Patronaatskap, herskrywing en sensuur

Abstract

This article’s basic premises stem from the Christian Philosophical theory (in which the concepts of the Dutch philosopher Herman Dooyeweerd are central). These concepts include inter alia the view of the ground-motive in scientific endeavours, transcendental criticism, the enduring aspect of norms and values, the impossibility of total objectivism and rationality and the dangers of extreme relativity. This article is embedded in the theory of a Scientific, Personal Narrative (SPN). As a relatively new research methodology it strives to reconcile a scientific discourse (which complies with all the traditional aspects thereof) with a personal narrative. The reason for choosing this methodology is because it affords the possibility to blend personal experience (the publication of a column and the subsequent polemic reaction) with a structural framework. Because personal scientific approaches (like auto-ethnography) are often contested, the whole question of subjectivity in science is investigated in depth from different standpoints/viewpoints/perspectives. Corner stones of this article are the Christian Philosophy, the SPN, child and youth literature, rewriting, patronage, literary history as manipulation and the literary system. After a brief discussion of youth literature, all the books referred to in my column are thematically discussed. The most important finding is that these books refrained from representing reality as it was, but rather portrayed an idealized reality as surmised in my column. In conclusion André Lefevere’s explication of rewriting in a specific literary system controlled by a patronage, is used as explanitory frame for the aforementioned polemic. One of the key findings is that rewriting is rife and often the original text ‘dissappears’. This was the case with my column which was rewritten by various critics: the majority creating their own text in a highly unethical way, according to the studies of Wessels (2023) and Olivier (2024). Lefevere’s (1992) theoretical explication explains why opponents of any incumbant system are punished, while supporters are rewarded.