gabrič’s contributions in this issue, and also in Neubauer’sintroduction to publishing and censorship under communism (Cornis-Pope and NeubauerIII, 37, 57).3For an outline of the problem of defining censorship, see both Packard’s contributionand mine.4The term was launched by Friedrich Naumann’s book Mitteleuropa in 1915 and reintroducedby intellectuals and writers (e.g., Kundera, Konrád, and Miłosz) towards theend of the communist period as a motto of rebellion against communism and Russiandominance.WORKS CITEDAristoteles. Poetika. Trans. Kajetan Gantar. Ljubljana: Študentska založba, 2005.Kajetan Gantar. Ljubljana: Študentska založba, 2005.Cornis-Pope, Marcel and John Neubauer, eds. History of the Literary Cultures of East-CentralEurope. Junctures and Disjunctures in the 19th and 20th Centuries. Vol. I, II, III. Amsterdamand Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing, 2004.Gabrič, Aleš. Slovenska agitpropovska kulturna politika 1945–1952. Ljubljana: Mladika, 1991.[= Borec 43. 7–9]– – –. Socialistična kulturna revolucija. Slovenska kulturna politika 1953–1962. Ljubljana:Cankarjeva založba, 1995.Green, Jonathon, and Nicholas J. Karolides. Encyclopedia of Censorship. New York: Facts onFile, 2005.Jančar, Drago, ed. Temna stran meseca. Kratka zgodovina totalitarizma v Sloveniji 1945–1990.Ljubljana: Nova revija, 1998.Kralj, Lado. “Srednja Evropa in slovenska literatura.” Sodobnost 69.4 (2005): 353–68.Platon [Plato]. Zbrana dela I–II. Trans. Gorazd Kocijančič. Celje: Mohorjeva družba, 2004.Posner, Richard A. Pravo in literatura. Ljubljana: Pravna fakulteta and Cankarjeva založba,2003.Vezjak, Boris, ed. “Medijska cenzura v Sloveniji (tema).” Dialogi 43.7–8 (2008): 19–164.165
Page 1:
Literatura in cenzuraKdo se boji re
Page 5:
Marijan Dović:Literatura in cenzur
Page 9 and 10:
Marijan Dović:Literatura in cenzur
Page 11 and 12:
Totalitarna in post-totalitarnacenz
Page 13 and 14:
Marijan Dović:Totalitarna in post-
Page 16:
Literatura in cenzura: kdo se boji
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 27 and 28:
Stephan Packard:Model tekstualnega
Page 29:
Page 33:
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38:
Page 43:
II.Kontroverze totalitarne cenzure
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
Page 50 and 51:
Page 52 and 53:
Page 54 and 55:
Page 56 and 57:
Page 58 and 59:
Page 60 and 61:
Page 62 and 63:
Page 64 and 65:
Page 66 and 67:
Page 68 and 69:
Page 70 and 71:
Page 72 and 73:
Page 74 and 75:
Page 76 and 77:
Page 78 and 79:
Page 81 and 82:
Cenzura in dramske strategijev jugo
Page 83 and 84:
Aleksandra Jovićević: Cenzura in
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95:
III.Post-totalitarna cenzura
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103:
Page 105 and 106:
Slačenje literarne zgodovine:cenzu
Page 107 and 108:
Andrej Zavrl:Slačenje literarne zg
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115: Andrej Zavrl:Slačenje literarne zg
Page 118 and 119: Literatura in cenzura: kdo se boji
Page 150 and 151: Obsojena pisatelja
Page 156 and 157: O AVTORJIHSalah Salim Ali je študi
Page 158 and 159: Breda Smolnikar, pisateljica in pre
Page 161 and 162: Literature and Censorship, Truthand
Page 163 and 164: Marijan Dović:Literature and Censo
Page 165: Marijan Dović:Literature and Censo
Page 169 and 170: Totalitarian and Post-totalitarianC
Page 171 and 172: Marijan Dović:Totalitarian and Pos
Page 173 and 174: Marijan Dović:Totalitarian and Pos
Page 175: Marijan Dović:Totalitarian and Pos
Page 178 and 179: Literature and Censorship: Who is A
Page 202 and 203: II. Controversies of TotalitarianCe
Page 216 and 217:
Literature and Censorship: Who is A
Page 218 and 219:
Page 220 and 221:
Page 222 and 223:
Page 224 and 225:
Page 226 and 227:
Page 228 and 229:
Page 230 and 231:
Page 232 and 233:
Page 234 and 235:
Page 236 and 237:
Page 238 and 239:
Page 240 and 241:
Page 242 and 243:
Page 244 and 245:
Page 246 and 247:
Page 248 and 249:
Page 250 and 251:
Page 252 and 253:
III.Post-totalitarian censorship
Page 254 and 255:
Page 256 and 257:
Page 258 and 259:
Page 260 and 261:
Page 262 and 263:
Page 264 and 265:
Page 266 and 267:
Page 268 and 269:
Page 270 and 271:
Page 273 and 274:
Untimely Rewriting: Memoryand Self-
Page 275 and 276:
Peter Dunwoodie:Untimely Rewriting:
Page 277 and 278:
Page 279 and 280:
Page 281 and 282:
Page 283:
Page 286 and 287:
Page 288 and 289:
Page 290 and 291:
Page 292 and 293:
Page 294 and 295:
Page 297 and 298:
Words in FreedomSimona ŠkrabecBarc
Page 299 and 300:
Simona Škrabec:Words in Freedomnow
Page 301 and 302:
Simona Škrabec:Words in Freedomof
Page 303 and 304:
Simona Škrabec:Words in Freedoming
Page 305 and 306:
Simona Škrabec:Words in FreedomRea
Page 307 and 308:
Simona Škrabec:Words in Freedomrea
Page 309:
Convicted Writers
Page 312 and 313:
Page 315 and 316:
A Dream Napkin White as Snowon the
Page 317 and 318:
Breda Smolnikar:A Dream Napkin Whit
Page 319 and 320:
Louise L. Lambrichs is a French nov
show all

Literatura in cenzura - Društvo za primerjalno književnost - ZRC SAZU

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?