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
한국외국어대학교 동유럽발칸연구소 동유럽발칸연구 동유럽발칸연구 제39권 제6호
발행연도
2015.1
수록면
57 - 94 (38page)

이용수

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

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
In this article the emphasis is on the procedures in which the ethnic and émigré literature discourses are considered and defined in theoretical writing and how are they evaluated in the process of canonization in national literatures, or within the circle of their academic and political hegemonic frames . At the centre of attention will be two questions. The first question is allied with the poststructuralist question of otherness which nowadays is still central to a number of post-structural methodological approaches in literary and cultural studies, from deconstruction and post-colonial theory to multicultural and gender studies. Its implications are discussed in the context of post-Foucauldian poststructuralist theories of discourse, in ideas about the distribution of power and in the context of the re-construction of history of displaced others in relation to the now-alienated imaginary space of possible inclusion. By that I mean the original environment from which the émigré writer is physically excluded. The second question is concerned with the location of the displaced voice in both corpus and cannon, and with the bridging of a gap in time and space which in émigré literature is not only a temporal issue but also spatial. It often represents a poly-ethnic and dispersed discursive realm, rather than an ethno-centric and biased position hostile to the dominant hegemonic order. All this represents a dynamic interaction of fields and includes the process of historicizing discourse in a process of re-canonizing and re-evaluating the current strategies in rewriting national literatures’ histories and their dealings with their own others. I will argue that this process of diverting the traditional historicism of closed communal discourses into a multicultural and intercultural environment is embedded in the otherness that is produced as a reading against being positioned in a host nation’s paradigms. The fact is that host nations often try to impose new meanings and paradigms onto the foreign body of displaced émigré writing and to forcefully position them in their imagined historic progression. This, in return, becomes a process of reaffirming than postmodern, ideas. In these circumstances the strategies of national re-canonization stipulate the process of active forgetting, not remembering. Following this stream of thought, in this essay I emphasize the post-Nietzschean, poststructuralist thesis which states that the “(…) creation of the new, like representation, inevitably involves an act of repression”. The second part of this article deals with the practical modes of this complex process in the comparative environment of two peninsulas: Balkan and Korean. Therefore I will also discuss and interpret individual examples from both geographically and discursively diverse locations. Here, the first part of the essay is presented, and the second part will be published in the next issue of this journal.

목차

등록된 정보가 없습니다.

참고문헌 (22)

참고문헌 신청

함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문

논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!

이 논문의 저자 정보

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0