<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<p>This article is the first part of a series of publications on Arthur Koestler’s reception in Hungary during its transition to Communism. Given the author’s iconic status as an anti-Communist writer, it is reasonable to suppose that his texts would have been banned and his name rarely uttered, much less printed, in Hungary before the 1989 regime change. It is thus not surprising that this view is virtually uncontested by scholars both in Hungary and beyond. Yet, as shown here on the basis of thirty-one articles published between April 1945 and June 1948 in Hungarian dailies, journals, and magazines, at least in this early and transitional period, Koestler’s writing is not only frequently mentioned but actively discussed. Furthermore, through a closer analysis of the contents of these texts, five specific categories of mentions are identified: (1) Koestler cited as a journalist reporting on contemporary events; (2) his opinion quoted as that of an authority figure; (3) polemics towards Koestler’s views; (4) reports on the foreign reception of Hungarian literature, including Koestler; and (5) Koestler used as a public scapegoat.</p>
</abstract>

This article is the first part of a series of publications on Arthur Koestler’s reception in Hungary during its transition to Communism. Given the author’s iconic status as an anti-Communist writer, it is reasonable to suppose that his texts would have been banned and his name rarely uttered, much less printed, in Hungary before the 1989 regime change. It is thus not surprising that this view is virtually uncontested by scholars both in Hungary and beyond. Yet, as shown here on the basis of thirty-one articles published between April 1945 and June 1948 in Hungarian dailies, journals, and magazines, at least in this early and transitional period, Koestler’s writing is not only frequently mentioned but actively discussed. Furthermore, through a closer analysis of the contents of these texts, five specific categories of mentions are identified: (1) Koestler cited as a journalist reporting on contemporary events; (2) his opinion quoted as that of an authority figure; (3) polemics towards Koestler’s views; (4) reports on the foreign reception of Hungarian literature, including Koestler; and (5) Koestler used as a public scapegoat.

Not Only by Accident.  Arthur Koestler’s Reception  in Post-war Hungary, 1945–1948

Acta Universitatis Sapientiae, Philologica

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

This article is the first part of a series of publications on Arthur Koestler’s reception in Hungary during its transition to Communism. Given the author’s...

Not Only by Accident. Arthur Koestler’s Reception in Post-war Hungary, 1945–1948

Publié en ligne: 15 nov. 2023

Pages: 126 - 149

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/ausp-2023-0009

Mots clés
Arthur Koestler, reception, Hungary, 1940s, Communism

© 2023 Zénó Vernyik, published by Sciendo

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Not Only by Accident. Arthur Koestler’s Reception in Post-war Hungary, 1945–1948

Publié en ligne: 15 nov. 2023

Pages: 126 - 149

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/ausp-2023-0009

Mots clésArthur Koestler, reception, Hungary, 1940s, Communism

© 2023 Zénó Vernyik, published by Sciendo

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Mots clés
Arthur Koestler, reception, Hungary, 1940s, Communism