Selma Lagerlöf – vägen in på fältet : en fallstudie i litteraturkritikens konsekrering

Sammanfattning: The thesis intends to answer the question whether the author Selma Lagerlöfs novels were perceived differently in literary reviews (in Swedish newspapers), before and after her being awarded with the Nobel prize in literature. Any difference observed will go through analyses based on the theoretical framework of Pierre Bourdieu's theory of the “literary field”. To closely examine the text of the different reviews, and look for differences, the thesis uses Norman Fairclough's Critical Discourse Analysis, with Bourdieu's theory as the social setting. In total, twelve literary reviews by six significant critics on the Swedish literary field between 1891 to 1914 are investigated. These are selected from the reviews of four of Lagerlöfs novels. Two of the novels were written prior to her being awarded with the Nobel prize, and the other two were written after receiving the prize. When examining the literary reviews there was a difference observed. Especially the chronologically first novel (Lagerlöfs debut Gösta Berlings saga) received considerably negative reviews. The critique was mostly regarding style of writing, but it also often involved the author's character. The following novel in the thesis Jerusalem was received mostly positively by the critics. And the two following Lagerlöv being awarded with the nobel prize received almost no negative comments. The authors of this thesis point out conditions of the literary field partly being the reason for the harsh reviews. Lagerlöf introduced a new “avant-garde” style of writing that challenged current writing practice. As time went on Lagerlöf, and her style of writing, was elevated on the literary field. Displayed by the critics praising and comparing her to the greats of the field and a changed power dynamic regarding critic and the critiqued.