With special regard to the Slovenian context, I address questions raised by the (non)trope of anthropomorphisation. An overview of the main Slovenian textbooks on literary theory and a brief historical overview of personification showed that anthropomorphisationʼs closest tropological connection is personification. The consequence of this connection is a confusion and indistinguishability between the two concepts. Anthropomorphisation, as a process related to the “attribution of human form”, raises the question of what belongs to the domain of the human, from where it is transferred to other categories according to the dialectic of inclusion and exclusion. As such, it speaks primarily about our understanding of the relationship between the human and the nonhuman or the more-than-human and raises the question of the possibilities of the representation of the nonhuman in language. Since the task of the fundamental difference between human and nonhuman has been imposed on language, one of the key qualities that connects/distinguishes personification from anthropomorphisation is the ability to speak. At the same time, this is the place where anthropocentrism enters the paradigm most clearly as the central “problem” from which anthropomorphisation can arise and is consequently reproduced. Anthropomorphisation is a strategy that needs to be evaluated in more detail, taking into account the context of each individual text. In the final part of the thesis, I focus on the role of animal focalization in Borut Kraševecʼs novel Agni (2020). In the novel, anthropomorphisation allows the rabbit Agni to become a person with her own life, hopes and desires, with »her own« perspective; however, it is simultaneously employed for diametrically opposite purposes, helping to naturalize the killing of persons with their own lives, hopes and desires.
|
