Tradition and Development of the Austrian Literature of the 20. Century

十九世纪奥地利小说研究。《世纪》杂志明确指出，“父亲”问题是希尔斯菲尔德（Sealsfield）或艾伯纳-艾森巴赫（Ebner-Eschenbach）等作家作品的中心问题，他们在日本鲜为人知，但却是那个时代非常典型的作家。这也是权威和权力的问题，它实际上源于语言本身的结构。这个传统的问题是在20世纪20年代发现的。在20世纪的穆西尔和里尔克的作品中，尤其是在他们对父亲之死的描述中。在他作为小说家的活动之初，穆希尔遇到了马赫、胡塞尔、魏宁格和弗洛伊德等作家在世纪之交遇到的类似问题。他的思想与马赫和魏宁格的思想有一些相似之处，但他用胡塞尔在他的逻辑研究中使用的论点来批评马赫。《Musil》的文本结构类似于弗洛伊德对歇斯底里症的研究。在《没有品质的人》中，他追求的是一种“爱的语言”的话语……莫尔开启了一种不受“父亲的语言”控制的另一种生活方式的可能性。这种“爱的语言”是一种语言，它下降到人类语言起源的“Ursprung”的深处，在那里有感觉和无感觉并没有明显的区别。但Musil总是意识到语言的“Vermitteltheit”，而“爱的语言”也总是被唤起“第三人称”形象的元素所打断。列宁在他的《唯物主义与经验批判》中只比穆西尔晚一年就批判了马赫的思想，卢卡奇在近代欧洲小说中发现了无产阶级失去的整体，而穆西尔作为20世纪20年代的马克思主义者的地位则与之相比。世纪德国作家变得更加透明。对于列宁和卢卡奇来说，主体性是非常重要的，因为一个人必须作为历史的自由主体，使自己成为世界历史的主角。但这种主体性被弗洛伊德和拉康的精神分析所动摇，而穆斯尔的思想与之有某种亲缘关系。在这个意义上，Musil的位置可以位于马克思主义和精神分析之间。少

The research of the Austrian novels of the 19. century made it clear that the problem oft the "father" was central in the works of such authors as Sealsfield or Ebner-Eschenbach, who little known in Japan are very typical writers of the time. It is also the problem of the authority and power that derives in fact from the structure of language itself. This traditional problem is to be found in the 20. century then in the works of Musil and Rilke, especially in their description of the death of the father.At the beginning of his activity as a novelist Musil had similar problems which such authors like Mach, Husserl, Weininger and Freud had at the turn of the century. His thoughts had some similarities with those of Mach and Weininger, but he criticized Mach with the very arguments that Husserl used in his logical studies. The text of Musil is structured like that of Freud in his studies of the hysteria.In The Man without Qualities he pursued a discourse with the "language of love" which … More opens a possibility to live in another way that is not controlled with the "language of the father". This "language of love" is a language, which descends into the depth of "Ursprung" where the human speech originates and sense and senselessness are distinguished not clearly from each other. But Musil is always conscious of the "Vermitteltheit" of the language and the "language oft love" is also interrupted always with elements that evoke the image of the "third person".Compared with Lenin who criticizes the ideas of Mach only one year later than Musil in his Materialism and Empririo-Criticism and with those of Lukacs who found the lost totality in the class of proletariat after he had missed it in the modem European novel, the position of Musil as the 20. century German author becomes more transparent. For both Lenin and Lukacs the subjectivity is very important because one must act as free subject of the history and makes oneself to the protagonist of the world history. But this subjectivity is made instable by the psychoanalysis of Freund and Lacan to which Musil's thoughts have some affinities. In this meaning the position of Musil could be situated between Marxism and psychoanalysis. Less