hrvatski

Tko je bio Marin Držić

The starting point of the author of the book Tko je bio Marin Držić (Who was Marin Držić) is the definition of intertextuality as a conflictual field of multiple and opposing discursive practices. The book is constructed around the author's belief that all the distinct elements of a society, all its texts as well as all the public acts it produces during a given time period, are intertwined in manifold ways in which these acts establish a dynamic contact with kindred and converse elements alike. The person of Marin Držić is one such entity in this dynamic textual process because he, more than many others, has the power to connect the past with the present in every moment of his textual existence. The first part of the book elucidates problem areas in the biography of Marin Držić through both diachronic and synchronic analyses of numerous oppositions underpinning these areas. The initial focus of the research was on the imitable or legendary phase of the biographies of the writer which lasted until the final years of the 19th century. The author's interest then extends to the first scientifically and archivally sound approaches to biographemes of Držić and to the creation of the first biographical fabulae. This phase greatly solidified following Vodnik's aesthetic canonisation in Povijest hrvatske književnosti (History of Croatian Literature) in 1913, Dayre's discovery of conspiratorial letters to Cosimo I de' Medici in 1929, Rešetar's critical edition of Držić's works in 1930, and a successful production staged by Marko Fotez at the Croatian National Theatre in 1938. It was only after these problem areas had solidified that the ideologemes started penetrating both the interpretations of Marin Držić and the first constructions of his complex human and literary character. In this book, the author treats the political mystifications and ideologisations of Marin Držić, and takes special care to establish the currents which instituted elements of Držić's spiritual and historical biography despite political conflicts. The book pays special attention to the opposing ideological interpretations of Držić's biography which arose in the work of writers from the Catholic school and those inspired by the Marxist ideology of Miroslav Krleža. The author also addresses the issues of ethnic disputes regarding Držić's work, especially those raised by Serbian historians, by interpreting their actions as part of a broader professional agenda, which is in fact political. Furthermore, the author critically reviews the use of the latest tenets of cultural materialism and new historicism in interpreting both the writer as a person and his works. In her research, she has reevaluated a series of interpretations of the writer which have been neglected to this date, insisting on the interlacing of otherwise barely noticeable interactions of fictional and non-fictional layers in the texts pertaining to Držić and those inspired by his works. Convinced that it is the non-fictional layers of the aforementioned texts – which are presented as referential under the auspices of historiographic discourse – which contain the greatest number of ideological codes, the author interprets them critically and attempts to elucidate their ideological provenance. Researching the issues related to the inclusion of the Croatian literary canon into a supranational context the author attentively scrutinises the process of canonisation and recanonisation of Držić's literary corpus in the histories of Croatian literature to this day, attesting the gradualness of the process of canonisation as well as its limitations – particularly with regard to the inclusion of Držić in a supranational canon. The book contains interpretations of all the texts which have been inspired by Držić's life and his work, texts in which he is either a literary character or texts in which his texts or texts about him have served as prototexts. For this purpose the author closely analyses the drama and prose of Milan Šenoa, Ivan Bakmaz, Marijan Matković, Senker- Škrabe-Mujičić, Slobodan Šnajder, Feđa Šehović, Hrvoje Hitrec, Tonko Maroević, Matko Sršen, Davor Mojaš, as well as works in which Marin Držić is either left out on purpose or unconsciously foregrounded as otherness, as with the drama by Ernest Katić and the novel about Cvijeta Zuzorić by Luko Paljetak. The book Tko je bio Marin Držić demonstrates the ways in which diverging portraits of Marin Držić arose. It explains the processes by which the new texts and ideologemes came about in various social and ideological contexts. In the book Držić is presented as a literary contemporary, as an overdescribed writer who has undergone very similar phases of canonisation, recanonisation and feigned decanonisation, to those William Shakespeare has undergone in English and world literature and Cervantes in Spanish literature. The author offers proof that Marin Držić, once inducted into the centre of his own national literary canon – albeit at a relatively late stage – overshadowed all the previously canonised and ideologised lives of the numerous writers who were both his senior and junior. The aim of the book is to study the diverging portraits of the most famous writer of the Croatian Renaissance in intertextual discourse, therefore not in the light of its own historic existence, but of what ensued. The book repeatedly demonstrates that in these texts the person of Držić is seen more as a literary character than as a real historical person. All the texts studied in the book are therefore a part of the history of not just one literary canonisation but of texts – ideologemes – which, when they come into contact with each other within this delimited discursive field, indicate the turbulent processes of a period in history, opposing ideological trends and migrating centres of power which turn certain corpora of texts into either unspoken otherness or centres of the discursive field. In the book, the author also describes two dominant canonisation processes, one of which came about through the activities of writers from the group that surrounded Miroslav Krleža and which was commissioned by the political powers of the period, while the other concurrent process grew stronger in the 1960s with the works of Leo Košuta, Josip Torbarina, Vinko Foretić and Frano Čale, and finished with the Leksikon Marina Držića (Lexicon of Marin Držić), printed in 2009. In this latest ideologisation, the corpus of Držić's biography and poetics is portrayed as the highest achievement of the national spirit, an achievement which, because of its clear correspondence with other European cultures, is likely to be recognised as central to the global canon.

Marin Držić ; biografija ; hrvatska književnost ; književna historiografija ; intertekstualnost ; književni kanon ; ideologem ; diskurzivno polje

nije evidentirano