A Rest in the West. Translation of Modernity and Modernism in William Heinesen's „Grylen“ / Týðing av moderniteti og modernismu í „Grylen” eftir William Heinesen

<p><strong>Úrtak</strong></p><p>Greinin viðger ‘týðingar’spurdómar í stuttsøguni „Grylen“ (1957) eftir William Heinesen. Søgan tekur støði í einum elligomlum føstulávintssiði í Føroyum – at ganga grýla – sum doyði út beint fyri seinna heimsbardaga. Í søguni hjá Williami verður grýlan til ein dionýsiskan figur kallaður Grylen, sum er ólýsandi og ímyndar orðloysi. Greinin vísir, hvussu metatilvitaða frásøgufólkið letur seg hugkveikja av hesum fyribrigdi við áhaldandi at umringja tað við nýggjum myndum. Týdda grýlan verður greinað sum 1) eitt ontologiskt tulkingartilvitað frásøgufólk og sum 2) eitt eyðkenni við bókmentamentan í útjaðaranum. Stuttsøgan fær skap sum ein navngevingargongd av einari undantaksveru, og tað er við støði í hesum botnloysi, at frásøgufólkið tulkar og týðir grýluna til eitt listaligt úttrykk. Grylen umboðar eina rest, sum dregur seg undan modernaðum mannagongdum. Við støði í hugsanum hjá Franco Moretti og Andreas Huyssen verður týðingin samstundis knýtt at landafrøðiliga útjaðaranum, sum skapar ein serligan tørv á týðing í royndini at minka um munin millum ‘miðdepil’ og ‘útjaðara’. Í hesum samteksti umboðar Grylen og oyggin Stapa eitt mentanarligt eftirsleip, sum verður gjørt til eina styrki. Hetta ’writing back’ brúkar føroyskan miðaldarsið og fornaldarligt evni sum Dionysos til at seta spurning við hegemoniska(n) modernitet og modernismu og við hvat er miðdepil og hvat er útjaðari.</p><p><strong> </strong></p><p><strong>A</strong><strong>bstract</strong></p><p>This analysis addresses the issue of translation in William Heinesen’s short story „Grylen“ (1957). It is a story of an old Dionysiac Faroese ritual, which died out around The Second World War. The narrator sets himself the task of transplanting this Dionysos into modern fiction. Due to the muteness of the Gryla the literary connection to the myth can only be established by virtue of interpretation as demonstrated as an explicit mediation of the mythical silence. The muteness appear as a matter of interpretation while being encircled in conflicting images. Focus is partly given on the interpreted Gryla as a complex question of ontological interpretation and partly as an expression of cultural translation linked to aesthetic development in the geographical periphery. Due to the muteness of the Gryla, the whole story appears as a course of naming the nameless forces that work within Dunald, who is the one having the Gryla. Based on Franco Moretti’s og Andreas Huyssen’s notion of ‘centre and periphery’, the question of translation is connected to the Faroe Island as a non­metropolitan culture. Due to the cultural backlog in the periphery there is a special need for translations caused by the discrepancy between the trans­atlantic modernity and a minor culture as the Faroese still close to nature and the oral tradition. In response to the cultural backlog the dynamics of translation become a privileged perspective creating connections between modern and premodern aspects. The Faroese reaction represents an alternative modernity and an alternative (geo)modernism writing back to a rule­based hegemonic modernity an modernism in order to give an account of the encounter with another world, which evades direct contact and brings into question what is periphery and what is centre.</p><p> </p>