메뉴 건너뛰기
.. 내서재 .. 알림
소속 기관/학교 인증
인증하면 논문, 학술자료 등을  무료로 열람할 수 있어요.
한국대학교, 누리자동차, 시립도서관 등 나의 기관을 확인해보세요
(국내 대학 90% 이상 구독 중)
로그인 회원가입 고객센터 ENG
주제분류

추천
검색

논문 기본 정보

자료유형
학술저널
저자정보
저널정보
서울대학교 인문학연구원 인문논총 인문논총 제67호
발행연도
2012.1
수록면
273 - 301 (29page)

이용수

표지
📌
연구주제
📖
연구배경
🔬
연구방법
🏆
연구결과
AI에게 요청하기
추천
검색

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
In this article, I examine the two different interpretations of the ‘Kleine Literatur’ of Kafka: Casanova’s ‘Small Literature’ and Deleuze/Guattari's ‘Minor Literature’. Based on such an examination, I try to analyze the relationship between autonomy and contemporaneity (the political) in literature. According to Casanova, small literature refers to literary works written by writers from small countries which tend to depend upon the political situation. She suggests that peripheral literature can become Literature’s Greenwich Meridian by overcoming the politicization of literary space and acquiring the autonomy of Literature. Casanova criticizes that Deleuze and Guattari’s concept of a minor literature premises an anachronic idea that the writer is Vates (prophet)and shows an anachronical prejudice for Kafka’s politics. Their interpretation is disregarded by her as a crude one that deforms Kafka’s text and makes a historical error. However, Kafka says, “Art is a mirror, which goes ‘fast’, like a watchsometimes.”It means that anachronism is a practical and indispensable aspect of Art. As proposed by Deleuze and Guattari, an anachronic art and minor literature has its own absolute autonomy. It does not mean an achievement in literary history that has nothing to do with politics and economics, but an invention of a new assemblage that revolutionizes contemporary forms of life in the socio-political space.

목차

등록된 정보가 없습니다.

참고문헌 (20)

참고문헌 신청

이 논문의 저자 정보

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0