|
||
|
Заголовок: Авторская позиция в Сагах об Исландцах Прислано пользователем Antrekot на 08/17/04 в 19:59:55 Материалы к дискуссии у соседей. Теодор Андерссен. "Исландская семейная сага: аналитическое чтение" Harvard university press, 1967 (*) Из главки "Интродукция" (глава "Структура саги"). "This introduction is of course sufficient in itself to suggest that the persons intoduced are going to be combined in some way to produce the action of the story. However the author is not usually content to leave the reader with that simple deduction and hints broadly at the coming conflict by weigthing the characterisation. The scoundrel is not, as a tentative perusal of the sagas might suggest, given the benefit of complete objectivity, but is regularly described as a difficult person in one way or another. e is often ojafnadarmadr, that is to say, an overbearing, self willed, uncompromising man, who is not fairmided and temperate in hos dealings with his neighbours. The saga reader learns to recognise this characteristic as a sure sign of impending touble since it inevilably leads to frictions. In the story of Torsteinn prod-head, for example, we learn that: "Tordr was a very overbearing man and let people know that he belonged to a chieftains household." Accordingly, it is his unruly behavior that leads to violence at the horse-match and the quarrel between Bjarni and Torsteinn. The brief characterisation at the outset of a saga is thus not only a departure from the rule of objectivity but an anticipation of the conflict to follow. The sagas a full of give-aways and this is the first one. In Hensa-Toris saga we learn for example that Tungu-Oddr " was not known as a tractable man". In Gunnalugs saga Gunnaugr is described as "a man with a very haughty temper, ambitious at a nearly age, and toughand unyielding in all his dealings". In Bjarnar saga we learn about Tordr Kolbenisson: "Tordr was not very popular, because he was reputed to be spiteful and malicious when he could get away with it." [примеры на полстраницы] On occasion the idea of a conflict is reinforced by contrasing the desirable qualities in the hero fo the saga to the undesirable qualities in the villain. In such cases the characteristics usually stressed are good nature, patience and popularity. Torsteins pattr again serves as a good illustration. It tells us that Torsteinn "... was a large, strong man and even-tempered..." so that the personal conflict that arises between him and Tordr ("a very overbearing man") is seen to grow out of a temperamental conflict or discrepancy. In Hensa-Toris saga the hero Blund-Ketill is described as "the most popular man in the district". [опять примеры] pp 7-8 Таким образом, мы наблюдаем, что уже в интродукции, манипулируя стандартными блоками характеристик, автор может задавать отношение к персонажам. Продолжение следует. ----- (*) Одна из основопологающих работ по вопросу. Упоминаемая сага о Торстейне Битом лежит здесь http://norse.narod.ru/texts/torsteinsst.html С уважением, Антрекот |
||
|
Заголовок: Re: Авторская позиция в Сагах об Исландцах Прислано пользователем Antrekot на 08/18/04 в 15:35:44 Дале по Андерссену: Из главы "Риторика саги". Главка "Эскалация" "Gunnarr's downfall [Сага о Гисли] illustrates an idea that seems to have lurked in the minds of several saga authors, the idea that success is fatal. Another telling example is Viga-Glums saga. Glumr provokes his enemies not only by being too consistenlt successful, but by pursuing his success in increasingly devious and unscrupulous manner. стр 39 Из главки "Сага о Храфнкеле, годи Фрейра" (сага лежит здесь http://norse.narod.ru/texts/hrafnkels.html) "Hrafnkels saga is the most obviously moralistic of the sagas. Many of them have more or less marginal or implicit moral preoccupations - Hensa-Toris saga, Grettis saga, Fostbroedra saga, Glums saga, Havardar saga Isfirdings - but in Hrafnkels saga, the moral of the story _is_ the story. the concept of defective character, usually used only to set a plot in motion, is elaborated and placed at the center of the action. The saga is conceived not as the outgrowth of Hrafnkell's personality, but as the history and reform of his personality; he is purged by the action. Hrafnkell's defeciveness is twofold, social and religious. Both aspects are exposed in the introduction, when his devotion to to the heathen god Freyr and his domineering behaviour as chieftain are described. At the end of the saga both faults are repaired; Hrafnkell learns of Freyfaxi's death and abandons hos allegiance to freyr and, in the wake of his fall from power, he becomes an exemplary chieftain. [...] Hrafnkell's social inadequacy provides a background for his fall and his religious error provides the immediate cause (*). It's his arrogance which leads him to place such as strict injunction on the use of Freyfaxi, an act which amounts to provocation of all those around him, and it is his intrasigeance which causes him to fulfil his vow to the letter and kill Einarr. His subsequent behaviour matches. He refuses to treat Torbjorn [отец Эйнара] as an equal, offering reparations only in terma of condescension, he ridicules the possibility of Samr's [кузен Эйнара] revenge, and apparently it never occurrs to him that Samr can follow up the judgement of the jury. His is pride compounded with false security and the fall is quick. But no sooner has he fallen than Samr emulates his immoderation and unconcern. He is immoderate in form of humiliation he choses to inflict on Hrafnkell and unguarded both in his failure to carry vengeance to its logical conclusion and in his failure to take precautions against retaliation. That prepares the way for another inversion of fortunes. But now Hrafnkell has learned his lesson; he is at once moderate in his revenge and moderate in the exercise of his authority once it has been restored. стр 282-283 (*) религиозная ошибка не в том, что Храфнкель верил во Фрейра, а в том, что зашел в почитании слишком далеко. (прим. Антрекот) Продолжение следует. С уважением, Антрекот |
||
|
Заголовок: Re: Авторская позиция в Сагах об Исландцах Прислано пользователем Antrekot на 08/23/04 в 20:10:14 Hermann Palsson. "Hrafnkel's saga and other icelandic stories" Penguin, 1977 "In the realistic sagas the characters are no longer the pawns of fate but their actions are seen as manifestations of their own free will. each individual is responsible for what he does and, within the limits circumscribed by his innate talents and such external factors as poverty andunfavourable social position, he is responsible for his own fate. What mattersmost is that people should use their freedom of choice fo the benefit of themselves and others, and a failure to do this can lead to a tragedy. The character who enjoys the greatest freedom of all in Hrafnkel's saga, the wealthy and talented Hrafnkel, misuses it in a number of ways to his own and others' detriment. His fatal mistake is that he deliberately curbs his freedom of action by swearing an oath to kill anyone who rides freyfaxi without his permision, so that in one particular contigency he must act in a certain predetermined way. Einar [убитый] is also a talented man, but his freedim of action is severely restricted by his poverty [...] no vacancy is left for him except to be Hrafnkel's shepherd and that particular job involves the forbidden horse. But it is finally left to Einar himself to take an irrevocable step that leads to his death. He misuses his freedom of choice when he yields to temptation and rides Freyfaxi. The shepherd's tragedy is inspired by the sory of the Fall in Genesis which in medieval times was used to exemplify moral problems connected with the freedom of the will, temptation and disobedience. As in the Biblical model, the tempted is warned on the pain of death not to touch the forbidden thing, but apart from that he is given a wide choice:
In Hrafnkel's saga death threat is interpreted literally, and the shepherd's master carries it out without any hesitation, it seems. But the shepherd's trasgression in no way exculpates Hrafnkel from the guilt of murder, as he himself has created the situation by swearing the fatal oath, and afterwards it was within his power to violate that oath and spare Einar's life." pp 17-19 Прошу читателей обратить внимание на цитату из Библии. Это еще один непрямой способ высказывания авторской оценки, совершенно очевидный для средневековой аудитории. Продолжение следует. С уважением, Антрекот |
||
|
Удел Могултая YaBB © 2000-2001, Xnull. All Rights Reserved. |