Fatiguée et vieillie, la modernité est pourtant toujours vivante : au moment de devenir tradition, le modernisme tardif se charge de l’enfermement de son esthétique. Sans rompre avec la modernité, comme le prétend le discours postmoderne, celui-ci assume jusqu’au bout les apories d’une modernité désormais tardive, et il tâche de les réfléchir. La posture du modernisme tardif par rapport à la modernité sera métacritique, se rapprochant des interrogations philosophiques de son temps (Marcuse, Adorno, Derrida, Foucault). Le modernisme tardif en cinéma aurait dès lors une place tout à fait singulière, mais pas du tout solitaire, dans l’ensemble des questions esthétiques que son temps lui pose. Dans les années soixante et soixante-dix, le modernisme déjà tardif du cinéma propose un ensemble de figures de l’enfermement qui réfléchissent le dispositif cinématographique : le cadrage autoréflexif, ou hypercadrage, sera son principe de mise en forme. Au niveau du montage, les rapports internes à l’image, entre les images, et entre sons et images se fonderaient tous sur une pratique disséminée comprise selon la dialectique négative d’Adorno, c’est-à-dire sans synthèse et vouée à faire apparaître un principe de « non-identité ». En ce sens, le cinéma moderniste tardif propose des allégories négatives d’une modernité qui n’en finit pas de finir. / On its last legs, showing its age, modernity is nevertheless still alive. Now that it has become tradition, late modernism takes on the task of imprisoning its aesthetics. Without breaking with modernity, as postmodern discourse would have it, modernism fully assumes the aporia of what is now late modernity, and attempts to reflect them. The attitude of late modernism in relation to modernity is thus metacritical, in synergy with the philosophical enquiries of its time (Marcuse, Adorno, Derrida, Foucault). Consequently, late modernism in film has an utterly unique place within the aesthetic issues of its time, without however being isolated from them. In the 1960s and 1970s, what was already late modernism in film presented a set of figures of imprisonment, which reflected the filmic apparatus: self-reflective framing, or hyperframing, was the principle behind its form. On the level of montage, the relationships within the image, those between images, and those between sounds and images were all based upon a diffuse praxis to be understood here according to Adorno’s negative dialectics: a praxis without synthesis, one destined to reveal a principle of “non-identity.” In this sense, late modernist film offers negative allegories of a modernity that never stops coming to an end.

Yoko Tawada, écrivaine contemporaine d’expression japonaise et allemande, mène depuis trente ans une carrière qui connaît un succès critique considérable dans ses deux langues et pays d’écriture. Œuvre hybride à la croisée des genres, des langues, des cultures et des littératures, définie par une démarche autoréflexive et métalinguistique, c’est un sujet de choix pour la littérature comparée, avec laquelle elle partage des affinités fondamentales. Pourtant, elle n’est encore que peu étudiée par les comparatistes ; cette thèse se donne donc pour objet de combler en partie cette lacune. Au long d’un parcours à travers les champs de recherche et plusieurs problématiques de la littérature comparée, nous éclairons réciproquement le fonctionnement de l’écriture tawadienne et les enjeux comparatistes contemporains dans le but de démontrer l’intérêt d’un véritable dialogue entre la démarche critique et son objet. La première étape consiste à établir la pertinence et la nécessité d’une approche comparatiste. Ensuite, mimant le geste autoréflexif de l’écrivaine, nous analysons les rapports de la critique à l’œuvre littéraire afin de déterminer leurs apports mutuels. Puis nous étudions le traitement littéraire et épistémologique de la notion d’espace, et plus précisément celle de passage, centrales dans la poétique tawadienne comme dans la pratique comparatiste, avant de nous pencher sur l’Europe, espace géographique et culturel au cœur de la création chez Tawada et de la définition de la littérature comparée. Enfin, nous achevons ce parcours sur une réflexion dans les termes de Tawada sur la traduction littéraire et la littérature en traduction, nœud gordien du comparatisme. / Contemporary bilingual writer Yoko Tawada has received much critical acclaim for both her German and her Japanese literary work since 30 years now. Her hybrid writing between genres, languages, cultures and literatures, defined by a characteristic self reflexive and metalinguistic stance, is an ideal research topic for Comparative Literature. However, it has yet to be thoroughly studied by comparatists. In our thesis, we endeavour to fill part of this gap by connecting Tawada’s writing to comparative research fields and issues, in order for them to shed light on each other. Thus we aim to demonstrate what we can gain from a real dialogue between the researcher and its object of study. The first step will be to assess the meaningfulness and use of a comparative approach in the case of Tawada’s literature. Then, we will mimic the writer’s own self reflexive gesture in order to analyse the relationship between literary work and criticism and determine how they might benefit each other. Afterwards, we will study closely the epistemological and literary uses of space and passage, two crucial notions both for Comparatism and Tawada’s writing, before focusing on a more specific geographical and cultural space: that of Europe, which is also central to the writer’s literary journey as well as the very definition of Comparative Literature. Lastly, we will close with a study of Tawada’s thought-provoking take on the Gordian knot of Comparative Literature: literary translation and literature in translation.

All bodies of critical discourse on any given literary canon seek visibility through self- celebration, subversion of competing critical ideas and identification with supposedly popular, scientific and incisive critical theories. Thus, the literary-critical quest for significance and visibility is, in essence, a quest for „space‟, „voice‟ and „authority‟ in the discussion of aspects of a given literary corpus. This research explores the politics of „space‟, „voice‟ and „authority‟ in „white critical thought‟ on „the black Zimbabwean novel‟. It unfolds in the context of the realisation that as a body of critical discourse on „the black Zimbabwean novel‟, „white critical thought‟ does not only emerge in an intellectual matrix in which it shares and competes for „space‟, „voice‟ and „authority‟ with other bodies of critical thought on the literary episteme in question; it also develops in the ambit of Euro-African cultural politics of hegemony and resistance. Thus, the research sets out to identify the ways in which „white critical thought‟ affirms and perpetuates or questions and negates European critical benchmarks and cultural models in the discussion of selected aspects of „the black Zimbabwean novel‟. The investigation considers the fissures at the heart of „white critical thought‟ as a critical discourse and the myriad of ways in which it interacts with competing critical discourses on the „the black Zimbabwean novel‟. It derives impetus from the fact that while other versions of critical thought on „the black Zimbabwean novel‟ have received extensive metacritical discussion elsewhere, „white critical thought‟ remains largely under-discussed. This phenomenon enables it to solidify into a settled body of critical thought. The metacritical discussion of „white critical thought‟ in this research constitutes part of the repertoire of efforts that will help check the solidification of critical discourses into hegemonic bodies of thought. The research makes use of Afrocentric and Postcolonial critical tenets to advance the contention that while „white critical thought‟ on „the black Zimbabwean novel‟ is fraught with fissures and contradictions that speak directly to its complexity and resistance to neat categorisation, it is largely vulnerable to identification as part of the paraphernalia of European cultural and intellectual hegemony in African literature and its criticism, given its tendency to discuss the literature outside the context of critical theories that emerge from the same culture and history with the literary corpus in question. / African Languages / D. Litt. et Phil. (African Languages)

All bodies of critical discourse on any given literary canon seek visibility through self- celebration, subversion of competing critical ideas and identification with supposedly popular, scientific and incisive critical theories. Thus, the literary-critical quest for significance and visibility is, in essence, a quest for „space‟, „voice‟ and „authority‟ in the discussion of aspects of a given literary corpus. This research explores the politics of „space‟, „voice‟ and „authority‟ in „white critical thought‟ on „the black Zimbabwean novel‟. It unfolds in the context of the realisation that as a body of critical discourse on „the black Zimbabwean novel‟, „white critical thought‟ does not only emerge in an intellectual matrix in which it shares and competes for „space‟, „voice‟ and „authority‟ with other bodies of critical thought on the literary episteme in question; it also develops in the ambit of Euro-African cultural politics of hegemony and resistance. Thus, the research sets out to identify the ways in which „white critical thought‟ affirms and perpetuates or questions and negates European critical benchmarks and cultural models in the discussion of selected aspects of „the black Zimbabwean novel‟. The investigation considers the fissures at the heart of „white critical thought‟ as a critical discourse and the myriad of ways in which it interacts with competing critical discourses on the „the black Zimbabwean novel‟. It derives impetus from the fact that while other versions of critical thought on „the black Zimbabwean novel‟ have received extensive metacritical discussion elsewhere, „white critical thought‟ remains largely under-discussed. This phenomenon enables it to solidify into a settled body of critical thought. The metacritical discussion of „white critical thought‟ in this research constitutes part of the repertoire of efforts that will help check the solidification of critical discourses into hegemonic bodies of thought. The research makes use of Afrocentric and Postcolonial critical tenets to advance the contention that while „white critical thought‟ on „the black Zimbabwean novel‟ is fraught with fissures and contradictions that speak directly to its complexity and resistance to neat categorisation, it is largely vulnerable to identification as part of the paraphernalia of European cultural and intellectual hegemony in African literature and its criticism, given its tendency to discuss the literature outside the context of critical theories that emerge from the same culture and history with the literary corpus in question. / African Languages / D. Litt. et Phil. (African Languages)