Literární doupě bylo modernizováno a přechází pod novou doménu literdo.com!.
Nový web LD vám přínáší ještě více knih s možností výhodného stahování většího množství e-knih podle vlastního výběru (tedy nejen jednotlivých knih nebo balíčků podle autorů) ve formátech ePub , PDF a MOBI.
!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN"
The position of the writer in an age of State control is a subject that has already been fairly largely discussed, although most of the evidence that might be relevant is not yet available. In this place I do not want to express an opinion either for or against State patronage of the arts, but merely to point out that WHAT KIND of State rules over us must depend partly on the prevailing intellectual atmosphere: meaning, in this context, partly on the attitude of writers and artists themselves, and on their willingness or otherwise to keep the spirit of liberalism alive. If we find ourselves in ten years’ time cringing before somebody like Zhdanov, it will probably be because that is what we have deserved. Obviously there are strong tendencies towards totalitarianism at work within the English literary intelligentsia already. But here I am not concerned with any organised and conscious movement such as Communism, but merely with the effect, on people of goodwill, of political thinking and the need to take sides politically.
This is a political age. War, Fascism, concentration camps,
rubber truncheons, atomic bombs, etc are what we daily think about,
and therefore to a great extent what we write about, even when we
do not name them openly. We cannot help this. When you are on a
sinking ship, your thoughts will be about sinking ships. But not
only is our subject-matter narrowed, but our whole attitude towards
literature is coloured by loyalties which we at least
intermittently realise to be non-literary. I often have the feeling
that even at the best of times literary criticism is fraudulent,
since in the absence of any accepted standards whatever—any
EXTERNAL reference which can give meaning to the statement that
such and such a book is “good” or
“bad”—every literary judgement consists in
trumping up a set of rules to justify an instinctive preference.
One’s real reaction to a book, when one has a reaction at
all, is usually “I like this book” or “I
don’t like it”, and what follows is a rationalisation.
But “I like this book” is not, I think, a non-literary
reaction; the non-literary reaction is “This book is on my
side, and therefore I must discover merits in it”. Of course,
when one praises a book for political reasons one may be
emotionally sincere, in the sense that one does feel strong
approval of it, but also it often happens that party solidarity
demands a plain lie. Anyone used to reviewing books for political
periodicals is well aware of this. In general, if you are writing
for a paper that you are in agreement with, you sin by commission,
and if for a paper of the opposite stamp, by omission. At any rate,
innumerable controversial books-books for or against Soviet (...)
(......)
© Literární doupě
on-line knihovna, zdroj pro čtenářský deník, referáty, seminárky z češtiny, přípravu na maturitu a povinnou četbu;
knihy zdarma (free e-books) v epub a pdf, recenze, ukázky, citáty, životopisy, knihy pro Kindle a další čtečky