rel="nofollow" href="#ulink_640f3407-dd5b-5602-8f8e-c1dc0b925e98">167 Brigdes, “Exploration and Travel outside Europe,” pp. 66–67.
168 According to Riffenburgh, this showed in the Scandinavians’ eagerness to acquire Inuit knowledge and skills for survival in the Arctic. Riffenburgh, The Myth of the Explorer, pp. 114, 142–143.
169 Accounts of Norwegian polar expeditions were distinctively associated with national discourse, which thrived with particular robustness at the turn of the 19th century, when Norway became an independent nation. Karlsen, Triumf, lojalitet, avstand, p. 11.
170 Whereas Astrup died shortly after the English edition of his account was published, Rasmussen, for most of his life, remained in close contact with both Nansen and commander Holm: he met with them on many occasions, exchanged letters, asked for their advice or for letters of recommendation. They were all part of the great circle of Scandinavian polar explorers vividly described by Hastrup in her comprehensive work Vinterens hjerte. Michelsen, Vejen til Thule, p. 218; Hastrup, Vinterens hjerte, pp. 41–53; 184–200.
171 As observed by Riffenburgh, writing skills were a highly relevant factor in promoting polar explorers’ fame. Riffenburgh, The Myth of the Explorer, p. 164.
172 “Salvage travel writing” denotes a tendency which was particularly common among ethnographers towards depicting non-European peoples as subjects who will soon disappear from the globe and therefore need to be preserved for posterity. Helen Carr, “Modernism and Travel (1880–1940),” in: The Cambridge Companion to Travel Writing, eds. Peter Hulme and Tom Youngs (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002), p. 82.
173 This is argued by Inger Nilsson in his study of small state imperialism. Nilsson, “Grönlandsfrågan.”
174 According to Elleke Boehmer, colonial literature can generally be described as writing “reflecting a colonial ethos,” and more specifically as “writing concerned with colonial perceptions and experience, written mainly by metropolitans, but also by creoles and indigenes, during colonial times.” Boehmer, Colonial & Postcolonial Literature, p. 2. With such a generalised and generalising definition, all literary production generated across the Danish state throughout the colonial period can be classified as colonial literature since it spread imperialism as the regular order of things. “Colonialist literature” is described by Boehmer as writing particularly involved in colonial expansion, “written by and for colonizing Europeans about non-European lands dominated by them. […] informed by theories concerning the superiority of European culture and the rightness of empire.” Boehmer, Colonial & Postcolonial Literature, p. 3.
175 Melberg, Å reise og skrive, p. 12.
176 Holland and Huggan, Tourists with Typewriters, p. XI; Peter Hulme and Tim Youngs, “Introduction,” in: The Cambridge Companion to Travel Writing, eds. Peter Hulme and Tom Youngs (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002), p. 6.
177 Holland and Huggan, Tourists with Typewriters, p. IX.
178 Brydon and Tiffin, Decolonising Fictions, p. 12. For example, Karen Langgård stresses that the colonial and postcolonial situation of Geenlanders differed from that of the inhabitants of other colonies as there was no colonial or colonialist literature that depicted the former as an embodiment of evil; neither did European settlers write literature about Greenland inspired by their sense of displacement. Karen Langgård, “An Examination of Greenlandic Awareness of Ethnicity and National Self-Consciousness through Texts Produced by Greenlanders 1860s–1920s,” Etudes Inuit Studies, Vol. 22, No. 1 (1998), p. 99.
179 Wylie, Colonial Tropes and Postcolonial Tricks, p. 5.
180 Castle, “Editor’s Introduction,” p. xiv. Greenblatt also emphasises that European practices of representation vary, despite their copious common features, and points to discrepancies between respective nations, religions, social classes and professions. Greenblatt, Marvellous Possessions, p. 8.
181 Porter, Haunted Journeys, p. 14.
182 Porter, Haunted Journeys, p. 13, footnote 17; Johannes Fabian, Time and the Other: How Anthropology Makes Its Object (New York: Columbia University Press, 1983), p. 88.
183 Bhabha, The Location of Culture, p. 46.
184 Said, Orientalism, p. 21; Barnes and Duncan, “Introduction: Writing Worlds,” p. 9.
185 Pratt, Imperial Eyes, pp. 135–136.
186 Islam, The Ethics of Travel, p. vii.
187 Stadius, Reseberättelsen, p. 293.
188 Said, Orientalism, pp. 20–21.
189 The author’s self-staging is discussed by Swedish literary scholar Arne Melberg, who explains that the literary “self” can be constructed in a variety of ways, which fosters the fictionalisation of both the subject and the reality the subject presents. In her study of autobiographical literature, with which travel writing is affiliated, Leigh Gilmore states that at the centre of travel texts lies the only ostensibly “ ‘unifying’ I,” which is in fact intrinsically split by its locatedness in different discourses. Arne Melberg, Selvskrevet: Om selvframstilling i litteraturen (Oslo: Spartacus, 2007), pp. 9–12; Leigh Gilmore, Autobiographics: A Feminist Theory and Women’s Self-Representation (Ithaca & London: Cornell University Press, 1994), p. 45.
190 Carl Thompson, Travel Writing (London & New York: Routledge, 2011), p. 109.
191 Gilmore, Autobiographics, p. 84. This approach does not mean that referentiality and fictionality are dichotomous and mutually exclusive; in fact, they affect each other. Gilmore, Autobiographics, p. 84.
192 Karlsen, Triumf, lojalitet, avstand, p. 38. In her PhD dissertation, Karlsen explores in detail the fictionality of travel writing and “self-writing” practised by travel writers. See Karlsen, Triumf, lojalitet, avstand, pp. 27–38, 41–44.
193 Bhabha, The Location of Culture, p. 22.
