K RYBOVĚ KRITICE KARLA KOLČAVY SJ A JEHO ZNALOSTÍ TEORIE DRAMATU
The only comprehensive study inquiring into the life and work of the Jesuit dramatist and teacher Carolus Kolczawa (1656-1717) was written by Bohumil Ryba and published in 1926 under the title Literární činnost Karla Kolčavy ["Writings of Carolus Kolczawa"]. Ryba's overall evaluation...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Listy filologické 2017-01, Vol.140 (3/4), p.429-447 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | cze |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 447 |
---|---|
container_issue | 3/4 |
container_start_page | 429 |
container_title | Listy filologické |
container_volume | 140 |
creator | FÖRSTER, JOSEF |
description | The only comprehensive study inquiring into the life and work of the Jesuit dramatist and teacher Carolus Kolczawa (1656-1717) was written by Bohumil Ryba and published in 1926 under the title Literární činnost Karla Kolčavy ["Writings of Carolus Kolczawa"]. Ryba's overall evaluation of Kolczawa's work was negative, because he shared the traditional contempt of the Enlightenment for baroque literature, measuring it by classical and classicist standards. The present article challenges Ryba's disparaging assessment of Kolczawa's remarks pertaining to the theory of drama, especially his paraphrases of the Aristotelian definition of the tragic hero. Ryba did not take into account the development of the theory of drama and theatre practice from the 16th to the 18th centuries when the Aristotelian concept of άμαρτία – error underwent revisions, and theorists defended the view that pious and innocent martyrs could be protagonists of a tragedy. When criticising Kolczawa, Ryba referred to theoretical writings of the Italian Jesuit Alexander Donatus, but he knew them only indirectly and did not notice that Donatus, in fact, shared the same views as Kolczawa. |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_jstor_primary_44841062</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>44841062</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>44841062</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-jstor_primary_448410623</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpjYeA0MDAy0TUxMTXnYOAqLs4yMDAzNDMw52Rw9lYIinTyDzsyS8E7yDPE09lVwdsxyMdRwdvf50iPY1ikQrCXgqOCl6uHv0KUn6OPf3DI4V6FEFf_IE9XBZcgR1_HkFAeBta0xJziVF4ozc0g6-Ya4uyhm1Vckl8UX1CUmZtYVBlvYmJhYmhgZmRMSB4AxdYwkg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Publisher</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>K RYBOVĚ KRITICE KARLA KOLČAVY SJ A JEHO ZNALOSTÍ TEORIE DRAMATU</title><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><creator>FÖRSTER, JOSEF</creator><creatorcontrib>FÖRSTER, JOSEF</creatorcontrib><description>The only comprehensive study inquiring into the life and work of the Jesuit dramatist and teacher Carolus Kolczawa (1656-1717) was written by Bohumil Ryba and published in 1926 under the title Literární činnost Karla Kolčavy ["Writings of Carolus Kolczawa"]. Ryba's overall evaluation of Kolczawa's work was negative, because he shared the traditional contempt of the Enlightenment for baroque literature, measuring it by classical and classicist standards. The present article challenges Ryba's disparaging assessment of Kolczawa's remarks pertaining to the theory of drama, especially his paraphrases of the Aristotelian definition of the tragic hero. Ryba did not take into account the development of the theory of drama and theatre practice from the 16th to the 18th centuries when the Aristotelian concept of άμαρτία – error underwent revisions, and theorists defended the view that pious and innocent martyrs could be protagonists of a tragedy. When criticising Kolczawa, Ryba referred to theoretical writings of the Italian Jesuit Alexander Donatus, but he knew them only indirectly and did not notice that Donatus, in fact, shared the same views as Kolczawa.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0024-4457</identifier><language>cze</language><publisher>Centre for Classical Studies of the Czech Academy of Sciences in Prague</publisher><ispartof>Listy filologické, 2017-01, Vol.140 (3/4), p.429-447</ispartof><rights>Centre for Classical Studies of the Czech Academy of Sciences 2017</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/44841062$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/44841062$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,799,57992,58225</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>FÖRSTER, JOSEF</creatorcontrib><title>K RYBOVĚ KRITICE KARLA KOLČAVY SJ A JEHO ZNALOSTÍ TEORIE DRAMATU</title><title>Listy filologické</title><description>The only comprehensive study inquiring into the life and work of the Jesuit dramatist and teacher Carolus Kolczawa (1656-1717) was written by Bohumil Ryba and published in 1926 under the title Literární činnost Karla Kolčavy ["Writings of Carolus Kolczawa"]. Ryba's overall evaluation of Kolczawa's work was negative, because he shared the traditional contempt of the Enlightenment for baroque literature, measuring it by classical and classicist standards. The present article challenges Ryba's disparaging assessment of Kolczawa's remarks pertaining to the theory of drama, especially his paraphrases of the Aristotelian definition of the tragic hero. Ryba did not take into account the development of the theory of drama and theatre practice from the 16th to the 18th centuries when the Aristotelian concept of άμαρτία – error underwent revisions, and theorists defended the view that pious and innocent martyrs could be protagonists of a tragedy. When criticising Kolczawa, Ryba referred to theoretical writings of the Italian Jesuit Alexander Donatus, but he knew them only indirectly and did not notice that Donatus, in fact, shared the same views as Kolczawa.</description><issn>0024-4457</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid/><recordid>eNpjYeA0MDAy0TUxMTXnYOAqLs4yMDAzNDMw52Rw9lYIinTyDzsyS8E7yDPE09lVwdsxyMdRwdvf50iPY1ikQrCXgqOCl6uHv0KUn6OPf3DI4V6FEFf_IE9XBZcgR1_HkFAeBta0xJziVF4ozc0g6-Ya4uyhm1Vckl8UX1CUmZtYVBlvYmJhYmhgZmRMSB4AxdYwkg</recordid><startdate>20170101</startdate><enddate>20170101</enddate><creator>FÖRSTER, JOSEF</creator><general>Centre for Classical Studies of the Czech Academy of Sciences in Prague</general><scope/></search><sort><creationdate>20170101</creationdate><title>K RYBOVĚ KRITICE KARLA KOLČAVY SJ A JEHO ZNALOSTÍ TEORIE DRAMATU</title><author>FÖRSTER, JOSEF</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-jstor_primary_448410623</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>cze</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>FÖRSTER, JOSEF</creatorcontrib><jtitle>Listy filologické</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>FÖRSTER, JOSEF</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>K RYBOVĚ KRITICE KARLA KOLČAVY SJ A JEHO ZNALOSTÍ TEORIE DRAMATU</atitle><jtitle>Listy filologické</jtitle><date>2017-01-01</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>140</volume><issue>3/4</issue><spage>429</spage><epage>447</epage><pages>429-447</pages><issn>0024-4457</issn><abstract>The only comprehensive study inquiring into the life and work of the Jesuit dramatist and teacher Carolus Kolczawa (1656-1717) was written by Bohumil Ryba and published in 1926 under the title Literární činnost Karla Kolčavy ["Writings of Carolus Kolczawa"]. Ryba's overall evaluation of Kolczawa's work was negative, because he shared the traditional contempt of the Enlightenment for baroque literature, measuring it by classical and classicist standards. The present article challenges Ryba's disparaging assessment of Kolczawa's remarks pertaining to the theory of drama, especially his paraphrases of the Aristotelian definition of the tragic hero. Ryba did not take into account the development of the theory of drama and theatre practice from the 16th to the 18th centuries when the Aristotelian concept of άμαρτία – error underwent revisions, and theorists defended the view that pious and innocent martyrs could be protagonists of a tragedy. When criticising Kolczawa, Ryba referred to theoretical writings of the Italian Jesuit Alexander Donatus, but he knew them only indirectly and did not notice that Donatus, in fact, shared the same views as Kolczawa.</abstract><pub>Centre for Classical Studies of the Czech Academy of Sciences in Prague</pub></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0024-4457 |
ispartof | Listy filologické, 2017-01, Vol.140 (3/4), p.429-447 |
issn | 0024-4457 |
language | cze |
recordid | cdi_jstor_primary_44841062 |
source | Jstor Complete Legacy |
title | K RYBOVĚ KRITICE KARLA KOLČAVY SJ A JEHO ZNALOSTÍ TEORIE DRAMATU |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-02T17%3A37%3A45IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=K%20RYBOV%C4%9A%20KRITICE%20KARLA%20KOL%C4%8CAVY%20SJ%20A%20JEHO%20ZNALOST%C3%8D%20TEORIE%20DRAMATU&rft.jtitle=Listy%20filologick%C3%A9&rft.au=F%C3%96RSTER,%20JOSEF&rft.date=2017-01-01&rft.volume=140&rft.issue=3/4&rft.spage=429&rft.epage=447&rft.pages=429-447&rft.issn=0024-4457&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cjstor%3E44841062%3C/jstor%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=44841062&rfr_iscdi=true |