Abstract
Based on Beecroft “ecology of world literature,” the chapter discusses the role of canon formation in the processes of nationalizing and autonomizing literature. These lead from vernacular literatures to national literary ecologies organized in a modern literary world-system. In the early Slovenian poetry from the Enlightenment to Post-Romanticism, the imagining of the emerging national literary system and its growing canon allegorized the efforts toward the standardization and cultivation of national literary language. In this context, intertextual indigenization of Parnassus and Elysium, classical topoi of canonicity, served as an autopoietic strategy of a nascent literary system (nested in the predominantly German-speaking Habsburg Empire) to assimilate the cosmopolitan patterns of the Classical canon and capitalize on its Pan-European prestige.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
On the concept of literary emergence, see Domínguez 2006.
- 2.
Until the mid-nineteenth century, the ethnonyms slovenski and kranjski often appeared as synonyms although the latter (Carniolan) prevailed; Carniola was a Habsburg hereditary region in which the majority of population spoke the Slovenian language. The ethnonym Slovenian, however, whose usage achieved prominence after the revolutionary year of 1848, had been used as early as the Reformation period to denote the Slovenian-speaking population of the Inner Austria, which included not only Carniola but also Styria, Carinthia, the County of Gorizia, and Trieste with parts of Istria.
- 3.
In this period of Prešeren’s creativity dubbed “the Romantic classic,” classicist proportion, historicist use of Romance, Germanic, and Oriental forms, and imagery borrowed from the Western canon usually merge with modern Romantic sensibility and vernacular stylistic features.
- 4.
Created in the mixture of prose and verse during the rule of the emperor Hadrian (AD 117–138), this Greek narrative rewrites an older tradition going back to the sophist Alcimadas’s work Mouseion (fourth century BC); its origin is an episode from Works and Days, where Hesiod writes how he won a poetry contest (without mentioning Homer). He was awarded a tripod, which he later dedicated to the Muses of Mount Helicon.
- 5.
For the relation between national and world literature, see also Tsu 2012.
- 6.
However, the status of Slovenian in the eighteenth century illustrates that even though a peripheral ethnic language succeeded to lay the foundations of a vernacular ecology, it remained subordinated to universal Latinity and the imperial language (in this case German, the official language of Austrian Empire).
- 7.
To be true, Bourdieu is discussing the radicalization of this situation in the second half of the nineteenth century.
- 8.
These philological works about the Slovenian language were patterned on Latin or took Latin as a norm, what Beecroft considers as characteristic of a vernacular ecology.
- 9.
The connections between the literary canon and standardization of the literary language are emphasized, a.o., by Guillory (1993: 60–77).
- 10.
The dominance of the narrative prose fiction begins in 1866 with the first novel in Slovenian language.
- 11.
- 12.
On Dev’s contribution to Pisanice, see Koruza (1993: 7–9, 30–31, 63–67, 77–78, 85–162). Dev, a monk of the Discalced Augustinian Order and a member of the Enlightened circle of the restored Academia Operosorum in Ljubljana, was rightfully called “the first Slovenian poet” because he was the main author of poems published in the three succeeding volumes of Pisanice (Koruza 1986). This epithet challenges the canonized understanding according to which the founding father of Slovenian poetry was Valentin Vodnik (1758–1819), the author of the 1806 volume of poetry entitled Pesme za pokušino, and the Enlightenment multigenre writer, journalist, grammarian, and historian. As a matter of fact, Vodnik’s collection Poems for Tasting was not even the first printed single-authored book of Slovenian secular poetry (a booklet of humorous, parodic, and vulgar poems written by a local teacher and organist Pavel Knobl was printed five years earlier, in 1801). With regard to Dev’s baroque classicism and references to Parnassus, it is important to know that he also contributed two translations from Ovid and Virgil to the Slovenian grammar Krajynska Grammatika (1768) published in German by Marko Pohlin, his comrade in the order, member of the restored Academia Operosorum, and the initiator of the early stage of Carniolan vernacular awakening.
- 13.
According to Kozma Ahačič (2015), Pohlin aimed to encourage his countrymen’s proudness of their mother tongue by demonstrating that it was possible to standardize the vernacular through the generally acknowledged grammatical rules.
- 14.
Marko Pohlin, Dev’s collaborator and coeditor of Pisanice, in fact announced his dictionary in his grammar where he also polemicized with prejudices about poverty and impurity of Slovenian, and its apparent dependence on loanwords. In the framework of the efforts to restore the Academia operosorum, the enlightened educationalist and philologist Blaž Kumerdej (1738–1805) read his rhetorically masterful foreword to his unfinished Carniolan orthography in 1779 before the audience of about 15 members of the academy, including Dev. Dev’s poem thus seems to echo Kumerdej’s position (Koruza 1993: 65–67).
- 15.
In his monograph Ljubljana as the New Rome: The Academy of the Industrious and Baroque Italy, Luka Vidmar points out that the Ljubljana Academy of the Industrious (Academia Operosorum) represents the beginning of an economic, cultural, and artistic flourishing in the Duchy of Carniola whose geostrategic location between the Italian lands, the Holy Roman Empire , and the Kingdom of Hungary fostered its openness to Italian influences. Many Carniolan aristocrats and clerics studied in Rome, Perugia, Sienna, Parma, Bologna, Padua, and Venice, while it also became a habit for young nobles to refine and cultivate themselves by going on Italian “grand tour” of all the major monuments of Classical Antiquity, the Middle Ages, the Renaissance, and the Baroque. Having gained knowledge and experience of prestigious cultural-artistic achievements in Italian cities, the Carniolan intellectual elite strove to introduce these models to their homeland when they took up important positions in the provincial and church hierarchy. They attempted to transform Ljubljana into a regional center following the example of Italian art centers, especially Rome and Venice. Among their strategies of emulating the renowned practices, institutions, and artworks of Italian centers, the foundation of the system of learned societies patterned after Italian academies was most important. According to Vidmar, members of the Ljubljana Academy of the Industrious (founded in 1693) gathered extensive background knowledge from their study or travels to Italy. They considered Ljubljana the successor of the Roman town of Emona which was believed to be founded by Jason and the Argonauts. Janez Gregor Dolničar (1655–1719), the main ideologue of the academy, was the prime mover for a new cathedral in Ljubljana; it was planned and its building chronicled in terms of a Carniolan remake of Saint Peter’s basilica in Rome (Vidmar 2013).
- 16.
In in his Grammatik der slavischen Sprache in Krain, Kärnten und Steyermark of 1808, which was the first modern scholarly grammar of Slovenian (that is, the language spoken by “a million of Slavs in the Inner Austria”), Jernej Kopitar adopted the Herderian concept of “folk language” as the only legitimate basis of the literary norm, while he regarded the Carniolan folk tradition as natural, pure, and realist foundation of further literary and cultural development. Kopitar’s purist views exerted deep influence on the codification of the standard Slovenian literary language and on “populist” cultural politics until the second half of the nineteenth century, even though as early as in the 1830s they collided with Prešeren’s cultural program relying on educated readers, townspeople, and cosmopolitanism. (See Orožen 1996: 16–21, 30–31, 46–47, 51–90, 121–133, 153–177, 207–225.) More on this below.
- 17.
In his monograph on Pisanice, Jože Koruza took pains to identify the allegorical meaning of Belin. He concedes that the Carniolan deity that equals Apollo has a more general meaning: it represents the driving force behind the philological, scholarly, and literary revival of Carniolan culture, maybe even the need for the formative cultural impulse from Italy. However, several cryptic allusions along with the period and circumstances of publication allow for a more concrete historical reconstruction of the influential personality—Belin is an allegory of the Count Franz Adam Lamberg (1730–1803) who was appointed governor general of the Carniolan province in 1780 and arguably involved in the efforts at reviving the learned society Academia Operosorum in Ljubljana. As a member of the learned Dismus Society, Lamberg left Ljubljana around 1773, at the time when Pohlin and his philological circle commenced the cultivation of the Slovenian vernacular. Before his return to Ljubljana in 1780, Lamberg had great merits in the Italian Gorizia, the capital of Carniola’s neighboring county where the cultured life began to flourish around 1780, with the foundation of a branch of Roman Academia degli arcadi. Although Lamberg was not member of this academy, he was important for the rise of Italian language in this Habsburg province because he used his authority of the governor general to support the role of Italian in schools and public instead of German (for what he was blamed by the Austrian court) (Koruza 1993: 91–92, 95–101, 134–140).
- 18.
Apostrophizing the Muses, the voice of a bodiless poet occasionally joins the first-person narrative of the collective which is anxiously expecting Belin’s arrival.
- 19.
With this, Dev reiterates the Italophile classicist orientation toward Rome which, according to Vidmar (2013), characterized the Ljubljana Academy of the Industrious a few decades before.
- 20.
Indicative of the spatial expansion of the Slovenian ethnic territory based on the modern notion of the nation is the 1852 map entitled Zemljovid slovenske dežele in pokrajin (A Map of Slovenian Land and Provinces) of the lawyer, businessman (brewer), and cartographer Peter Kozler (1824–1879), who was a Carniolan German by his ethnic origin but became a passionate adherent of the Slovenian national movement and its 1848 demand for the “united Slovenia” (zedinjena Slovenija). Whereas Kozler actually mapped the territorial claims of the national movement (which for the large part match the borders of the Kingdom of Illyria, a crown land of the Austrian Empire from 1816 to 1849), he argued for the equality of German- and Slovenian-speaking inhabitants of Slovenia.
- 21.
Although Austrian authorities never allowed the demands of The United Slovenia to be fully realized, the program established a platform for the subsequent struggles of the Slovenian national movement right to the end of the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy. The Habsburg authorities did not prevent the national movement from founding its institutions and media (albeit they, too, were subjected to censorship), with much demur they conceded Slovenian language to be introduced in the regional education system (since the 1860s in elementary schools, toward the end of the century in gymnasiums), while Slovenian politicians advocating the national program were represented in the regional assembly of the Duchy of Carniola since the Monarchy’s 1861 constitutional reform. The authorities tolerated massive meetings after the Czech example (so-called tabori) organized in Slovenian lands in support for the national program (including the demand for Slovenian as an official language) in the years 1869–1871.
- 22.
In a kind of Romantic postmodernism, Prešeren used, adapted, and gave a singular meaning to forms such as the Greek Anacreontic verse, Latin elegy, Arab ghazel, German ballad, Spanish romance, Italian sonnet, terza rima , and the wreath of sonnets, French triolet, or English Byronic verse tale. He employed erudite exempla or allusions to Classical Antiquity (including the Parnassus imagery with Muses, flowers, and Orpheus), the Christian literary tradition, and the masters of the Middle Ages, Renaissance, and Baroque (Dante , Petrarch, Camões, Tasso, and others). Mastered by architectonic principles, the style and composition of his poems draw on the universal repertoires of rhetorical topics or figures of speech and Petrarchan conceits.
- 23.
In his official assessment of the almanac Krajnska čbelica, the Viennese court censor Jernej Kopitar accused Prešeren’s “Glosa” of libeling honest merchants of Ljubljana.
- 24.
Prešeren’s strategy, developed according to the Schlegelian ideas of his learned friend Matija Čop (1797–1835), was typical of the initial phases of dependent East-Central European national movements that took place in monarchies headed by foreign-speaking ruling classes. According to Hroch (1993), national awakening in countries like Carniola initially relied on philological, scholarly, and literary activities by a few intellectuals, who discovered, invented, raised awareness of, and provided evidence for the main attributes of these national communities and their historical continuity (language, literature, history, mythology and folklore, customs, territory, and religion).
- 25.
Vodník means “leader,” “guide” in Slovenian. This wordplay was often related to mentioning Vodnik as the first Slovenian classic.
- 26.
The contributions to Vodnik’s Monument include his biography, surveys of his poetical, grammatical, journalist, and historical work, the history of his time, a study on his relation to the Slovenian language, and an anthology of Slovenian writers; many of their works pay homage to Vodnik.
- 27.
The narrative of the medieval historical fall of Slovenians, their millennial stagnancy, and absence from the stage of universal history was almost a commonplace of Slovenian nineteenth-century nationalist discourse. Prešeren gave to it a canonical form in his major works in the 1830s.
- 28.
Mladoslovenci of the 1860s and 1870s were inspired by the Young Czech movement.
- 29.
Metelko , in fact, added only a few Cyrillic or newly coined graphemes to the Latin alphabet in order to denote affricates and palatal fricatives.
- 30.
Holding Carniolan letters as his exclusive area of interest, Kopitar did not tolerate dissenters and opponents among his countrymen. Irritated by Prešeren’s satirical mockery of his views and Čop’s open opposition, he broke with his friendly mentorship of Čop and used his position of the court censor to obstruct the almanac Krajnska čbelica in 1833. Matija Čop publicly joined the adversaries of the reformed alphabet and Kopitar’s culture planning in his polemical treatise Slowenischer ABC-Krieg in the spring of 1833. See Chap. 7 for an interpretation of the conflict.
- 31.
- 32.
The endeavors of Old Slovenians to canonize Vodnik culminated in Costa’s Vodnik-Album (1859) mentioned above.
- 33.
In the literary supplement Illyrisches Blatt of 1847, a reviewer of Poezije called Prešeren “the single poet of our present Carniolan Parnassus of poetry” (see Paternu 1989: 4).
- 34.
For instance, Vinzenz Rizzi published in 1849 a critical assessment of Prešeren’s poetic achievement from the perspective of the universal literary values. See Chap. 7.
- 35.
See Chap. 6.
- 36.
Miran Hladnik (1992) reports about an infamous anecdote that helps understand a polemic gesture of the Young Slovenian concept of Klasje: On 12 February 1866, the liberal-oriented Carniolan German poet Anastasius Grün (pen name of the Count Anton Alexander von Auersperg), argued in the Carniolan Land Assembly that, with the exception of the religious education, Slovenian language did not possess other necessary textbooks and thus could not be equal to German as the language of instruction in Carniolan secondary schools. During his speech, he apparently showed two translated textbooks saying: “Es ist aber für den lernbegierigen und namentlich den im Unterrichte in der Selbstbildung weiter vorrücken wollenden Schüler wirklich traurig, im Besitze dieser beiden Bücher sagen zu müssen, wie der griechische Philosoph: Omnia mea mecum porto.” The next day German newspapers reported that Count Auersperg brought all Slovenian literature to the Carniolan Land Diet (Landtag)—in his pocket-handkerchief.
- 37.
Prešeren studies represents a prolific branch of literary history focused on the life and works of Prešeren (Levstik , too, contributed to this field in the early 1860s). Analogous to, say, Shakespeare studies, this discipline represents a typical phenomenon of the canonization of major authors through biographic scholarship and critical editions.
- 38.
The dismemberment of Orpheus—the Dionysian sparagmos that Prešeren’s Apollonian interpretation of the myth suppressed in the name of national utopia—might have influenced Stritar to depict Prešeren as sacrifice.
- 39.
Although Prešeren was a lawyer, neither his profession nor literary work earned him respect. Frustrated by his failed mobility toward the nascent Carniolan bourgeoisie, he leaned toward bohemianism.
- 40.
On the other hand, Stritar also refrains from patriotic exaggerations portraying local authors as, say, the Slovenian Goethe, Schiller, or Petrarch.
- 41.
Works Cited
Ahačič, Kozma. 2015. Marko Pohlin. Kraynska Grammatika. In Slovenske slovnice in pravopisi: spletišče slovenskih slovnic in pravopisov od 1584 do danes, ed. Kozma Ahačič. Version 1.0. https://fran.si/slovnice-in-pravopisi/7/1768-pohlin. Accessed 20 February 2018.
Anderson, Benedict. 1991. Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. Rev. and Extended ed. London: Verso.
Assmann, Aleida, and Jan Assmann, eds. 1987. Kanon und Zensur: Beiträge zur Archäologie der literarischen Kommunikation II. München: W. Fink.
Beecroft, Alexander. 2008. World Literature without a Hyphen: Towards a Typology of Literary Systems. New Left Review 54 (November–December): 87–100.
———. 2015. An Ecology of World Literature: From Antiquity to the Present Day. Verso.
Bosold-DasGupta, Bettina. 2005. Traiano Boccalini und der Anti-Parnass: Frühjournalistische Kommunikation als Metadiskurs. Amsterdam and New York: Rodopi.
Bourdieu, Pierre. 1996. The Rules of Art: Genesis and Structure of the Literary Field. Trans. Susan Emanuel. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Carravetta, Peter. 2012. The Canon(s) of World Literature. In The Routledge Companion to World Literature, ed. Theo D’haen, David Damrosch, and Djelal Kadir, 264–272. London and New York: Routledge.
Casanova, Pascale. 1999. La République mondiale des Lettres. Paris: Ed. du Seuil.
Cornea, Paul. 2000. Canon et bataille canonique. In Methods for the Study of Literature as Cultural Memory, ed. Raymond Vervliet and Annemarie Estor, 107–120. Amsterdam and Atlanta, GA: Rodopi.
Damrosch, David. 2006. World Literature in a Postcanonical, Hypercanonical Age. In Comparative Literature in an Age of Globalization, ed. Haun Sasussy, 43–53. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Domínguez, César. 2006. Literary Emergence as a Case Study of Theory in Comparative Literature. CLCWeb 8.2 (2006): http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/clcweb/vol8/iss2/1.
Dović, Marijan. 2008. Early Literary Representations of National History and the ‘Slovenian Cultural Syndrome’. In History and Its Literary Genres, ed. Vanesa Matajc, Gašper Troha, and Gregor Pompe, 98–114. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Dović, Marijan, and Jón Karl Helgason. 2017. National Poets, Cultural Saints: Canonization and Commemorative Cults of Writers in Europe. Leiden: Brill.
Ďurišin, Dionýz. 1984. Theory of Literary Comparatistics. Bratislava: Veda.
———. 1992. Čo je svetová literatúra. Bratislava: Obzor.
Even-Zohar, Itamar. 1990. Polysystem Studies = Poetics Today 11 (1).
———. 2008. Culture Planning, Cohesion, and the Making and Maintenance of Entities. In Beyond Descriptive Translation Studies: Investigations in Homage to Gideon Toury, ed. Anthony Pym, Miriam Shlesinger, and Daniel Simeoni, 277–292. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Goethe, Johann Wolfgang von. 1999. Sämtliche Werke. Briefe, Tagebücher und Gespräche. Band 22: Ästhetische Schriften 1824–1832; Über Kunst und Altertum V–VI, ed. Anne Bohnenkamp. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.
Gspan, Alfonz. 1978–1979. Cvetnik slovenskega umetnega pesništva do srede XIX. stoletja. 2 vols. Ljubljana: Slovenska matica.
Guillory, John. 1993. Cultural Capital: The Problem of Literary Canon Formation. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.
Hesiod. 1914. The Theogony of Hesiod. Trans. Hugh G. Evelyn-White. http://www.sacred-texts.com/cla/hesiod/theogony.htm. Accessed 10 January 2010.
Hladnik, Miran. 1992. Vloga prevoda v slovensko-nemški literarni tekmi. Seminar slovenskega jezika, literature in kulture 28: Zbornik predavanj. Eds. Miran Hladnik and Darinka Počaj-Rus. Ljubljana: Filozofska fakulteta. 109–119.
Hroch, Miroslav. 1993. From National Movement to the Fully-formed Nation. New Left Review 198: 3–20.
Juvan, Marko. 2008. Recouvrement palimpsestique des frontières: ‘le syndrome de la culture slovène’ dans l’histoire de la littérature nationale et compare. Trans. Marie-Hélène Estéoule-Exel. In Frontières de l’histoire littéraire, ed. Jean Bessière and Judit Maár, 111–122. Paris: Harmattan.
———. 2016. Na poti k prostorski zgodovini literarnih kultur: književnost in ustvarjanje slovenskega prostora. In Prostori slovenske književnosti, ed. Marko Juvan, 13–41. Ljubljana: Založba ZRC SAZU.
Koruza, Jože. 1986. Prvi slovenski pesnik Feliks Anton Dev. 22. Seminar slovenskega jezika, literature in kulture: Zbornik predavanj. Ljubljana: Filozofska fakulteta. 181–193.
———. 1993. Značaj pesniškega zbornika ‘Pisanice od lepeh umetnost. Maribor: Obzorja.
Krejčí, Karel. 1964. Heroikomika v básnictví Slovanu°. Prague: Nakladatelství ČAV.
Lacoue-Labarthe, Philippe, and Jean-Luc Nancy. 1988. The Literary Absolute: The Theory of Literature in German Romanticism. Translated with an Introduction and Additional Notes by Philip Barnard and Cheryl Lester. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Legiša, Lino., ed. 1977. Pisanice 1779–1782. Ljubljana: Slovenska akademija znanosti in umetnosti.
Levstik, Fran. 1948. Ježa na Parnas (1st ed.). In Zbrano delo, ed. Anton Slodnjak, vol. 1, 73–90. Ljubljana: DZS.
———. 1953. Ježa na Parnas (2nd ed.). In Zbrano delo, ed. Anton Slodnjak, vol. 3, 43–207. Ljubljana: DZS.
McGann, Jerome. 1983. The Romantic Ideology: A Critical Investigation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Močnik, Rastko. 2006. Julija Primic v slovenski knjiežvni vedi. Ljubljana: Založba Sophia.
Moretti, Franco. 2013. Distant Reading. London and New York: Verso.
Nemoianu, Virgil. 2002. ‘National Poets’ in the Romantic Age: Emergence and Importance. In Romantic Poetry, ed. Angela Esterhammer, 249–255. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Neupokoyeva, Irina Grigorevna. 2012. Dialectics of Historical Development of National and World Literature (1973). In World Literature: A Reader, ed. Theo D’haen, César Domínguez, and Mads Rosendahl Thomsen, 104–113. London and New York: Routledge.
Orožen, Martina. 1996. Oblikovanje enotnega slovenskega knjižnega jezika v 19. stoletju. Ljubljana: Znanstveni inštitut Filozofske fakultete.
Paternu, Boris. 1960. Slovenska literarna kritika pred Levstikom. Ljubljana: Filozofska fakulteta Univerze v Ljubljani.
———. 1989. Modeli slovenske literarne kritike: (od začetkov do 20. stoletja). Ljubljana: Znanstveni inštitut Filozofske fakultete.
Perkins, Mary Ann. 1999. Nation and Word, 1770–1850: Religious and Metaphysical Language in European National Consciousness. Aldershot: Ashgate.
Pirjevec, Dušan. 1978. Vprašanje o poeziji. Vprašanje naroda. Maribor: Obzorja.
Pogačnik, Jože. 1981. Recepcija Prešernovega pesništva do leta 1866. Obdobje romantike v slovenskem jeziku, književnosti in kulturi. Ed. Boris Paternu. Ljubljana: Filozofska fakulteta. 299–303.
Pohlin, Marko. 1768. Kraynska grammatika, das ist: Die crainerische Grammatik, oder Kunst die crainerische Sprach regelrichtig zu reden, und zu schreiben. Laybach: Gedruckt bey Joh. Friedr. Eger.
Pohlin, Marko, Žiga Zois, Anton Tomaž Linhart, Valentin Vodnik. 1970. Izbrano delo. Eds. Janko Kos, Jože Stabej, and Alfonz Gspan. Ljubljana: Mladinska knjiga.
Prešeren, France. 1965. Zbrano delo. 1. Ed. Janko Kos. Ljubljana: Državna založba Slovenije.
———. 1999. Poems. Trans. Tom M.S. Priestly and Henry R. Cooper. Klagenfurt: Hermagoras-Verlag.
Prijatelj, Ivan. 1961. Slovenska kulturnopolitična in slovstvena zgodovina 1848–1895. Vol. 4. Ljubljana: DZS.
Schmidt, Siegfried J. 1989. Die Selbstorganisation des Sozialsystems Literatur im 18. Jahrhundert. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.
Schulz-Buschhaus, Ulrich. 1988. Kanonbildung in Europa. In Literarische Klassik, ed. Hans-Joachim Simm, 45–68. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.
Schwanitz, Dietrich. 1990. Systemtheorie und Literatur: ein neues Paradigma. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.
Slodnjak, Anton. 1984. France Prešeren. Ljubljana: Slovenska matica.
Stritar, Josip. 1953. Zbrano delo. Vol. 1. Ed. France Koblar. Ljubljana: DZS.
———. 1955. Zbrano delo. Vol. 6. Ed. France Koblar. Ljubljana: DZS.
Tsu, Jing. 2012. World Literature and National Literature. In The Routledge Companion to World Literature, ed. Theo D’haen, David Damrosch, and Djelal Kadir, 158–168. London: Routledge.
Vidmar, Luka. 2013. Ljubljana kot novi Rim: Akademija operozov in baročna Italija. Ljubljana: Slovenska akademija znanosti in umetnosti.
Widdowson, Peter. 1999. Literature. London and New York: Routledge.
Yildiz, Yasemin. 2012. Beyond the Mother Tongue: The Postmonolingual Condition. New York: Fordham University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Juvan, M. (2019). The Birth of National Literature from the Spirit of the Classical Canon. In: Worlding a Peripheral Literature. Canon and World Literature. Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-32-9405-9_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-32-9405-9_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-32-9404-2
Online ISBN: 978-981-32-9405-9
eBook Packages: Literature, Cultural and Media StudiesLiterature, Cultural and Media Studies (R0)