Thesis (MA)--Stellenbosch University, 2012. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: J. M. Coetzee se werke ondersoek dikwels op intense en ongewone wyse wat kreatiwiteit is en hoe dit werk, wat die bronne en oorspronge daarvan is, en verwonder sig aan die onvoorspelbaarheid van die voorwaardes en katalisators vir, en die aard en uitkomste van, die kreatiewe proses. Hierdie essay ondersoek eerstens die teoretisering van literêre kreatiwiteit deur veral Derek Attridge, wat hy hoofsaaklik baseer op Coetzee se werk. Tweedens word die komplekse uitbeeldings – of performance – van kreatiwiteit en die kreatiewe proses in Coetzee se oeuvre, spesifiek aan die hand van The Master of Petersburg en die post-Disgrace werke, ontleed. Daar word gefokus op skeppende karakters en alter ego’s, veral skrywers, wat toenemend hul verskyning in Coetzee se prosa maak. Kwessies van skrywerlike mag, die etiek van skryf, die konflik tussen werklikheidsvlakke binne fiksie asook tussen werklikheid en fiksie, soos dit uitspeel in die hibriede en eksperimentele laat werke, kom aan bod. Die essay maak dikwels van stipleestegnieke gebruik in die lees van die betrokke werke. Ander strategieë word egter ook ingespan, veral by die lees van die laat werke. Die siening van kreatiewe impuls wat aldus blyk, is ‘n radikale een. Kreatiwiteit is blind vir moraliteit en dalk selfs etiek. Dit word onder andere gelykgestel aan die epileptiese val. Dit gaan oor die oopstelling vir – en die eksklusiewe verantwoordelikheid teenoor – die onverwagse, die Beckettiaanse/Derridiaanse proses van ‘n produktiewe/onproduktiewe gewag. Dit word vergestalt deur ‘n gebeurtenis wat beslag vind in die onverminderbare eiesoortigheid van die literêre werk. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: J. M. Coetzee’s work often investigates in an intense and unusual manner the nature of creativity and how it works, what the sources and origins of creativity are, and marvels at the unpredictability of the preconditions and catalysts for, and the nature and outcomes of, the creative process. This essay investigates, in the first place, the theorisation of literary creativity by especially Derek Attridge, which he mainly bases on Coetzee’s work. In the second instance, the complex portrayals – or performances – of creativity and the creative process in Coetzee’s oeuvre are analysed, particularly with reference to The Master of Petersburg and the post-Disgrace works. The focus is on creative characters, particularly authors, who are increasingly making an appearance in Coetzee’s prose. Questions of authorial power, the ethics of writing, the conflict of reality levels within fiction as well as between reality and fiction, as it plays out in the hybird and experimental late works, are presented. The essay often uses close reading in the reading of the mentioned works. Other strategies are also used, particularly in the reading of the late works. The view of the creative impulse thus crystallising, is a radical one. Creativity is blind to morality, and perhaps also ethics. It is equated, inter alia, to the epileptic fit. It is about the opening up – and the exclusive responsibility – to the unexpected, to the Beckettian/Derridian process of a productive/unproductive waiting. It is represented by a happening which precipitates in the irreducible singularity of the literary work.

L’ancrage universitaire de la tradition des ateliers d’écriture est souvent ignoré en France, alors qu’il est clairement établi pour les Etats-Unis. Les histoires des pratiques créatives d’écriture littéraire s’écrivent donc de manière différente, en mettant en jeu des conceptions de la littérature que cette étude cherche à comparer. La considération des sphères linguistiques et la question des dynamiques internationales d’expansion des pratiques exigent l’examen particulier des cursus québécois. Comment peut-on caractériser ces différentes formations ? Quelles représentations de l’auteur, du processus rédactionnel, de la créativité ou de l’œuvre véhiculent-elles ? Quelles forces de tension et de mutations se dessinent-elles ? Sur les plans diachronique et synchronique, et en étayant l’enquête bibliographique de questionnaires systématiques et recueil de données sur le terrain, la comparaison envisagera ses repères épistémologiques et l’état actuel des ressources, que les traductions des citations cherchent à rendre accessibles aux francophones. / The university grounding of the tradition of writing workshops is often ignored in France while it is clearly established in the United States. The stories of the creative practices of literary writing are thus handled differently and bring into play different views of literature which this study seeks to compare. The issue of the linguistic areas and the question of the process of the international extension of those practices particularly require to consider the Quebec courses. How can these different training courses be characterized? Which representations of the author, of the writing process, of creativity or of the work do they convey? Which tension and change currents emerge? On the diachronic and synchronic levels and by backing up the bibliographical survey with systematic questionnaires and collections of in-the-field data, the comparison will contemplate its own epistemological landmarks and the current state of resources which the translations intend to make accessible to French speakers.