z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Schulz niesceniczny?
Author(s) -
Balbina Hoppe
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
schulz forum
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
eISSN - 2450-1778
pISSN - 2300-5823
DOI - 10.26881/sf.2019.13.07
Subject(s) - anachronism , sign (mathematics) , literature , aesthetics , art , history , law , politics , political science , mathematical analysis , mathematics
Many theater reviewers consider Cinnamon Shops and the Sanatorium under the Sign of the Hourglass to be unspecific, impossible to translate into the language of the theater. Paradoxically, Schulz's theater reception is still growing, new performances, happenings and performances are created. The question arises whether today, in the era of post-dramatic theater, there is still a category such as “indecency” or should literary works be divided into those that can be shown in the theater and those that are not suitable for it. The article confronts the embarrassing concept of “indecency” on the example of Bruno Schulz's prose. It juxtaposes the harmful voices of critics with the rich theatrical reception of his work. It is an attempt to cleanse Schulz's work of accusations of indecency as a category now obsolete, anachronistic.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here