Digital resources in the Social Sciences and Humanities OpenEdition Our platforms OpenEdition Books OpenEdition Journals Hypotheses Calenda Libraries OpenEdition Freemium Follow us

„Ich war ja nicht krank – ich war nur krank, aber ganz anders“. Ingeborg Bachmanns (Patho?-)Texte

Aufsatz von Marlen Mairhofer

Abstract

This article examines the ongoing literary construction of Ingeborg Bachmann as a ‘sick poet’ and then asks whether – or how – her texts can be read as patho-texts without focusing on the author’s biography. In posthumously published texts („Male Oscuro“) Bachmann attempts to rewrite the narrative of the sick woman by claiming her symptoms as an individual expression of artistic value. In Malina, the relationships between the protagonists are negotiated in metaphors of infection, the mode of viral transmission thus becoming an essential motivic and narrative principle. To illustrate the intricate entanglement of body politics, subjectivity, and power of definition, this essay refers to the philosopher Paul B. Preciado. His theory of the “pharmapornographic regime” describes the development of a pharmaceutical-pornographic apparatus of control that no longer acts only from the outside, but from within the individual’s body.

Über die Autorin: Marlen Mairhofer, Universität Salzburg

Editorial Review

Rechte: CC-BY 4.0 

Empfohlene Zitierweise: Marlen Mairhofer: „Ich war ja nicht krank – ich war nur krank, aber ganz anders“: Ingeborg Bachmanns (Patho?-)Texte, in: Kunst und Gebrechen, hg. v. Hildegard Fraueneder, Manfred Kern und Nora Grundtner, Wien: Sonderzahl 2024 (Figurationen des Übergangs 1), S. 175-189, DOI: 10.25598/transitionen-2024-i_6, <https://transition.hypotheses.org/4763>

Buckel, Blutsturz und das tägliche Befinden. Widerständige Körperlichkeit im Zeitalter der Autonomie (Lichtenberg, Schiller, Stifter)

Aufsatz von Daniel Ehrmann

Abstract

Vitality is a main aspect of literature since the 18th century. The new conception of literature as art, that was developed around 1770, also changed the notion of the poet, who act as a ‘second maker’ and creates works of art as an effigy of himself. Not all and even some of the most famous authors between 1750 and 1850 fit this very influential depiction. The paper presents reasons for that in the historical context and explores some of the consequences. It lays out the frictions between the notion of autonomous production and the actual limitations imposed on it by the bodies that have to execute it.

Über den Autor: Daniel Ehrmann, Universität Wien

Editorial review

Rechte: CC-BY 4.0 

Empfohlene Zitierweise: Daniel Ehrmann: „Buckel, Blutsturz und das tägliche Befinden. Widerständige Körperlichkeit im Zeitalter der Autonomie (Lichtenberg, Schiller, Stifter)“, in: Kunst und Gebrechen, hg. v. Hildegard Fraueneder, Manfred Kern und Nora Grundtner, Wien: Sonderzahl 2024 (Figurationen des Übergangs 1), S. 41-73, DOI: 10.25598/transitionen-2024-i_3, <https://transition.hypotheses.org/4696>