{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.00997506234413965, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 4.695035460992908, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The anatomy of a myth

The text analyses myth-making practices in the literary field. Literary studies place certain authors on the right side of history, while delegitimising others and letting them slip into oblivion. The analysis of the formation of the literary cult of Danilo Kiš is placed in a
 wider context of the reproduction of author positions and writing styles that are not independent of power mechanisms. Based on the historical example of the polemic on plagiarism in the book A Tomb for Boris Davidovich by Danilo Kiš, I analyse the formation of the literary field
 in Yugoslavia. This concrete example helps deconstruct the literary myth that allows us to see the subterranean forces in the field of culture and the specific role of literature in the ideological formation of society.