**9. Coda**

The reception history we have been following is grounded in literary reviews, book chapters, introductory articles, and forewords. The common denominator for this body of work is 'criticism', which according to one definition is "the analysis and judgement of the merits and faults of a literary or artistic work" (Pearsall 1988, p. 435) Its etymological root is the Greek verb *krinein*, meaning "to separate, decide, judge" (Klein 1966, p. 375). The function of criticism is thus to select and judge, either to praise or dismiss, to take extreme standpoints. Literary criticism in its various forms situates a work; it ranks it and compares it to other works. To criticize is to appreciate the value of a work of art, to be engaged in an act of evaluation. An effect of this historically conditioned critical activity is that certain books or authorships over time are preserved in the collective literary consciousness and eventually are included in that continuously changing entity: the literary canon.

The criticism that we have studied is performed according to various sets of values and norms, some of which are implicit, and some of which are made explicit. The critical criteria of course varies from one critic/reviewer to another, and, as has been made clear, not all of these criteria function equally well; some are obviously more relevant and suitable than others. Qualitative judgements regarding 'novelty', 'originality', and 'complexity' have been profuse, and they adhere to the formal aspects of Faulkner's work. Whereas terms such as 'sordid', 'repulsive', and 'macabre' are judgements that are used with relevance for the contents or the worldview. Between these opposites, we have come across an array of critical judgements resulting from the critics' wrestling with Faulkner's prose and its particular challenges. The evaluations could roughly be ordered along an axis where the parameters are form and content, aesthetics and ideology, narrator and author, writer and reader. The problematics adhering to these basic parameters are of course more or less relevant for the modernist novel in general. From the limited context of Swedish Faulkner reception, it could thus be argued that Swedish criticism epitomizes and highlights the fundamental features pertaining to the notion of 'modernism', both with regard to its formal and content-based aspects.

Faulkner's Swedish reception history has not been without friction, to put it mildly. However divergent the critics and their judgments may have been, it has been obvious that Faulkner left no one indifferent. From the point of view of attracting literary attention and having an impact, it might in principle be preferable to have a negative review than no review. Silence is probably the worst fate for a writer, any writer. Faulkner has from the early 1930s stirred up emotions among critics and reviewers. Throughout his time, he was considered controversial and continuously discussed, from the first controversies in the early 1930s up until the Nobel Prize in 1950, which was the final institutionalization of Faulkner as a groundbreaking modernist writer.

In a survey of the history of the Nobel Prize in literature, Kjell Espmark entitled the period from 1946 onwards "The Pioneers", which was said to reflect a radical new policy at the Academy in comparison to the previous more populist period. Here, Faulkner falls into line with his immediate predecessors Herman Hesse, André Gide, and T.S. Eliot (Allén and Espmark 2006, pp. 30–33). By 1950, Faulker had been raised to a modernist classic. His writings had been selected, judged, ranked, and compared to others—which in essence is also an act of 'criticism'.

**Funding:** This research received no external funding.

**Conflicts of Interest:** The author declares no conflict of interest.

## **Swedish Translations of William Faulkner 1932–1951:**

"En ros åt Emily" ("A Rose for Emily"). 1932. Translated by Artur Lundkvist. *BLM*: 11–17. Republished in *Dagens Nyheter*. 1950, November 12. Republished in *Amerikansk berättarkonst*. 1963. Stockholm: Bonniers, pp. 69–78. Republishedin*Detberättasivärlden*.1998.Stockholm:Naturochkultur,pp.76–87.

 "Torr september" ("Dry September"). 1943. Translated by Artur Lundkvist. *Karavan* 2: 99–111.

"Ella" ("Elly"). 1941. Translated by Artur Lundkvist. *Horisont* spring: 64–100.

*Ljus i augusti* (*Light in August*). 1944. Translated by Erik Lindegren. Stockholm: Bonnier.

"Elly" ("Elly"). 1944. Translated by Erik Lindegren. *Kärlek från hela världen*. Stockholm: Hökerberg, pp. 539–56.

"De skäckiga hästarna" ("The Spotted Horses"). 1947. Translated by Mårten Edlund. In *All världens djurhistorier*. Stockholm: Bonnier, pp. 219–61. Republished in *Hästhistorier från hela världen.* 1961. Stockholm: Folket i Bild, pp. 79–121.

*De obesegrade* (*The Unvanquished*). 1948. Translated by Håkan Norlén. Stockholm: Folket i Bilds Förlag.

*Medan jag låg och dog* (*As I Lay Dying*). 1948. Translated by Mårten Edlund. Stockholm: Bonnier.

*De vilda palmerna* (*The Wild Palms*). 1949. Translated by Mårten Edlund. Stockholm: Bonnier.

"Carcassonne" ("Carcassonne"). 1950. Translated by Erik Lindegren. *BLM* 10: 731–33.

*Inkräktare i stoftet* (*Intruder in the Dust*). 1950. Translated by Thomas Warburton. Stockholm: Bonnier.

"I morgon" ("Tomorrow"). 1950. Translated by Mårten Edlund. *BLM* 1: 16–25.

*Det allra heligaste* (*Sanctuary*). 1951. Translated by Mårten Edlund. Stockholm: Bonnier.
