Lines of work

• It will be interesting to refine the “author” criterion used today in the Dictionnaire des auteurs luxembourgeois. According to S. Freyermuth (2016), the CNL “jouit d’une grande influence dans la vie Culturelle”, the publication of the Dictionnaire in 2010 – in Luxembourg and in French – has led to questions about the large number of authors listed: writers of great scale, whose work has nurtured and displayed literary qualities, rank as translators who have never been “premier auteur” or authors from a single local publication.

Clarifying the “auteur” criterion is the first question that is required of the FEATHER project, in order to identify precisely the corpus of the French-language Luxembourg female authors. It is important, in constituting the corpus of writers, to identify precisely their contribution to the literary field, taking into account the resonance of their works and the critical studies that have resulted from them. The “auteur” criterion therefore raises the question of the literacy of the works and the processes of legitimization and canonization that select these works. In this regard, a clue that might be enlightening is how the female authors place themselves and define themselves on the literary scene constitutes a path, provided it does not neglect the aspects of self-depreciation linked to the gender and masculine status of canonical literary activity (Ambroise, 2001). This would take into account the concepts of ethos and posture, which will also shed light on the creation of literary networks. 

• Three awards are especially highlighted at the national level: the Servais Prize, the National Literary Competition and the Batty Weber Prize in that they are representative of a plurilingual literature, reflecting the plural identity of the country. It is therefore interesting to look at the place of French-language Luxembourg literature. This would be all the more revealing since the authors (men and women) have often explained and expanded on the motivations for language change in their works. Digging this track would allow us to accurately envision a mapping of French-language women’s literature. In a similar line of thought, we note that the most famous female authors are often included in a multilingual Luxembourgish literature. These are the same female authors we find in the list of authors who have won prizes for their works in German and/or Luxembourgish. This, of course, raises a related question: How to articulate the corpus of French-language writers with national multilingual production? For example, the case of Cl. Muno (illustrated by four-language novels) will be interesting clues to identify tensions at work in Luxembourgish literature.

The absence of Luxembourgish male and female authors in the list of International Prize recipients, with the notable exception of the poetess A. Koltz (Jean Arp Prize in 2008 and Goncourt de la Poésie 2018), who poses (in addition to the question of the place of Luxembourg literature) the question of the visibility of the female authors. A relevant starting point is based on the work of F. Fehlen (2010), who shows that Luxembourgish writers have relatively easy access to Luxembourgish publishing and prizes, but that the international scene is much more difficult to access. Contrary to the representations that preceded the constitution of this project, the percentage of French-speaking women whose literary work has won awards is higher than that of award-winning French-speaking men. This remark is an opportunity to note the real need for in-depth work on this field, as proposed by the FEATHER project, which by its simple preliminary clarifications already offers a renewed look at the material.

• Considering French-speaking Luxembourgish female authors as members and actresses of literary networks makes it possible to bring to light the interactions they had with the literary field on two levels: 1) how they took part in it, 2) what were the any intermediaries, 3) how they were received there. As the literary field is not neutral (Sapiro, Bourdieu), this study will lead to an understanding of the strategies of legitimation and canonization, taking into account not only critical literary factors, but also the social impact. For example, É. Mayrisch (cofounder of Arbed18 and patron) and his wife A. de Saint-Hubert, who was also the female author of Letters and translator of Maître Eckhart, organized, after the First World War in their castle of Colpach, famous cultural meetings with guests from European literature, like A. Gide or H. Michaux. These meetings fed the place at the heart of European literature of the first part of the 20th century.

Objectives

Several general objectives emerge from these working hypotheses. FEATHER aims to identify and enhance a body of work by French-speaking Luxembourgish female authors. This project differs from existing research projects and proposes an innovative contribution that will focus on the following objectives:

• Production. How to qualify and characterize Luxembourgish French-speaking female authors?

By relying on a literary criticism of the works of female authors and on the identification of existing archives, FEATHER (to integrate the unpublished in the analyses) aims to analyse the place of women on the literary scene, taking into account that the literary canon is the product of a “système androcentrique” (Boisclair, 2004). It is therefore a question of determining who are the Luxembourgish authors of the French language, how to define them as authors and what are the characteristics of their writing? This makes it possible to think of female literature, particularly French-speaking, as a system in which the Luxembourg example finds its place. This research question focuses on female authors – taken as individuals or as groups – and their ways of intervening in the literary field.

• Reception. How do female authors break into the literary scene?

The analysis of the literary journeys of the female authors allows us to identify the processes and strategies that have allowed them to become sacred on the national scene. It is a question here of being interested in the reception of works on the literary scene. Literary networks, and their role and influence, participate in the development of this scene. Thus, FEATHER will be interested in literary critics, editors, correspondence, which sometimes constitute strategies of authors. In parallel, the project will study the role – positive or negative – played by the literary institutions through the awarding of prizes. The edition of a new one by A. Koltz planned as part of the project, participates in this movement.

• Network. How can we grasp the Luxembourg literary scene in this context?

FEATHER will establish a critical approach at local and international level, aiming to put the Luxembourg literary scene into perspective using a critical approach. This will lead us to reconsider, reassess and elevate the dynamism and the importance of the literary production of French-speaking female authors of the 20th and 21st centuries in the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg. FEATHER will provide innovative lighting because it is based on a perspective of Francophone studies and Gender studies. The resulting platform, designed as a research and educational tool, will allow us to take a fresh look at the Luxembourg literary scene as small literature, the way it is structured, its networks and places of influence.

In view of its objectives, aimed at questioning and revaluing the place of female authors in Luxembourg, FEATHER contributes to the development of current research anchored in French-speaking studies and gender studies:

FEATHER aims to question the processes of visibility/invisibility. Contrary to what was envisaged before the preliminary works, female French-language literature in Luxembourg is characterized by a high recognition rate (see statement of hypotheses): higher than that of its male counterparts. This leads us to postulate corpus effects. Thanks to FEATHER, it will be possible to precisely analyse the Luxembourgish female literary scene and to relate visibility to the names of the cited female authors. The first observations illustrate the fact that visibility is based on reiteration phenomena.

One of FEATHER’s strengths is to focus on Luxembourgish literature, and particularly on areas less studied by current research: the small literatures. The Luxembourgish literature, by virtue of its minority and peripheral status, contains elements of understanding about tensions with the French-dominant literary field. By extension, this will enrich French-speaking studies by taking into account specific literature (multilingual, central place in Europe, etc.) which nevertheless presents obvious similarities with Belgium and Switzerland.

Our approach does not seek to define a corpus of female works under the sole argument that these works were written by women. We therefore postulate feminine literature as a system; some works, meeting the subjective criteria of their time, managed to break the glass ceiling and thus entered the literary canon.

FEATHER will be an opportunity to renew the approach to Luxembourgish literature by adding a more inclusive dimension with regard to literature written by women. This could also lead the Luxembourg literary scene to be more visible and more attractive in the current research fields of gender studies and French-speaking studies.