594 KB33 KB197820252017Gvozden, Vladimirštevilka:2letnik:40str. 79-90ISSN:0351-1189COBISSID_HOST:64752226URN:URN:NBN:SI:doc-B9ZRY3TPenSlovensko društvo za primerjalno književnostPrimerjalna književnostaesthetic experienceestetsko izkustvoethics and aestheticsetika in estetikafreedomliterarni kanonliterarno vrednotenjeliterary canonliterary evaluationliteratura in etikaliterature and ethicsmetapoliticsmetapolitikamodernaModerna TherapeuticsmodernitysubjectivitysubjektivnostsvobodaWhat makes a good book?| bonae literae in twenty-first century|The first part of the article analyses the term bonae literae that leads us to the core of the problem of good book before the period of aesthetic separation that occurs at the end of the eighteenth century. Its second part attempts to demonstrate that even in the case of fragmented literary canon we often repeat the same "elitist" operation of power we criticize. Long before the emergence of modern literary studies organized through university departments and research institutes, properties of the good book were related to the evaluation of its rhetorical qualities, its dependence on poetic tradition and, above all, on its moral qualities. In twenty-first century there is no single criterion by which we can assess whether a book is good or not either in terms of its aesthetic or ethical properties. Thus, it seems that the answer to the question of good book would be as simple as it is paradoxical: there are good books and good books, old and new, classical and modern, good foreign and good domestic books, mostly written by great novelists and only few by great poets. In fact, the answer to the question of good book is problematic because it is difficult to find the clip that connects individual experience of the text and experience in general. Of course, the result is not disappearance of the concept of goodness (it still has certain content) but rather its vagueness. Therefore, caution is always needed in any generalizations, regardless of whether we generalize culturally or multiculturally. However, it appears that there still exists a small, almost invisible residuum of Erasmus%s view of bonae literae in the fragmented contemporary literary canon: belief in the idea that literature has a value in itselfPrvi del članka podaja analizo pojma bonae literae, ki nas povede v srž problema dobre knjige pred časom estetske separacije, ki se pojavi ob koncu 18. stoletja. Drugi del poskuša prikazati, da celo v primeru fragmentiranega literarnega kanona pogosto ponavljamo "elitistično" operacijo moči, ki jo kritiziramo. Dolgo pred nastankom sodobne literarne vede, ki je organizirana v univerzitetnih oddelkih in raziskovalnih inštitutih, so se lastnosti dobre knjige nanašale na vrednotenje njenih retoričnih kvalitet, navezav na poetično tradicijo in predvsem na moralne odlike. V 21. stoletju ni enotnega kriterija, po katerem bi lahko presojali, ali je knjiga dobra ali ne, niti v estetskem niti v etičnem smislu. Tako se zdi, da bi odgovor na vprašanje dobre knjige lahko bil tako preprost kakor tudi protisloven: obstajajo dobre knjige in dobre knjige, stare in nove, klasične in moderne, dobre domače in dobre tuje knjige, ki so jih večino napisali veliki romanopisci in manjšino veliki pesniki. Odgovor na vprašanje dobre knjige je problematičen, ker je težko odkriti, kaj povezuje individualno izkušnjo z besedilom in izkušnje nasploh. Seveda rezultat ni izginotje koncepta dobre knjige (še vedno ima nek pomen), temveč predvsem njegova nedoločenost. Zato je vedno potrebna previdnost pri generalizacijah, ne oziraje se na to, ali generaliziramo kulturno ali multikulturno. Zdi se, da še vedno obstaja majhen, skoraj neviden ostanek Erazmovega pojmovanja bonae literae v sodobnem fragmentiranem literarnem kanonu: verjetje v idejo, da ima literatura vrednost sama po sebiTEXTznanstveno časopisjejournalsSlovenian National E-content AggregatorNational and University Library of SloveniaSlovensko društvo za primerjalno književnost