Проблемы стиля зрелых рассказов Кэтрин Мэнсфилд и ее взгляды на литературное мастерство : на английском языке

• Автор: Янсон, М. М.
• Шифр специальности: 10.00.00
• Научная степень: Кандидатская
• Год защиты: 1966
• Место защиты: Рига
• Количество страниц: 314 с.

Латвийский Государственный Университет им. Петра Стучки
М.М. Я н с о н
ПРОБЛЕМЫ СТИЛЯ ЗРЕЛЫХ РАССКАЗОВ КЭТРИН МЭНСФЙ'ЛД И ЕЕ ВЗГЛЯДЫ НА ЛИТЕРАТУРНОЕ МАСТЕРСТВО /на английском языке
Диссертация на соискание ученой степени кандидата филологических наук.
Рига 1966
Table of Content«
Page
1. A. brief eurvey of Mansfield criticism
2. Katherine Mansfield’s views on literary craftsmanship a« expressed in her critical reviews and private papers
3. Specific features of Katherine Mansfield's style
in her critical reviews
4. The general structural design of Katherine Mansfield's stories
5. Katherine Mansfield's use of expressive detail
6. The role of "daydream" and "flashback" in the structure of the stories
7. "Point of view" as a narrative device and its use
in Katherine Mansfield's stories
8. Some characteristic features of Katherine Mansfield's language
9. Katherine Mansfield's creative imagery
10. The implied author in Katherine Mansfield's stories
11. The range of Katherine Mansfield's artistic vision
as encompassed in her stories
12. Bibliography
A BRIEF SURVEY OF MANSFIELD CRITICISM

became tantamount to pornography.
True, in 1919 the vast potentialities of Freudian ideas as salacious fictional subject-matter had not yet been recognized. The flood of pornography these released was to reach high-water mark some years later. But even the milder and less sensational aspects of psychoanalysis were enough of a novelty to be used as literary bait.
Just at this time K.M. took an unequivocal stand against the application of psychoanalysis to literature. In all probability she did not see in it an outgrowth of reactionary ideology, though she realized its pernicious effect on literature. Her objections were therefore based on purely aesthetical considerations. This made her criticism of psychoanalytical novels somewhat superficial and less effective1 than might have been, if she had recognized the debasement of humanity Freudian ideas implied. Still, it remains to K.M.'s credit that she consistently repudiated the Freudian approach to literature.
Thus, reviewing a book by May Sinclair, K.M. deplores the fact that the author "has allowed her love of writing to suffer the eclipse of psycho-analysis" (p,285) : and in another review she declares:
If there is a character in modern English fiction whom we wish with all our heart the boojum would call for, it is the man or woman who from childhood up has suffered from what our psycho-analytical skimmings have taught us to call the sex-complex, (p.71)
In her letters, too, K.M. makes her attitude quite clear.
In October 1920 she wrote to her husband:
1) See p,82 fbelow.