The Grotesque in the Works of Federico Fellini and Angela Carter

The Grotesque in the Works of Federico Fellini and Angela Carter By Maura O'Gara Submitted in accordance with the requirements for the Degree of Masters of Arts (Literary Studies) in the English Department of the University of Cape Town Supervisor: Associate Professor Eve Bertelsen University of Cape Town March 1997 The copyright of this thesis vests in the author. No quotation from it or information derived from it is to be published without full acknowledgement of the source. The thesis is to be used for private study or non- commercial research purposes only. Published by the University of Cape Town (UCT) in terms of the non-exclusive license granted to UCT by the author. University of Cape Town ( - I , I 1 5 JAN 1998 Abstract Chapter one of this thesis attempts to explicate and analyze the controversy that has historically surrounded the grotesque. Contention over the grotesque has existed since the earliest known discourses on the subject by Horace and Vitruvius. The indeterminacy and paradoxical nature of the grotesque, which disturbed these men of antiquity, has continued to generate debate among modern theorists such as Mikhail Bakhtin and Wolfgang Kayser whose ideas serve as touchstones throughout this work. Understandably, theorists, who strive to create systems of ideas which attempt to explain and define phenomena, are drawn to the grotesque. However, they are inevitably placed in the paradoxical position of trying to categorize something which ultimately subverts the conventional logic which underlies that process. Furthermore, the standards of mimesis and decorum, from which the grotesque gets its disruptive force, are subject to society. Societies provide the different conventions and assumptions that determine the form of the grotesque. Therefore, the grotesque will always have to be approached in its historically specific contexts of production and reception. What becomes apparent in analysing the grotesque is that attitudes toward its indeterminacy and paradoxical nature, which transgress the monologic binaries and implied hierarchies of Western thought, reflect the position of the observer or producer of the grotesque. If one espouses the cause of the low, as does Balch tin, then the indeterminacy and paradox of the grotesque provides an egalitarian possibility for the marginalized. If one stands with the status quo, as does Kayser, the transgressing of the definitions and distinctions which support the status quo is experienced as frightening and sinister (Harpham, 73). The differences noted between Kayser and Balch tin as observers of the grotesque may also be made between Federico Fellini and Angela Carter as producers of grotesque texts. The following two chapters of the thesis explore how the grotesque is used in Fellini 's films (chapter two) and Carter's novels (chapter three). Carter, like Bakhtin, celebrates the grotesque as a means of empowerment, particularly for women and her work seems to employ the Bakhtinian theory of the carnivalesque. Fellini' s films also use images of carnival, but Fellini, like Kayser, sees the grotesque as an isolating aspect of the human condition. Fellini uses the grotesque only to show humanity's alienation from a knowable world, whereas Carter uses it to demonstrate the possibilities of a totally new one. Carter appears to take the Fellinian, Kayserian, negative attitude towards the grotesque and turn it around for her feminist cause. She utilizes the emancipatory aspect of the grotesque inherent in its denial of hierarchy without, however, idealizing it as Bakhtin appears to. She is well aware that carnivals, like her novels, are author(ized). In analyzing the continuum of Fellini's and Carter's works, both artists show an increased dependence on the use of the grotesque combined with postmodern strategies to support their intentions. However, the continuum of Fellini's oeuvre suggests the development of a modernist approach which attempts closure, but faced with the impossibility of final determinacy, turns to the quagmire of simulacra where no meaning is possible. Carter, on the other hand, increasingly uses the grotesque and postmodern strategies not only to reveal and deconstruct oppressive representations, but to allow agency for the reconstruction of new subjectivities. As this thesis will demonstrate, the grotesque's indeterminacy may provide a way to understand "reality" or the means to construct a better one. Acknowledgements I would like to thank my supervisor, Eve Bertelsen, for her patience, wisdom and her exceptional method of advising which kept me guided and heartened throughout the year. I am also grateful for the love and support of my family in the U.S. and my adopted family of friends here in Cape Town whose companionship I cherish. A special thanks goes to Gabeba for her erudite advice and continual encouragement. A number of staff-members provided me with valuable materials and I extend my appreciation to them. The financial assistance granted me by the University is also gratefully acknowledged. Contents Chapter One: The Grotesque 1 Modernist Versus Realist Chapter Two: Federico Fellini 34 From Individuation to Universalization Chapter Three: Angela Carter 86 Chance is the Mother of Invention Chapter Four: Conclusion 149 A Change in Dialogue Filmography 154 Bibliography 157 1 CHAPTER ONE: THE GROTESQUE MODERNIST VERSUS REALIST The Two-Sided Act A sign does not simply exist as a given part of reality - it reflects and refracts another reality. Therefore, it may distort that reality or be true to it, or may perceive it from a special point of view, and so forth. Every sign is subject to the criteria of ideological evaluation (i.e., whether it is true, false, correct, fair, good, etc.). The domajn of ideology coincides with the domain of signs. They equate with one another. Whenever a sign is present, ideology is present, too. (Volosinov quoted by Dentith, 23) This situation is particularly acute when the sign is ambiguous and paradoxical as is the case with the word "grotesque". Underlying Volosinov's theory of the sign is the assumption that language is a social phenomenon, and he emphasizes the "' multiaccentuality of the sign', the idea that the signs of a language (words, above all) bear different accents, emphases and therefore meanings with different inflections and in different contexts. Meanings emerge in society and society is not a homogeneous mass but is itself divided by such factors as social class; signs do not therefore have fixed meanings but are always inflected in different ways to carry different values and attitudes" (Dentith, 23-4). The sociological pragmatics of Volosinov can be understood "as the study of language as it takes on meaning in the socially marked interactions between people" (29). Whether or not Mikhail Bakhtin wrote or contributed to the disputed texts of Volosinov, such a pragmatics is on tenor with his "translinguistics" or "metalinguistics" which become a helpful analytical tool when investigating the term "grotesque." In his metalinguistics, Bakhtin calls the actual act of communicating in its particular situation or context an utterance. The utterance is a dialogic process in which not only the speaker or writer is involved, but also the implied or actual listener or addressee. Unlike Volosinov, Bakhtin "does not draw substantially upon the category of 'ideology' but instead insists upon the multiplicity of social languages that make up the apparent unity of a national language; any utterance therefore takes place between language users who are socially marked in the very language they use" (Dentith, 34). Bakhtin calls the various social languages (those of certain groups, classes, generations, occasions, etc.) heteroglossia. According to Bakhtin, heteroglossia is "not only a static invariant in the life of language, but also what ensures its dynamics ... Alongside the centripetal forces (provided by a notion of a 'national language'), the centrifugal forces of language (provided by various social languages) carry on their 2 uninterrupted work; alongside ... centralization and unification, the uninterrupted processes of decentralization and disunification go forward" (my parentheses, Bakhtin: 1982, 272). Simon Dentith summarizes this theory: The conception of language as dynamically pulled between centre and periphery, between unitary national forces and heteroglossia, at once describes the tensions that are holding together and pulling apart a language at any one time, and also the same forces which, in given social, economic, political, artistic and educational histories, are producing the multiple changes that constitute the history of a language. These dynamic forces are not simply linguistic ones; they are produced by historical forces that are external to language but which act partly in language. Each and every utterance, in Bakhtin's account, is intersected by these forces, realizes itself only by virtue of participating at once in the 'normative-centralizing system of unitary language' and contributing to living heteroglossia. (Dentith, 35) Every utterance must locate itself within the competition and contradictions that exist in heteroglossia. Bakhtin states that "the utterance not only answers the requirements of its own language as an individualized embodiment of a speech act, but it answers the requirements of heteroglossia as well" (Bakhtin: 1982, 272). In this theory, the force behind linguistic change becomes the very contradictions and conflicts which constitute a "language" (Dentith,

Load more