Documents found

  1. 271.

    Thesis submitted to McGill University

    1996

  2. 273.

    Article published in Ciné-Bulles (cultural, collection Érudit)

    Volume 43, Issue 2, 2025

    Digital publication year: 2025

  3. 275.

    Article published in Meta (scholarly, collection Érudit)

    Volume 39, Issue 3, 1994

    Digital publication year: 2002

  4. 277.

    Article published in Bulletin d'histoire politique (scholarly, collection Érudit)

    Volume 5, Issue 2, 1997

    Digital publication year: 2019

  5. 278.

    Article published in Ciné-Bulles (cultural, collection Érudit)

    Volume 22, Issue 1, 2004

    Digital publication year: 2010

  6. 279.

    Article published in Études littéraires (scholarly, collection Érudit)

    Volume 41, Issue 3, 2010

    Digital publication year: 2011

    More information

    Although Kafka took an interest in anarchism, associating with anarchist organisations in Prague from 1910 to 1912, he was not himself an “anarchist author”. Indeed, his writings should not be narrowly misconstrued as a given political doctrine. However, one can discern the underlying connections between, on the one hand, his dislike of authority, his libertarian bend and his sympathies for anarchism, and his writings on the other. These excerpts shine a privileged light on what one could describe as the “internal scenery” of Kafka's oeuvre.

  7. 280.

    Article published in Études d'histoire religieuse (scholarly, collection Érudit)

    Volume 67, 2001

    Digital publication year: 2011

    More information

    Numerous instances of clerical censorship conclusively demonstrate that, at the turn of the 20th century, the Roman clergy were determined to control literary output. But it does seem rather hazardous to speak of censorship — even less total censorship — as still being exercised by the clergy during the years 1920-1929, since not a single overt act of censorship took place during the ten-year span. All the same, we must not conclude that censorship didn't exist any more. As this paper will show, a new form of censorship was instituted, of an altogether more pervasive kind. It aimed at homogenizing the productions of the creative spirit, thereby prompting the rise of a literature singularly lacking in variety, and whose very sameness was calculated to stifle debate. We cannot be far wrong in regarding this censorship as total, since it sought dominion over the mind rather than the printed page.