Canons as Reservoirs: The Ottoman Ocean in Ziya Pasha's Harabat and Reframing the History of Comparative Literature
Canons as Reservoirs: The Ottoman Ocean in Ziya Pasha's Harabat and Reframing the History of Comparative Literature
复制标题
作为水库的经典：齐亚帕夏《哈拉巴特》中的奥斯曼海洋与重新构建比较文学史
DOI：
10.5325/complitstudies.54.4.0731
复制
发表时间：
2017
影响因子：
0.4
通讯作者：
C. C. Arslan
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
C. C. Arslan
摘要：本文分析了齐亚·帕沙的奥斯曼帝国文集《哈拉巴特》(AH 1291-1292[1874/1875-1875/1876])的介绍，这本书提供了阿拉伯、土耳其和波斯文学的比较历史。我认为，哈拉巴特汇编了来自不同地理和时间来源的文本，而不是将它们定义为独特的民族传统的成员，而是将这种汇编投射为我所说的构成多语言奥斯曼帝国正典的文学库。我的论点基于Ziya Pasha将奥斯曼帝国文化描述为包含阿拉伯语、波斯语和土耳其语“溪流”的“海洋”。这种描述破坏了典型的学者观点，即奥斯曼帝国文化是在阿拉伯和波斯文化的影响下产生和发展的。然后，我通过使用世界文学学术带入文学研究的概念曲目--循环、目标文化和源语文化--来重新构建我们对封圣的理解。在约翰·吉洛里关于正典形成过程的研究基础上，我提出，当原文的语境在目标文化中被忽略时，每一篇原文都可以被“去剥离”，以促进这一文本融入到新的正典或“水库”中。通过论证哈拉巴特是19世纪比较文学范式的组成部分，本文最后呼吁重写比较文学和世界文学史。
ABSTRACT:This article analyzes the introduction of Ziya Pasha's Ottoman anthology Harabat (AH 1291–1292 [1874/1875–1875/1876]), which provides a comparative history of Arabic, Turkish, and Persian literatures. I argue that Harabat compiles texts from diverse geographical and temporal origins and, instead of defining them as members of distinct national traditions, projects this compilation as what I call a literary "reservoir" that constitutes the multilingual Ottoman canon. My argument draws upon Ziya Pasha's characterization of the Ottoman culture as an "ocean" that encompasses Arabic, Persian, and Turkish "streams." This description undermines the typical scholarly view that the Ottoman culture emerged and developed under Arabic and Persian influences. I then reframe our understanding of canonization through using the conceptual repertoire that the world literature scholarship has brought into literary studies—circulations, target culture, and source culture. Building upon John Guillory's work on the process of canon formation, I propose that each source text can be "deracinated" when its context is ignored in the target culture to facilitate this text's incorporation into a new canon, or "reservoir." This article finally calls for rewriting the history of comparative and world literature by demonstrating that Harabat is constitutive of the nineteenth-century comparative literature paradigm.