Vilhelm Ekelund och den fransk-italienska kultursfären : Några nedslag i de tidiga prosaverken - från Antikt ideal (1909) till Attiskt i fågelperspektiv (1919)

Vilhelm Ekelund och den fransk-italienska kultursfären: Några nedslag i de tidiga prosaverken – från Antikt ideal (1909) till Attiskt i fågelperspektiv (1919). (Vilhelm Ekelund and the French and Italian cultural heritage: A study of his early prose – from Antikt ideal (1909) to Attiskt i fågelperspektiv (1919)). The Swedish poet, essayist and aphorist Vilhelm Ekelund was not only influenced by German literature and philosophy, he also wrote extensive literary criticism on the subject of Romance language authors. This article discusses Ekelund’s relationship to some of the most influential French and Italian writers – as it can be seen in his work during the period 1909-1919. This relationship was ambiguous: he paid homage to French authors such as Montaigne, Montesquieu, Stendhal and Comte – as well as to the Italian poet and philosopher Leopardi – but he also severely criticized such distinguished writers as Baudelaire, Rousseau and Maupassant. One conclusion of this article is that the authors praised by Ekelund all venerate the Greek and Roman cultural heritage, whereas the despised novelists and poets were, in his opinion, either too “modern” or too “feminine” – both highly pejorative adjectives in the author’s terminology. It is also noted that Ekelund’s most ferocious attacks date from the first part of the decade, before he entered a more harmonic period with the works Metron (1918) and Attiskt i fågelperspektiv (1919).

The Family Novel in the Emerging Nation-State: A Comparative Study of Ba Jin’s Jia and Lev Tolstoy’s Anna Karenina

The theme of family in literature and in popular discourse occurs at times when the family as an institution is under attack. Attacks against the family coupled with defence of the family are viewed as the barometer of people’s satisfaction with the society in which they live. This outpouring of emotion, whether it is in defence of or attacking the family, is the result of the family’s position on the bridge between nature and society – a fortunate (or a detrimental) link between an individual and the units that make up a society. Across the United States and much of the western world, the battle for gay marriage and inclusive civil unions has revealed the fissures in our collective moral view of the family. The conservative concern about the absence of ‘family values’ is magnified by our situation in a world of flux. Inflation, war, terrorist threats, and the depletion of natural resources are but a few examples. When so much is unknown, how do we position ourselves? What anchors us to the past, gives us comfort in the present, and supports us in the future if not the family? Alternatively, what coddles us more in the past, shackles us more to the present, and lulls us more into a fixed conception of the future than the family? My research is not a sociological survey into the family nor does it stake any claims to understanding the present state of the family in society. The study seeks, however, to shed light on the rhetorical uses of the family by analysing two novels that are inextricably concerned with the theory of the family in times of heightened social change. In particular, my research focuses upon the social role and political meaning of the family in Anna Karenina and Jia.