No description available.

Sigurd Agrell published six volumes of melancholic and highly stylised poetry between 1903 and 1912, and has since then been largely ignored in 20th century Swedish literary history. His writing shows influences from decadence and symbolism, and his frequent use of the sonnet, as well as other metrical devices, also connects him to an older tradition. In this essay I examine what tradition he belongs to, and in what ways his verse fits in with other writers of the turn of the last century. I analyse poems by Sigurd Agrell in order to identify what themes, motifs and literary techniques he shares with contemopary poets, and in what ways he differs from them. We will see that while Agrell shares many traits with the symbolist movement, he also stands out in certain important respects.

This thesis is a study of motherhood in Afhild Agrell’s play Räddad (first performed in 1882 at The Royal Theater in Stockholm) and Adda Ravnkilde posthumously published novel Judith Fürste (1884) with a focus on the relationship between mother and son. I study how the mothers wish to raise their sons, how mother and son interact with one another, the family dynamic’s influence on their motherhood and finally how they shape their identity as mothers when their motherhood is first threatened (often by their husbands) and then after the death of their sons. By analyzing two works by women authors of the Modern Breakthrough, I examine how motherhood is represented in literature from this period with a unique focus—mothers of sons. During this period, despite advancements in the rights of women including equal inheritance and increased access to education and professions such as teacher, doctor and dentist, many of the rights gained pertained to unmarried women—how an unmarried woman was to support herself was a central question. Literature from this period illustrates the struggles that woman faced upon marriage—often they had to give up their desire to work and focus on being wives and mothers instead. However, in the two works I have selected, the main female characters’ motherhood is threatened. Motherhood is a crucial part of both mothers’ identity and Agrell’s play and Ravnkilde’s novel follow the shaping of the main characters’ identity as mothers, the following threat to this identity and the crisis that arises after the death of their sons. I analyze this identity-arc and how being mothers to sons shapes and complicates this arc.

Uppsatsens syfte är att undersöka kvinnan och modersgestalten i dramatik från 1800-talets moderna genombrott utifrån ett genusperspektiv. Materialet som ligger till grund för undersökningen består av tryckta manus till fyra olika dramer: Et dukkehjem av Ibsen, Räddad av Agrell, Sanna kvinnor av Leffler och Fadren av Strindberg – alla ursprungliga skrivna under perioden 1879–1887. Tidigare forskning kring moderskap visar hur normer och värderingar av och i samhället ställer olika krav på hur en moder ska vara. För att uppfylla syfte tillämpas en kvalitativ litteraturanalys med närläsning av materialet och i slutdiskussionen diskuteras och jämförs de olika dramerna. Undersökningens resultat visar att kvinnorna i dramerna påverkas av samtidens samhällsnormer samtidigt som kvinnorna även lyckas utmana sin modersroll på olika sätt, vilket även går hand i hand med det moderna genombrottet inom litteraturen. Dramernas skildring av kvinnan och modergestalten speglar den tid då kvinnors frihet tar sin början men fortfarande i hög grad begränsas av normer och samhällets krav.

<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.