Tzvetan Todorov s Narratology 2003 10 7 Outline u u

Tzvetan Todorov’s Narratology 2003/10/7

Outline u u General Questions Narratology and Todorov “The Structure of Narrative” Examples

General Questions What are the possible basic structures of narratives? u What are the functions in getting the basic structures? And the possible limitations? u

Structuralist Narratology u u Narratology – the science of narrative; popularized in 1970’s. Contemporary narratology includes comparative narratolgy, theories of authorship, enunciation, action, story and narration, reception, self-referentiality and intertextuality. Applied narratology: psychoanalysis, gender studies, reader-response, ideological critique.

Narratology Social contexts, u History cultural conventions 3. Point-of-view authors narrator 5. semiologoist, marxists narrative reader 4. readerresponse Literary Traditions 2. Russian formalists Formal analytic frameworks (literary, linguistic, interdisciplinary) Martin 29

Structuralist Narratology: Major Theorists u u u u Levi Strauss – four terms (2 sets of binaries) V. Propp – 7 spheres of actions (Villain, hero, false hero, sought-for person, etc. ) and 31 functions out of Russain fairy tales T. Todorov –focuses more on syntax; Greimas –focuses on semantics (actants— Subject/Object, Sender/Receiver, Helper/Opponent, and 3 structures—contractual, performative, disjunctive) Claude Bremond -- virtuality (a situation opening a possibility); actualization or nonactualization of the possibility; achievement or nonachievement. Roland Barthes – 5 different codes (S/Z). etc.

Structuralist Narratology: Possible Criticisim u u u Reductive; too static and unable to characterize the very engine that drives a narrative forward to its end, the very dynamics that dictate its shape. Ignore context –depends on how it is used; The possibility of a coherent narratology, one that successfully integrates the study of the what and the way, has been put into question by poststructuralist theorists and critics invoking the so-called double logic of narrative (e. g. story and discourse, event and meaning). (Ref. http: //www. press. jhu. edu/books/hopkins_guide_to_literary_theory /narratology. html )

T. Todorov u u 3 aspects of the narrative: semantic, syntactic and verbal (Todorov’s focus is more on syntax. ) Grammar of narrative –sentence structure with the following basic units: 1. Propositions and sequences//sentences and paragraphs 2. parts of speech – characters as nouns; their attributes as adjectives, actions as verbs.

T. Todorov: “Structural Analsys of Narrative” Outline 1. Structural approach to literature defined; 2. Exemplified by his analysis of plot in Decameron; 3. The nature of narrative and the principles of its analysis.

I. Structural approach to literature defined u u u Theoretic but not descriptive, logical but not spatial. (2099) Different from both Marxism (external, an abstract structure out side of the work) and New Criticism (internal). Structuralism – “its object is the literary discourse rather than works of literature, literature that is virtual rather than real. ” (2100). New Criticism (description)—articulates a paraphrase; Structuralist (poetics) – lit. works abstract literary properties

I. Structural approach – further compared with modernist views u u 1) 2) 3) Henry James – p. 2101 -- disagrees with 1) isolating a text’s dialogue, description for analysis; 2) disregarding the novel as ‘a living thing, all one and continuous. ’ T’s responses – A theoretical concept (e. g. temperature) does not need to exist in ‘a pure state’; The fact that we find them (blood, muscle, etc) together does not prevent us from distinguishing them. ) Subjectivity is inevitable in studies of humanities (or social science) but we can limit it.

II. Decameron u 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. From some stories he finds Plot unit shown as a clause; Characters as proper nouns; with adjectives; three actions as verbs – violate, punish, avoid; Actions with different statuses (e. g. negation) Modality – legends –imperative, fairy tale– optative, a wish; perception Relations between clauses (e. g. causal, temporal, spatial); common sequence of a group of stories (punishment avoided)

II. Decameron (2) u u 8. further analysis: a. more concrete analysis of syntax -- each clause can be written as an entire sequence; b. thematic study: study the concrete actions; c. rhetoric study: examines the verbal medium

II. Decameron (3) u u His goal – not knowledge of Decameron but an understanding of literature and plot. 1) avoid punishment: From equilibrium to a new equilibrium. 2) conversion The story illustrates the superiority of the individual over the social, or nature over culture.

III. Conclusion Literature and poetics u (2106) Ambiguity in moving back and forth between the two poles: auto-reference and its object u

II. Grammar of Decameron e. g. 3 adjectives – states, interior properties and exterior conditions (status) 3 verbs – to ‘modify’ a situation, to ‘transgress, ’ and to ‘punish. ’ (3 modes—indicative, predictive and obligatory, 3 relations between propositions, 3 sequences) Ambiguity – at both the levels of proposition and sequence. Boccaccio – a defender of free enterprise and even, . . . , of nascent capitalism.

T. Todorov: Grammar of Decameron e. g. Peronella’s story (of hiding her lover in a barrel) – X commits a misdeed X modifies the situation X is not punished.

T. Todorov: another example Given by Robert Scholes X – A+ (XA) opt X Xa XA X = Boy A = Love, to be loved by someone A = to seek love, to woo Opt X = Boy (X) wishes (opt) - = negation of attributes: -A lack love

T. Todorov: another example Given by Robert Scholes XA + XB X-C + Ya. X + (X-A+X-B XC) pred. X (Xb. Y)pred. X+XA! (XB+X-C)!imp X –Eveline, Y – Frank, A—a Dubliner, B—Celibate, C—happy—respected, secure, a – to offer an elopement; b-to accept elopement -- negative of attribute, not negative of verb pred –predicts or expects, imp – is implied by discourse

T. Todorov: Questions for Discussion 1. 2. What could be the advantages of scientific and abstract descriptions? Can we use Todorov’s method on a novel such as Heart of Darkness? Or a story from The Dubliners? A Hollywood film, The Titanic?

Possible Attempts u u Chinese-American uses of traditional legends (e. g. Fox, Tang-Ao) to re-write canonical history as initial causes for disequilibrium; later confirmed to bring up a new equilibrium; How/where modification of situation is possible. • The Heart of Darkness: no equilibrium, or in the final sympathy between Kurtz and Marlow. • The Titanic: transgression obstacles (human and natural) a new equilibrium in spiritual love and death. • The Working Girl: transgression by the women (first the boss and the secretary), mutual punishment, modification by the man.

T. Todorov: critique u Jonathan Culler’s critique in Structuralist Poetics • – Modification can be done without the use of ruse or deception. • -- anything which modifies a situation will receive the same structural description. • “Todorov has not considered what facts his theory is supposed to account for and so has not considered the adequacy of the implicit groupings which it establishes” (217) • Another example – ‘the sentence “The man out of the last house passed on his way home” can be excluded from any account of the plot’ -since it has no consequences. ( Barthes kernels + satellites)

T. Todorov: critique (2) u Seymour Chatman’s Story and Discourse • p. 92 to transfer Propp’s and Todorov’s method to any narrative macrostructure whatsoever is questionable. Most do not have the necessary overarching recurrences. The worlds of modern fiction and cinema are not two-valued, black and white, as are the Russian tales and the Decameron. • P. 93 Whatever success Scholes achieves in his analysis of ‘Eveline’ depends on his knowledge of the overriding thematic framework of the Dubliners. “Why a Dubliner instead of an Irishwoman or a European or a female? Why celibate instead of poor. . . ? ”