File Name: thousand and one nights .zip
It is often known in English as the Arabian Nights, from the first English language edition , which rendered the title as The Arabian Nights' Entertainment. The work was collected over many centuries by various authors, translators, and scholars across West, Central, and South Asia and North Africa. The tales themselves trace their roots back to ancient and medieval Arabic, Persian, Mesopotamian, Indian, and Egyptian folklore and literature.
- Your request has been sent!
- The Thousand and One Nights
- The Thousand and One Nights
- One Thousand and One Nights
Its tales of Aladdin , Ali Baba , and Sindbad the Sailor have almost become part of Western folklore , though these were added to the collection only in the 18th century in European adaptations. As in much medieval European literature, the stories— fairy tales , romances , legends , fables , parables , anecdotes , and exotic or realistic adventures—are set within a frame story. Then, loathing all womankind, he marries and kills a new wife each day until no more candidates can be found. His vizier , however, has two daughters, Shahrazad Scheherazade and Dunyazad; and the elder, Shahrazad, having devised a scheme to save herself and others, insists that her father give her in marriage to the king.
Your request has been sent!
Scheherazade is a veritable story-producing human apparatus which, in order to satiate the bulimic King Shahryar, swallows up and reworks everything she heard during her childhood and adolescence from her wet nurses, parents, relatives, friends, foreign travellers, renowned storytellers, and everything she has accumulated during long hours of reading. The thread of the one thousand and one nights gathers together an entire epic thesaurus of the Arabic, Persian, and Indian civilisations, as well as of other bordering cultures.
How does such epic machinery work? A novel, a novella, and a theatre play usually have a backbone, an internal logic, a plot heading towards resolution. By contrast, A Thousand and One Nights only benefits from an "exoskeleton" the framework provided by Scheherazade and the king , which do allow for a sequential articulation of the stories but does not impose a logos of the entire ensemble. The book may go on indefinitely; the one thousand and one nights and the stories narrated throughout them may be extended forever, nothing preventing this from happening.
One might conclude that this is the very narrative convention of this type of "collections," that such compilations assume, from the start, a principle of openness and non-finitude. There are, however, also other works, belonging to theoretically "closed" and "finite" species, which behave in a similar manner.
Such are the romances of the Renaissance or the "extraordinary voyages" of the seventeenth and the eighteenth centuries, in which, instead of following an initiation path leading to maturation, to an apogee. In other words, instead of amounting to a Bildungsroman, the protagonists' adventures continue freely, uncontrollably, as variations generated by the pure narrative pleasure of the writers and of their readers.
This is why the epic convention in A Thousand and One Nights raises a much deeper issue, pertaining to the very manner of articulating the epos. These narrative mechanisms form a mental paradigm, which deserves being investigated as such, rather than being reduced to an artifice of construction.
In order to describe theoretically this metatypology of disarticulated and "unfinished" works truly unfinishable except through an arbitrary gesture as the opposite of the other, more familiar metatypology of structured and "closed" works, I shall propose two antagonistically constructed concepts, the archetype and the anarchetype, or archetypal structures and anarchetypal narratives.
The ArchetypeThe archetype is a concept with a venerable history, which goes back to Philo of Alexandria and even to Plato. At present, the term is regarded with reservation and has rather idiosyncratic acceptations.
It sounds somewhat obsolete, as it appears to refer to an outdated conception of the issue. We live in a world where a certain nominalist scepticism makes us distrust the concept of initial, immutable models, located in a religious or metaphysical illud tempus. The premise of such invariants with hard ontological presence has long ceased to trigger the same adherence as in ancient philosophy, in medieval scholastics or in Renaissance Neoplatonism. On the other hand, the concept of archetype has also been compromised in its psychological sense, which regards it as an anthropological invariant, with a subjective existence, rather than a metaphysical invariant, with an objective existence.
I am, of course, referring here to the Jungian theory of archetypes, which are conceived as matrices of a purported collective unconscious -a theory that contemporary epistemologies tend to eschew. Moreover, Jung's archetypology was also tainted by the fact that it was invoked in disseminating an anti-Semite message, given that the notion of psychological invariants lent itself to serving as the basis for a theory of the races. However, despite the validity of these objections and critiques, it would be regrettable if they led to the burial of a term with a much richer and more venerable conceptual potential than some of its later ideological evolutions and slippages.
Even if Jung's system were to be discarded in its entirety, it would be erroneous to also dispose of the archetype, his terminological offspring.
The concept is, after all, much wider than the acceptation imparted upon it by Jung, Eliade, Durand or any other con-temporary thinker and philosopher. It is true, its very longevity has subjected it to a process of augmentation and inflation, which has led to the erosion of its original contours and outlines and to overloading it with the most diverse of contents and meanings.
What is therefore required is a historical overview of the evolution of the concept, which may discriminate between the diverse acceptations it has acquired throughout time, and, secondly, a restitution of its operational meaning.
In the volume entitled 10 Studies of Archetypology 10 studii de arhetipologie , I distinguish between three major meanings with which the term archetype has been invested in European culture: a metaphysical meaning in the sense of the Platonic ideas , a psychological meaning in the sense of the Jungian psychic schemata and a cultural meaning in the sense of Curtius' topoi or loci. Divested of ontological or anthropological ambitions, taken in a cultural sense, the cultural archetype has all the necessary "modesty" for serving as an operational instrument in the field of cultural studies.
Its simplest and, hence, most efficacious acceptation is that used in the field of philology. In researching the transmission and migration of the variations upon an original text via the copying system practised in the Middle Ages, the archetype designates a primary text from which stems an entire array of copies; it is the root of the genealogical tree which comprises all its derivatives.
Having located the archetype within the frame of a "culturalist" conception, I shall define an archetypal structure as that structure which organises itself in accordance with a unitary and centred model.
An archetypal work is a work in which a quantifiable scenario may be detected, a scenario that may also be identified in similar works, forming a sort of skeletal structure, a genetic imprint of the entire group of works. This identifiable scenario may be defined in thematic or formal terms.
In thematic terms, all the great myths, whether archaic or modern, may form an archetypal scenario, as it happens with Joseph's episode from The Book of Genesis in Thomas Mann's Joseph and His Brothers, or with the Homeric Odyssey in James Joyce's Ulysses. It was not by chance that Northrop Frye saw the Bible as the "great code" of European literature. For instance, Christopher Booker identifies the seven great "plots" of world epics: the quest, the confrontation with a monster, the evolution from rags to riches or from low to high, the journey, the rebirth, comedy and tragedy.
Other series of texts organised in accordance with certain themes may also be identified: the descent in the inferno, 9 the shamanic voyage of the soul, 10 the spiritual quest, 11 regressus ad uterum, etc. Such an undertaking may even generate a Dictionary of Literary Myths, as that coordinated by Pierre Brunel. The blend between the novelistic epic and the Protestant idea of an individual destiny introduced a rather rigorous scenario, which, in the modern novel, no longer permitted the vagrancy and uncontrollable digression that wreaked havoc in the Renaissance or baroque chivalry and picaresque romances, as it demanded that the plot should be ordered within a unifying scheme -the shaping of a character.
I shall therefore define archetypal works as those works that are built in accordance with a unifying explanatory scheme, irrespective of the nature and origin of this scheme. An archetypal text may be "summed up" in a few words or phrases, and the summing up consists exactly in identifying the unifying scenario. This scenario has the role of a backbone, which prevents the narrative from becoming disarticulated or disaggregated. It is responsible for the impression of the text's coherence and unity, no matter how many digressions and narrative pockets that discourse might give off.
Generalising, one might say that an archetypal model describes a culture based on what Baudrillard calls the "great explanatory scenarios" be they religious, philosophical, historical or literary. An archetypal culture is a culture dominated by centred and globalising schemata, which polarise phantasmatic matter along preestablished routes that may be ordered within a harmonious and downright Pythagorean solar system. The archetypal would thus define a cultural metatypology, a dominant paradigm of works with a monopolar and totalising configuration, with a welldefined centre and a rapidly identifiable vertebral column.
The anarchetype would be, depending on how we want to combine the three words, either an "anarchic model" or an "anti-archetype. As it is well known, Plato considered that the real world is an image eikon , a copy eidolon of the ideal world, which is made up of essences eidos , or ideas idea. The multiplicity of the empirical world is the result of an ontological mimesis, of an ultimately inexhaustible material replication of the stock of essential models.
What would happen, however, if the real world diverged from the models and started to generate itself an-archetypally? This would be the nightmare of Plato's metaphysics. In the dialogue entitled Parmenides, Parmenides confronts Socrates with the following aporia: should we not assert the existence of a separate, ideal form also for "things of which the mention might provoke a smile, such things as hair, mud and filth?
Talking about the species of the art of the image, the Stranger from Elea, in the dialogue entitled Sophist, distinguishes between the art of exact reproduction, which gives birth to icons eikon and fantasist art, which engenders phantasms phantasmata. Anarchetypes involve the activity of an anarchic mimesis, which refuses conformity with ideal types and produces fortuitous and irreducible, singular entities, a gallery of "monsters.
As its name suggests, the anarchetype is a concept that manifests itself anarchically in relation to the idea of a model or a centre. The archetype and the anarchetype describe two types of imaginary and creative configurations and "behaviours. The opposition here is, of course, not that between the real and the virtual, since both the archetype and the anarchetype have the same reality; what distinguishes them is the fact that the former has a central organising nucleus, being like a solar system configured around a star, whereas the latter is diffuse and centreless, like galactic dust that has either not coagu-lated into a solar system yet or is the result of the explosion of a supernova.
As these two antagonistic metaphors -the astral body and the galactic cloud -suggest, it is not compulsory for the archetype and the anarchetype to derive from one another although both cases are possible ; they may well coexist without there being a question of a succession relation between them.
It is true that the very term an-archetype is etymologically constructed via the negation of a pre-existent term, the archetype, but this negation does not necessarily entail a derivation via the destruction of something that existed before; it is merely the case of organisation according to a centrifugal, rather than a centripetal, principle.
Through its configuration, the archetype entails the presence of a principle of closure, finitude and completeness.
An archetypal work has a roundness that does not allow for unlimited and uncontrolled amplifications and developments. Any organising skeleton allows, naturally, for unpredictable developments, but only within the limits of a certain tolerance that guarantees the coherence of the whole. Overstepping these boundaries would lead to an outburst of the whole, to the dissolution of meaning.
In contrast, the anarchetype is by definition an open, extensible, continuable form. Its sequences are chained together without depending upon a centre of gravitation, since no matter how distanced from one another they may become, along the most unexpected of trajectories, they will not endanger the nebula which they are a part of.
Let me give an example: The Saragossa Manuscript, Jan Potocki's fantastic novel, is built on an archetypal schema -the initiation of the protagonist, Alfons van Worden. Upon this narrative thread, however, is grafted a series of tales and anecdotes which outweigh by far the epic mass devoted to the main story.
What would happen if, were we to imagine a small theoretical experiment, we extracted the backbone of the initiation schema and maintained only its peripheral narrative flesh?
We would obtain a sort of narrative mollusc, in the manner of A Thousand and One Nights. To such an invertebrate may be appended countless new episodes and sequences without their upsetting any sense of coherence and finitude. Another mind-blowing book is in a similar situation: Alice's Adventures in Wonderland, a nightmare clad in the garments of a fairy tale. Built upon the principle of oneiric associations, the book consists of a suite of tableaux and occurrences that do not add up and are not combined in a unitary scenario.
At any moment a new episode might be inserted, without its damaging the overall picture, since the very nature of this book is anarchetypal. It seems to me that introducing the concept of the anarchetype is necessary in order to explain a series of works and, in a wider sense, of cultural and social configurations.
There are several works which may be literary, as well as filmic, musical, visual, etc. Since such a norm usually has all the prerogatives of a canon, in the sense that it confers value, the works that exceed this canon are relegated to the periphery of non-value, of the inexpressive, of the unintelligible. The only chance for non-canonical creations to impose themselves in an "archetypal" environment is that of posing as an exception, which may be accepted exactly because of their oddity, because they represent singularities that only serve to reinforce and valorise the norm itself.
Besides such examples of intruders that have, nonetheless, been accepted into the canon after having been made fully aseptic, there are entire series of creations that have circulated along parallel routes to those of the official paradigm.
In his vast synthesis of the "anatomy" of literary genres, Northrop Frye also finds a place for writings that are subordinated to a certain "technique of disintegration. In my own view, however, anarchetypes are not simple deconstructivist parasites on archetypes, but have their own autonomy and internal reason for being. In light of the terms proposed here, it is not difficult to see that the European cultural canon has largely been dominated by archetypal art. The creations that have been accepted and appreciated are those works that have been built according to an intelligible, logical, centred and unidirectional scenario.
Around and outside this mainstream literature, however, are constellations and galaxies of creations that criticism usually dismisses as rambling, chaotic, de-centred, prolix, without a message, unintelligible, badly constructed. What would happen, however, if we were to discover that the badge of failure attached to these works is the result of an incompatibility between paradigms rather than that of an actual decline?
The concept of the anarchetype aims to affirm the existence of certain atypical structures where only a lack of structure is visible. Moreover, it also intends to exculpate de-centred and multipolar configurations, whose value the archetypal canon dismisses. In what follows, I shall give examples of anarchetypical creations; these examples shall include sets or corpuses of works, rather than individual works, which, throughout various periods of European literature were considered to be sub-literature.
The first class is represented by the novels of the late antiquity, novels that have been characterised as "Alexandrine," in a relatively pejorative acceptation, as opposed to "Attic" works. Novels of imaginary voyages, of mythological inventions, or of avant-la-lettre picaresque fashion, the works of Lucian, for instance, have been regarded as mere amusements and fantasies, as epiphenomena or excrescences of the great literature, whose canonical models were the epic, tragedy, the philosophical poem, etc.
The Thousand and One Nights
Planning a visit? Read more here. Some material may be stored offsite and require up to two business days for retrieval. Describe the materials you want reproduced example: entire folder, letter dated Sept. You must be logged into your account in order for your request to be submitted. Click here to view your requests. Skip to Content.
The origin of the work is a mystery. The themes and narrative structure are very similar to those of the One Thousand and One Nights — having as setting the immense Muslim world, the stories talk about intrepid travellers, epic and romantic adventures, and enigmas, desires and wonders, which enchant the reader. However, the spirit of both is the same and the scholars consider that the reading of each one of them complements the other and allows a more complete appreciation of mediaeval Arabian literature. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. A Hundred and One Nights.
Such versions may serve in an inadequate degree to make the Arabian Nights known to those who care only for the bare stories; but educated readers, who are.
The Thousand and One Nights
Faster previews. Personalized experience. Get started with a FREE account. Freely Transcribed from the Original Translation.
Language Editing Service. The overall structure of the folktale narrative depends on the tales she recounts to King Shahriyar, and it is through these tales that she finally is able to change his mind. The richness of the narrative qualities, properties, and techniques in The Thousand and One Nights has attracted narrative scholars and narratologists for a long time. Narrativity generally refers to the qualities and features that cause a narrative to be accepted or evaluated as a prototype narrative. Bal, Mieke.
One Thousand and One Nights
How to publish with Brill. Fonts, Scripts and Unicode. Brill MyBook. Ordering from Brill. Author Newsletter.
Pages·· MB·14, Downloads·New! The Book of the Thousand Nights and One Night - Vol 2 Edited by J.C Madrus & E.P Math.
Its tales of Aladdin , Ali Baba , and Sindbad the Sailor have almost become part of Western folklore , though these were added to the collection only in the 18th century in European adaptations. As in much medieval European literature, the stories— fairy tales , romances , legends , fables , parables , anecdotes , and exotic or realistic adventures—are set within a frame story. Then, loathing all womankind, he marries and kills a new wife each day until no more candidates can be found. His vizier , however, has two daughters, Shahrazad Scheherazade and Dunyazad; and the elder, Shahrazad, having devised a scheme to save herself and others, insists that her father give her in marriage to the king. Each evening she tells a story, leaving it incomplete and promising to finish it the following night. The stories are so entertaining, and the king so eager to hear the end, that he puts off her execution from day to day and finally abandons his cruel plan. Though the names of its chief characters are Iranian, the frame story is probably Indian, and the largest proportion of names is Arabic.
Стратмору едва не удалось сделать предлагаемый стандарт шифрования величайшим достижением АНБ: если бы он был принят, у агентства появился бы ключ для взлома любого шифра в Америке. Люди, знающие толк в компьютерах, пришли в неистовство. Фонд электронных границ, воспользовавшись вспыхнувшим скандалом, поносил конгресс за проявленную наивность и назвал АНБ величайшей угрозой свободному миру со времен Гитлера. Новый стандарт шифрования приказал долго жить. Никому не показалось удивительным, что два дня спустя АНБ приняло Грега Хейла на работу. Стратмор решил, что лучше взять его к себе и заставить трудиться на благо АНБ, чем позволить противодействовать агентству извне. Стратмор мужественно перенес разразившийся скандал, горячо защищая свои действия перед конгрессом.
Даже в полуметре от шефа она не видела очертаний его фигуры. Всякий раз, ступая на очередную ступеньку, она носком туфли первым делом старалась нащупать ее край. К ней снова вернулись страхи, связанные с новой попыткой найти ключ Хейла в Третьем узле. Коммандер был абсолютно убежден в том, что у Хейла не хватит духу на них напасть, но Сьюзан не была так уж уверена в. Хейл теряет самообладание, и у него всего два выхода: выбраться из шифровалки или сесть за решетку. Внутренний голос подсказывал ей, что лучше всего было бы дождаться звонка Дэвида и использовать его ключ, но она понимала, что он может его и не найти.
Подойдя к компьютеру Джаббы, она подняла глаза и увидела своего любимого человека. Его голос гремел: - Три. Разница между 238 и 235 - три.