The Rhetoric of Irony in Julian Barnes's Novels
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
UNIVERSITATEA DIN CRAIOVA FACULTATEA DE LITERE ȘCOALA DOCTORALĂ „ALEXANDRU PIRU” THE RHETORIC OF IRONY IN JULIAN BARNES’S NOVELS SUMMARY Conducător științific, Prof. univ. dr. Victor OLARU Doctorand, Anca-Ioana VULCĂNESCU (VULCĂNESCU-FLOREA) Craiova 2020 SUMMARY Key words: Postmodernism, rhetoric, irony, Socratic irony, Derrida, Deconstructivism, Bakhtinian influences, carnivalization of literature, literary techniques, intertextuality, reinterpretation, narrative, reinterpreting history, carnival, sarcasm, parody, burlesque characters, hyperreal, simulacrum, irony and postmodernism, re-enactment of dandyism, Neo-Victorian influences. Julian Barnes is one of the writers who transgresses the narrative boundaries and rewrites the major themes of Early postmodernism, thus becoming a controversial figure. His narrative technique differs from the modernist one and we notice that he either deconstructs the narration replacing it with a state of mind, or goes beyond the boundaries of narratology, changing the structure, and impregnating it with irony. Barnes replaces the plot with a narrative game and his motto seems to be a simple one: ‘Let’s play with the characters, the plot… let’s play with everything.’ His changeable style, either journalistic or dramatic, constitutes an element of novelty that might puzzle the average reader. For example, in Flaubert’s Parrot, he starts by presenting a short history of literature, and re-writes it in an imaginary way: 2/3 of the story is real, while the rest is fictional. He never ceases to amaze us when he uses language as a means of transition and combines postmodernism with classical rhetorical features in order to obtain ironic situations. In The Porcupine he relies on both verbal and situational irony when he describes the activity of the Devinsky Comando. He employs verbal irony when he refers to the students’ slogans ‘THANK YOU FOR THE PRICE RISES/ THANK YOU FOR THE FOOD SHORTAGES’ (Barnes 2005: 46), and situational irony when he describes their encounter with lieutenant Ganin. The meeting was supposed to be a bloody confrontation, but it turned out to be a pacifist reunion due to the main participants’ power to negotiate. England, England abounds in examples of situational irony: when Sir Jack is excited because he believes he can fire Martha, she manages to turn the tables, blackmails him with the disclosure of his most shameful secret pleasure, and becomes the company’s manager, instead. Consequently, these are some of the situations when Barnes finds the necessary means to insert ironic hints or 2 funny misinterpretations, irrespective of the novel’s theme. Our endeavour is to investigate if and how irony provides Barnes the opportunity to reshape the narrative according to his rhetorical approach, starting from Jacques Derrida’s deconstructivism. A. Field of research Our study begins from an interdisciplinary approach, with references to literary theory, intertextuality, psychoanalytic studies, and Philosophy. We will analyse Socrates’ irony, Plato’s maieutic principles, Aristotle’s rhetoric or Derrida’s deconstructivism and their effects on the narrative. The thesis also focuses on Julian Barnes’s interviews, as they enable the reader to understand the mechanism of the novels, as well as the motivation that prompted him to choose certain topics. His interviews are another source of information due to their diversity and richness, as they provide the only chance to scrutinise each situation from the writer’s perspective. By tracing the development of every novel, we will be able to identify the patterns, which constitute the basis of this study. As the title suggests, we will approach the novels from two perspectives: one determined by the narrator’s ironic attitude and the other shaped by the rhetorical devices. These interdisciplinary aspects are now part of the literary panoply, and based on the information gathered so far, we will interpret the eight novels that form the corpus of analysis, including his latest novel The Man in the Red Coat (2019). By contrasting the novels, the literary elements: plot, narrative, characters, themes, as well as the literary techniques, we will determine the author’s ability to adapt the narrative and reshape it according to the deconstructive technique. In our opinion, this multidisciplinary conceptualization and the comparative analysis facilitate the access to a thorough understanding of the novels. B. Statement of the problem Julian Barnes and his work have aroused mixed feelings, and there has always been a storm of acclamation and incessant critiques. Firstly, in a world where categorisation plays the most important role, and critics are inclined to reject everything that does not correspond to their patterns, Barnes had the audacity to distance himself from these restrictions and 3 created his own versatile style. He embraces sharp irony and satire from the very beginning of his writing career, and coins it as a Barnesian attribute, alongside solitude and other features. Not all critics responded positively to this new literary style, so some accused him of superficiality, others of inconsistency. Secondly, in a postmodern fling, he favours the deconstruction of the narrative and borrows the Modernist non-linear pattern. In The Noise of Time, the narration is a cubist one, and Barnes decides to cycle back and forth through the memories of the famous composer Dimitri Dmitriyevich Shostakovich. He describes the effects of an authoritarian regime on Shostakovich’s life and career: not only does he feel insecure and persecuted, but also enchained and forced to submit to the restrictions of the system. Thirdly, all the features discussed so far are part of his contested rhetoric. From Antiquity, rhetoric has always been a critical instrument facilitating communication, becoming the milestone of literature and philosophy. Some critics might dismiss his novels, accusing Barnes of simplicity, due to his tendency to minimise and enwrap into irony certain aspects that could be highly important for others. Barnes does not seem to succumb to detractions, and he refused to change the ending of The Porcupine even if that meant to confront his publisher. We have based our study on two fundamental assumptions. The first supposition is that irony and the narrative peculiarities become the cause of these controversies. The second one refers to his ability to use Derrida’s deconstruction as a starting point and reshape Postmodernism according to his literary interest. Our aim is to explore the texts and the narration in order to discover the literary influences and the structure itself and find the proofs that might support or invalidate our research. Furthermore, our intention is to determine if this literary fusion, spiced with intertextuality, Bakhtinian influences, and Neo-Victorianism, is one of the steps towards his narrative accomplishment. C. Research, questions, and objectives Starting from the premise that Julian Barnes’s novels are the products of narrative deconstruction, rhetorical irony, and postmodern rhetoric in general, we shall attempt to answer the following questions: 4 Chapter One 1. Why does irony play a crucial role in literature and philosophy? 2. How do Irony and Postmodernism interrelate? 3. Does the art of rhetoric influence Postmodernism? 4. How does intertextuality affect the novel? 5. What is deconstructivism? Chapter Two 1. Does Barnes rely on the reinterpretation of History? 2. What is the narrative approach in The Porcupine? 3. What forms of irony does Barnes use in The Porcupine? 4. How does Barnes employ the deconstruction theory? Chapter Three 1. How is Bakhtin’s concept of carnivalization reflected in Barnes’s England, England? 2. Can we identify any Bakhtinian patterns when we analyse England, England? 3. What kind of society does England, England present? 4. How is the concept of irony reflected in Staring at the Sun? Chapter Four 1. What are the effects of the deconstruction theory on Barnes’s latest novel The Man in the Red Coat? 2. To what extent does he combine irony and intertextuality? 3. Is this novel a form of reinterpreted history? 4. What are the Neo-Victorian influences? Chapter Five 1. How does he reinterpret feelings and time? 5 2. How does he represent memories and time in The Sense of an Ending? 3. What inspired him to create the characters from The Sense of an Ending? 4. Does he deconstruct feelings in Talking it Over and Love, etc? 5. What kind of irony does he use in Talking it Over and Love, etc? Furthermore, the objectives of our research are derived from literary theory and analysis. The aims of this study are as follows: 1. to define and analyse the concepts of irony and rhetoric with reference to Julian Barnes’s novels. 2. to investigate the selected novels using Derrida’s deconstruction theory. 3. to analyse the way in which Barnes used irony as a rhetorical device. 4. to identify the connection between Bakhtin’s concept of carnivalized literature and Julian Barnes’s work. D. Significance of the study The eight novels selected for the study have in common the fusion of irony and rhetoric that enabled the writer to adapt the literary elements to his own need, in a deconstructive process. England, England is the epitome of the Barnesian satire and was published in a period when many British critics believed this genre had come to an abrupt end. The Porcupine is a reshaped novel, in conformity with Barnes’s journalistic style, a radiography of the post-communist society, with many ironic sparkles. Staring at the Sun is a reinterpreted bildungsroman with many ironic accents, presenting Jean’s life from childhood to her one-hundredth birthday. The Man in the Red Coat is an intertextual approach of the nineteenth-century French and English society with accents on Dr Samuel Pozzi’s personal and professional life, following his excesses, vices and numerous achievements. The Sense of an Ending is another reinterpreted bildungsroman based on the main character’s retrospections and attempts to reconstruct the past, while The Only Story is an amalgam of ironic and dramatic experiences caused by the consequences of a controversial relationship.