Denna uppsats visar hur representationen av dekadent maskulinitet i svensk dekadenslitteratur från tiden strax innan sekelskiftet 1900 konstruerades. Genom att se till de tre författarna Ola Hansson (1860-1925), Emil Kléen (1868-1898) och Axel Wallengren (1865-1896) visas hur den dekadente mannen – dekadenten – skapas som karaktär och litterär figur. Dekadenten var, menar denna undersökning, extremt bunden av rum, socialitet och kropp, och kunde endast agera inom mycket snäva ramar skapade av dessa kulturella kategorier. Vad som framträder är närmast en schablon enligt vilken dekadensförfattarna arbetade, och rum, umgängesformer och kroppsligheter är så gott som utbytbara från verk till verk och författarskap till författarskap. I likhet med tidigare forskning på ämnet styrker denna uppsats bilden av den dekadenta maskuliniteten som en nervös och förment feminiserad maskulinitet, men vill till detta även tillföra att den, i egenskap av en motmaskulinitet i opposition mot den normativt borgerliga maskuliniteten, även var kapabel att erbjuda fysiskt motstånd.

Den här är en läromedelsanalys som studerar hur lyrik framställs och presenteras i tre läromedelsserier. Det perspektiv som används för att studera representationen av manligt och kvinnligt är ett genusperspektiv som utgår från Judith Butlers teorier om genus och kön. Den metod som används i studien är både kvantitativ och kvalitativ textanalys och utgår från tre olika faser. Den kvantitativa analysen används för att se förekomsten av manliga och kvinnliga lyriker medan den kvalitativa analysen används för att studera hur lyriken framställs. Det material som används i studien är läroböcker från läromedelsserierna svenska impulser, Svenska helt enkelt samt Formativ svenska. I dessa serier ingår tre böcker vardera. Det vi undersöker i materialet är hur kvinnliga respektive manliga lyriker framställs, hur mycket plats lyrikgenren får ta i läroböckerna samt hur det presenterade materialet svarar mot det centrala innehållet för kurserna svenska 1, 2 och 3 i gymnasieskolan. Resultatet visar att det manliga lyrikerna är överrepresenterade vad gäller representationen av lyriker i läroböckerna. Detta visas i den kvantitativa analysen där vi räknar hur många gånger män respektive kvinnor nämns i läroböckerna. Läroböckerna visar att det förekommer lyrik men att det sker på olika sätt och i olika utsträckning beroende på vilken läromedelsserie det är samt vilka författarna till läroböckerna är. Slutsatsen som kan dras utifrån den här studien är att läroböckerna som studeras har goda möjligheter att användas i (lyrik-)undervisningen. En annan slutsats som kan dras av studiens resultat är att kvinnor och män blir representerade i olika utsträckning. Män nämns fler gånger och får mer utrymme i läroböckerna än vad kvinnorna får. Detta ser vi både genom den kvantitativa och den kvalitativa analysen.

In the Anthropocene, a new approach towards nature in poetry is emerging. This change is closely related to ecocritical theory, which is a reevaluation of the human view on, and representation of, nature. It moves away from a more traditional anthropocentric perspective to a more critical one. This can for instance be in the spirit of Arne Naess or Timothy Morton, the two main theorists used in this essay. This essay is an ecocritical close reading of two Swedish contemporary poems on nature: “När jag går i skymningsmörkret” by Ingela Strandberg (from Att snara en fågel, 2018) and “(Strandförskjutningar)” by Gunnar D Hansson (from Tapeshavet, 2017). The focus of the reading is on the representation of wild, untouched nature. The formulated questions in the essay concern how untouched nature is represented in the poems, the human relationship towards it and how the differences and similarities between the two poems relate to and transform romantic representations of nature.  The conclusion is that these two very different poems exemplify the range of contemporary Swedish nature poetry. Strandberg’s poem is leaning towards a romantic or ecosofist representation of nature, whilst Hansson’s is more clear-cut ecocritical in line with Morton’s dark ecology.

Bengt Lidforss (1868–1913) was professor of botany between 1910 and 1913. But after the turn of the century he also emerged as a charismatic leader within the Swedish working-class movement. He became one of its foremost publicists. In the social democratic newspaper Arbetet in Malmö he wrote about natural sciences but also about political, philosophical and literary issues. As a literary critic Lidforss was the keenest protector of the Scanian literary school, and his struggle for Ola Hansson and Vilhelm Ekelund has made its mark in Swedish literary history, as have his contributions in favour of Gustaf Fröding and August Strindberg, culminating in the polemic articles during the Strindberg Feud (1910–11). Skönhetsdyrkare och socialdemokrat. Studier i Bengt Lidforss litteraturkritiska gärning (Worshipper of Beauty And Social Democrat. Studies in Bengt Lidforss’ Achievement As A Literary Critic) emphasises the paradoxic combination of Lidforss’ fundamentally socialist views and a strong belief in art. To him art was not isolated from society but quite the contrary; a significant factor in the changing of society. The new socialistic human being should be ennobled by arts instead of emasculated by religion. With the help of Pierre Bourdieu’s concept of “field”, it is shown how Lidforss, by attacking leading middle-class newspapers and publicists, created for himself and Arbetet a constantly stronger position within the field of journalism. Within the field of literary criticism he attacked the middle-class critics, and thus participated in associating Strindberg and Fröding as well as the young Scanian writers with the working-class movement. Lidforss’ literary taste was seen as an alternative to middle-class taste and the worshipping of beauty thereby became fashionable among socialists. The fact that one finds sympathies not only for symbolism but also for decadent descriptions with Lidforss the socialist, has to do with the fact that the descriptions of the discomfort of the heroes revealed the disadvantages of the capitalist society. Nevertheless Lidforss’ issued warnings against programmatic pessimism, since he was of the opinion that literature should strengthen people in their struggle. When it came to the plight of the human being under capitalism he was a pessimist, but he believed the stronger in a future socialist society. The terms for the artists would be more tolerable in such a society, he prophesied. He admitted that revolutionary poetry could be useful but was of the opinion that the quality of art would lessen if it consciously served politics. The revolutionary poetry he praised in his reviews was poetry he found genuine and coming from the heart. He did not favour pronounced tendencies, but he liked to use poetry in a political context. / Bengt Lidforss (1868–1913) var botaniker, men också publicist och socialist. Skandalomsusad och färgstark har han porträtterats av ett stort antal skönlitterära författare, allt ifrån August Strindberg till Inger Alfvén. Hans mångsidiga medarbetarskap i Arbetet hjälpte tidningen fram till en uppmärksammad position. I denna bok skildras hans kamp för en ledande position också inom det litterära fältet. Lidforss var en skönhetsdyrkare av stora mått men samtidigt socialdemokrat. Detta ledde till att han stred på många kulturella arenor – inte bara mot kritiker, författare, och Svenska Akademien, utan också mot inflytelserika män inom kyrka och politik. Skönhetsdyrkare och socialdemokrat ger oss oväntade svar på vad dessa bataljer handlade om och vi får möta Lidforss samtida giganter som Fredrik Böök, Vilhelm Ekelund, Albert Engström, Verner von Heidenstam, Oscar Levertin, August Strindberg med flera.

<p>The dissertation describes a crucial step in the development of a modern writer's identity in Sweden. It applies the French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu’s theories of the autonomous ”literary field” to the development in eighteen-eighties, one of the most important periods in Swedish literary history.</p><p>During this decade a large group of authors appeared, with August Strindberg in the front. In accordance with the dominating esthetical view of the nineteenth century, ”ideal realism”, the writers had an ethical responsibility. But they differed from their predecessors by not being loyal to the bourgeois society and its values, as codified in the concept of ”decency”, that contained, among other things, rules for what could be said in public. On the contrary, the new generation of authors attacked the bourgeoisie in novels, dramas and articles, especially in the singularly most controversial area, the regulation of sexuality and the ideals of bourgeois women.</p><p>This study argues that the new authors in their radical criticism aimed at the position of power in society traditionally upheld by the State church, which supervised education and ethical values. They did this by creating a role for themselves as young and oppressed, something that made it possible to deny any responsibility for the present state and furthermore to speak up, despite their own bourgeois background, for other oppressed groups like the working classes, the poor and women. But this also meant that they could not be successful in their ambitions to gain influence without loosing their identity. This was especially the consequence of the fact that an autonomous ”literary field” did not yet exist. That is, there were no internal literary institutions that, seemingly independent of the rest of society, decided what was ”good literature.” Instead, the singularly most important judge of interesting literature was the bourgeois public. Strindberg seems to have realised this early, and achieved an identity as ”uncontrolled”. He thereby lost his intellectual credibility, but gained a much bigger freedom to write and also got the attention of the large audience. At the same time, his writing undermined the values of decency by breaking the bourgeois society’s fundamental wall between the private and the public sphere, not least by writing what was regarded as facts about his own private life. </p><p>The conservative reaction accelerated towards the end of the decade while the authors grew more and more bitter about the public’s lack of understanding. At this point the author Verner von Heidenstam took the opportunity to declare a new literary era, dissociating his aesthetics from the one of the Eighties and proclaiming the necessity of an aristocratic, ethically indifferent literature (with himself as its leader). </p><p>Confronted with the new concept of what ought to be regarded as “modern”, the established male authors were generally quick to separate themselves from the female authors, and to identify the attacked literature solely with the one that critically discussed the situation of women in society - a description that has been largely adopted in the history of literature. A number of male authors also wrote novels separating themselves from the Eighties. Thus, they could continue into the new period, while female authors in general were silenced or forced to write in less esteemed genres (”popular literature”, children’s books). </p><p>Ultimately the result was a more distinct male domination coupled with a growing contempt for the large audience. This, in turn, created a need for internal institutions that could interpret, value and support literature - scholarships, elitist critics, and a writers’ union. These institutions subsequently were founded or developed during the nineties – all of them steps towards autonomy.</p>

The dissertation describes a crucial step in the development of a modern writer's identity in Sweden. It applies the French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu’s theories of the autonomous ”literary field” to the development in eighteen-eighties, one of the most important periods in Swedish literary history. During this decade a large group of authors appeared, with August Strindberg in the front. In accordance with the dominating esthetical view of the nineteenth century, ”ideal realism”, the writers had an ethical responsibility. But they differed from their predecessors by not being loyal to the bourgeois society and its values, as codified in the concept of ”decency”, that contained, among other things, rules for what could be said in public. On the contrary, the new generation of authors attacked the bourgeoisie in novels, dramas and articles, especially in the singularly most controversial area, the regulation of sexuality and the ideals of bourgeois women. This study argues that the new authors in their radical criticism aimed at the position of power in society traditionally upheld by the State church, which supervised education and ethical values. They did this by creating a role for themselves as young and oppressed, something that made it possible to deny any responsibility for the present state and furthermore to speak up, despite their own bourgeois background, for other oppressed groups like the working classes, the poor and women. But this also meant that they could not be successful in their ambitions to gain influence without loosing their identity. This was especially the consequence of the fact that an autonomous ”literary field” did not yet exist. That is, there were no internal literary institutions that, seemingly independent of the rest of society, decided what was ”good literature.” Instead, the singularly most important judge of interesting literature was the bourgeois public. Strindberg seems to have realised this early, and achieved an identity as ”uncontrolled”. He thereby lost his intellectual credibility, but gained a much bigger freedom to write and also got the attention of the large audience. At the same time, his writing undermined the values of decency by breaking the bourgeois society’s fundamental wall between the private and the public sphere, not least by writing what was regarded as facts about his own private life. The conservative reaction accelerated towards the end of the decade while the authors grew more and more bitter about the public’s lack of understanding. At this point the author Verner von Heidenstam took the opportunity to declare a new literary era, dissociating his aesthetics from the one of the Eighties and proclaiming the necessity of an aristocratic, ethically indifferent literature (with himself as its leader). Confronted with the new concept of what ought to be regarded as “modern”, the established male authors were generally quick to separate themselves from the female authors, and to identify the attacked literature solely with the one that critically discussed the situation of women in society - a description that has been largely adopted in the history of literature. A number of male authors also wrote novels separating themselves from the Eighties. Thus, they could continue into the new period, while female authors in general were silenced or forced to write in less esteemed genres (”popular literature”, children’s books). Ultimately the result was a more distinct male domination coupled with a growing contempt for the large audience. This, in turn, created a need for internal institutions that could interpret, value and support literature - scholarships, elitist critics, and a writers’ union. These institutions subsequently were founded or developed during the nineties – all of them steps towards autonomy.

This thesis explores the architecture, interior design and furniture design of Greta Magnusson Grossman (1906-1999), a pioneering Swedish Modernist who emigrated to the United States in 1940 and became part of the design movement California Modern in Los Angeles. Despite a productive and acclaimed career, her work was more or less forgotten until rediscovered in the early 2000’s.In this thesis, Greta Magnusson Grossman’s broader context is understood through literature studies of the 1930 Stockholm Exhibition, the introduction of Swedish Modern at the 1939 New York World’s Fair, the postwar design movement California Modern, and the International Competition for Low-Cost Furniture Design organized by the Museum of Modern Art in New York in 1948. Similar needs for well designed, low cost housing and furniture in the two countries are found.To further examine the work of Magnusson Grossman, her 1949 residence at Waynecrest Drive in Los Angeles is visually analyzed and compared with contemporary Case Study House #8 by American design couple Charles and Ray Eames from 1949, and Swedish furniture designer and architect Bruno Mathsson’s Exhibition Hall from 1950. Several correlations between the three environments are identified, and confirms Greta Magnusson Grossman’s progressive contributions in the fields of architecture, interiors and furniture design.