![]() Yet, when the magnifying glass is pointed at Virginia Woolf, and in particular at her non-fiction (the literary space in which she is allowed to reflect more freely on literature), we immediately recognize that, in her opinion, an artist is never entirely allowed to step out of his/her creation. And many other examples might be added to this nuclear catalogue. ![]() Eliot envisioned a “continuous extinction of personality” Ezra Pound had his personae and “absolute rhythm” Joyce himself purported that “The artist remains within or beyond or above his handiwork, invisible, indifferent, paring his fingernails”. A category in particular, that of impersonality, might appear as the most universally applicable: T. ![]() As a matter of fact, having been constructed and negotiated by the most heterogeneous literary personalities of world culture, it is highly predictable that many of its ‘canonical’ features might substantially vary according to the author analysed. Modernism is far from being a monolithically conceivable theoretical entity, as its various popularisations and canonizations may lead us to think.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |