Senosios lietuvių literatūros kanono klausimu

LTStraipsnio objektą sudaro svarstymai apie senosios literatūros istoriją, pagrįstą atnaujintu senosios raštijos kanonu. Keičiantis požiūriui į senosios Lietuvos raštiją: pripažįstant jos įvairialypį – keliakalbį, daugiažanrį, keliareligį pobūdį, tenka iš naujo formuluoti tos raštijos kanoną. Jį siūloma pildyti ankstesnėms epochoms būdingais žanrais ir rūšimis, o autorius ir kūrinius kanoniniais pripažinti, atsižvelgiant į jų poveikį visuomenės literatūrinių lūkesčių horizontui ir paisant jų originalumo.

ENThe article discusses theoretical aspects of literary canon and a possible image of the ancient Lithuanian literature, formed according to the principles established in the works by Harold Bloom and other literary theorists. The author argues that the canon list of authors of the ancient Lithuanian literature compiled in earlier studies of the history of Lithuanian literature (Jurgis Lebedys, 1977; Albinas Jovaišas and Eugenija Ulčinaitė, 2003) is significant but incomplete; it could be enlarged by the authors of some important works of literature who were not properly discussed in the above-mentioned studies. As the viewpoint on the ancient Lithuanian literature is changing, renouncing the Lithuanocentric attitude and acknowledging the diverse - multilingual, multigenre, multiconfessional - character of the ancient Lithuanian literature, it becomes possible to introduce corrections to the existing canon. The author proposes to supplement the canon with genres characteristic for earlier periods, and to recognize authors and their creations as canonic not because of a language, a literature genre or a religion, but due to their originality and their impact on the society's literary expectations. The article sets forth specific proposals as to supplementing the canon of the ancient Lithuanian literature.