Recepcija Bartolovega Al Arafa

diplomsko delo

Abstract

Leta 1935 je izšla Bartolova zbirka kratkih zgodb Al Araf. Zaradi odstopajočega načina pisanja v tedanjem času je požela ogromno odziva, ki je bil pred vojno po večini negativen. Po vojni se je situacija malo spremenila, pozitivne literarno zgodovinske študije pa so bile večinoma napisane v novem tisočletju. Izmed številnih publicistov, ki so se ukvarjali z Bartolom, sem si izbrala tri, od katerih je vsak predstavnik določenega obdobja, in njihova mnenja podrobneje analizirala. Milena Mohorič, predstavnica predvojnega obdobja, je, z izjemo Izpovedi gospe Forcesinove, podala pozitivno kritiko in je v svojem času predstavljala izjemo. Svoje mnenje o Bartolovem delu je strnila v drugi januarski številki sedmega letnika Modre ptice (1935/36). Na straneh 33-40 je napisala članek z naslovom Vladimir Bartol: (Ob njegovi knjigi Al Araf). Boris Paternu se je ukvarjal predvsem z jezikom v Bartolovem Al Arafu, tudi njegova študija ni povsem negativna. Al Arafa je temeljito razčlenil leta 2002, ob ponatisu zbirke, v spremni študiji Bartolov Al Araf. (str. 326-338). Po mojem mnenju je najobjektivnejša in tista, ki je najbolj zadela bistvo Bartolovega pisateljevanja, študija Tarasa Kermaunerja, ki ga predstavljam kot zadnjega izmed trojice. Leta 1974 je napisal spremno študijo k Demonu in erosu z naslovom Vladimir Bartolpredhodnik današnje slovenske moderne literature (str. 423-445). Svoje mnenje utemeljim na koncu diplomskega dela.

Keywords

slovenska književnost;kratka proza;literarna recepcija;slovenska literarna kritika;Mohorič, Milena;Paternu, Boris;Kermauner, Taras;diplomsko delo;Bartol;Vladimir;1903-1967;"Al Araf";

Data

Language:	Slovenian
Year of publishing:	2016
Typology:	2.11 - Undergraduate Thesis
Organization:	UL FF - Faculty of Arts
Publisher:	[U. Zore]
UDC:	821.163.6.09-32Bartol V.
COBISS:	61817186
Views:	724
Downloads:	206
Average score:	0 (0 votes)
Metadata:

Other data

Secondary language:	English
Secondary abstract:	In 1935, Bartol's collection of short stories Al Araf was published. Due to the distinctive way of writing at that time, it received numerous critiques, which were before the war mainly negative. Situation changed a bit after the war, and positive critiques were mainly written in the new millennium. From a crowd of critics that dealt with Bartol I chose three, among which everyone is a representative of a certain period. I analysed their opinions in detail. Milena Mohorič, a representative of the pre-war period, gave a positive critique with exception of the story titled Izpovedi gospe Forcesinove. Therefore, she represented an exception in her period of time. She summarized her opinion on Bartol's work in the second January issue of the publication Modre ptice (1935/36). Her article on pages 33-40 is titled Vladimir Bartol: (Thoughts on his book Al Araf). Boris Paternu mainly dealt with the language in Bartol's Al Araf, and also his critique is not entirely negative. He had thoroughly analysed Al Araf in 2002, when the collection was republished, in his accompanying study Bartols' Al Araf (p. 326-338). In my opinion, the most objective and the one that captured the essence of Bartol's writing the most, is the critique by Taras Kermauner, whom I present as the last among the trinity. In 1974, he wrote an afterword to Demon in eros which he titled Vladimir Bartol - predecessor of contemporary Slovenian modern literature (p. 423-445). At the end of the graduation thesis, I also substantiate my opinion.
Type (COBISS):	Bachelor thesis/paper
Thesis comment:	Univ. v Ljubljani, Filozofska fak., Oddelek za primerjalno književnost in literarno teorijo
Pages:	31 f.
ID:	10976190