Search

This paper explores how an article by Marita Mathijsen on literary subsidies in the nineteenth century (1996, Nederlandse letterkunde) has served as a prelude to later research on post-romantic private literary patronage in The Netherlands on the one hand, and Dutch government policy on the other. It provides an overview of research carried out by Dutch researchers since 1996 into practices of and discourses on the public and private support of authors. Over the past two centuries, governments and private citizens have taken care of writers in multiple ways, with varying motives and with varying degrees of success. Since 1996, researchers have researched these practices from a number of angles. One important question they grappled with was whether these forms of public and private support are essentially similar and should be examined as such, or essentially different. Another dilemma: is it more effective to approach and examine writers after 1850 as passive recipients of charitable (emergency) aid, or to emphasize their role as (non)equal partners in the reciprocal relationships they maintained with their public or private benefactors? In the last section of the paper, the author outlines four directions in which (inter)national patronage research could develop over the next 25 years. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A grand narrative of Dutch literary authors' opportunities to economically profit from their writing is yet to be written. The general assumption, however, is that these opportunities developed teleologically from a dominant system of patronage during medieval and early modern times, in which financial gains were marginal and in which author's independence of their supporters was constrained, to a system in which the commercial book market was dominant and where authors could be more self-supporting and thus more independent of supporters. This article argues that there is no such teleology. On the contrary: on the basis of an exploration of both practice and discourse of literary authors' profits from the Middle Ages to the present, we conclude that in every period, it was possible for authors to profit from their writing through either patronage, market or governmental support, and often through a combination of these sources. Moreover, in every period varying types of independence of literary authors was valued highly. Our analysis of the discourse on profits shows that the continuous tendency to disguise financial advancement could be related to the importance of authorial independence throughout the ages. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article argues that it is both important and viable to develop a diachronic perspective on the profits of literary authors in the Low Countries. Up to now, conceptual and theoretical boundaries between different subdisciplines within Dutch literary studies have resulted in a compartmentalized, fragmentary narrative of the economic, social and symbolic profits of literary authors throughout the centuries. On the basis of a survey of the theoretical frameworks dominant in the subdisciplines of medieval, early modern and modern Dutch literature, we highlight the opportunities and difficulties for a diachronic perspective on financial advancement, focusing both on practice and discourse. In addition, we propose a schematic model that tries to overcome the difficulties and enables us to profit from the opportunities. This proposal allows for a sharper focus on both the practice of and discourse on literary authors' economic gain from a diachronic perspective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on negotiating authorship and (in)dependence by writer Albert Verwey in Dutch literary magazine "De beweging." It mentions notions about the value of autonomy and the value of authorship were closely linked and Verwey formulated autonomy as a form of artistic and economic independence. It also mentions spectrum are gifts within the market pricing model and maximising profit is the main concern for both parties and exchange.

This article suggests that patronage relationships can be interpreted in terms of gift exchange, arguing that this pertains in particular to late nineteenth-century forms of patronage. Patronage relationships in this period had a reciprocal nature and were characterised by a certain degree of instability. Since literary patronage had to redefine its position in a field that was becoming ever more commercial, benefactors and beneficiaries were both looking for new ways of fulfilling their role and subtly negotiated their share in influence and power. These changes were caused by developments affecting artistic practice and autonomy: paradoxically, in this period patronage was not so much a threat to the independence of artists as one of the conditions and driving forces for their increased autonomy. Focussing on the 1860s and 1870s, the author examines three patronage circles: one led by a writer-patron, the other by a writer-beneficiary and the third by a salon hostess offering a platform to numerous authors. Their negotiations will be interpreted through an adaptation of gift theory. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Dutch poet Albert Verwey was editor of the cultural magazine De Beweging between 1905-1919. This article uses gift theory to investigate the alliances he forged with his publishers, with his readers, and with the writers he worked with, and takes stock of the ways he tried to keep the insolvent magazine financially afloat. Verwey struggled to find a balance between his own agenda and the interests of his associates, and had to tread carefully as he appealed to their clemency and goodwill. Following Aafke Komter, who differentiates between four types of gift relationship, this article demonstrates that Verwey positioned himself predominantly within the modes of what Komter calls community sharing and authority ranking. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]