• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

LIGHT THE TOWEL: NARRATIVE AND THE NEGOTIATED UNCONSCIOUS by Julia Prendergast, BA (Hons), MA Submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Deakin University November, 2012 Acknowledgments I am grateful to Matthew for his unflinching support, for his enduring love and for his philosophy of family. I am grateful to our children: Albert (19), Amelia (18), Grace (15), Henry (13), Matilda (11) and Heidi (7) - for the stockpot of love, devotion, hilarity, selfishness and absolute nonchalance that propelled me to complete the PhD to the best of my ability. I am grateful to my Mum, Ruth Prendergast (dec.), for the example of her life, for teaching me how important it is to be a known quantity to my children. I am grateful to my Dad, Andrew Prendergast, for the example of his life, for the way he loved Mum, for his integrity. I am grateful to my parents for telling me that if I followed what I loved and I followed what I was good at, I would find my place. I am grateful to my stellar family for the ongoing love, generosity and laughter, and for the precious shared history. I am grateful to ‘Honey’, my maternal Grandmother (94 years old), for the example of her life, for her love and her stories, and for believing in me: ‘to thine ownself be true’ (Shakespeare 1919). I am grateful to my superb friends for the fun and the camaraderie. I am grateful that I have a place to write: the bungalow in our back garden. I am grateful to Professor Michael Meehan, my PhD supervisor, for the freedom. I am grateful to Michael for his generosity, for his faith in the writing, for his patience with the process, and for his open and celebratory mind. I am grateful to Professor Sudesh Mishra for his astute guidance throughout my Honours and Masters studies, for his high expectations, for pushing me to ask myself the questions I needed to ask. I am grateful to Professor Ann McCulloch for her insightful reading of the first, chaotic draft of the novel. I am grateful to Dr Ron Goodrich for practical support and encouragement. I am grateful for the Australian Postgraduate Award, and for the support of the School of Communication and Creative Arts at Deakin University. This support enabled me to complete this project on a full-time basis. I am grateful for the silver lining… Preface The PhD thesis ‘Light the Towel: Narrative and the Negotiated Unconscious’ is submitted by Julia Prendergast, a candidate in the School of Communication and Creative Arts at Deakin University, Melbourne, Australia. The thesis is based on a series of publishable works. The thesis is not conventional in structure. This format is ‘an alternative model, sometimes called a “thesis by publications”, where the thesis comprises a series of papers, some or all of which may have been published by the time of submission’ (Deakin University: 39). One of the difficulties with this model is that some repetition of material is unavoidable. Each paper is written for a new audience and it is necessary to contextualise the inquiry so that it meets the stringent requirements for publication. Deakin University recognises that ‘[i]n many cases papers include duplicated material’ and candidates who adopt this alternative model are encouraged to ‘minimise repetition’ (Deakin University: 40) . The attempt to minimise repetition must be balanced against the exacting requirements for peer- reviewed publication: a balanced, coherent argument, which inevitably involves the (re-) definition of key concepts and the (re-) introduction of key theorists. The theoretical component of the dissertation ‘Light the Towel: Narrative and the Negotiated Unconscious’ investigates the operation of authorial intention at a primal moment of narrative composition, drawing crucially and primarily on the concept of alterity (Derrida) and the work of the unconscious (Freud) as it organises memory and creativity. Chapter one concentrates upon Derrida’s early work, for this is where Derrida’s concept of alterity originates. Derrida’s alterity is a response to the perceived limitations of the Saussurean and Husserlian linguistic traditions. Derrida’s impetus is juxtaposed with the preoccupations of the practice-based inquiry, with the observation that consciousness and logic do not sufficiently explain the ‘coming to expression’ of the novel’s themes and preoccupations. Chapter one charts the direction of the inquiry by referring to the body chapters of the theoretical component of the thesis. Derrida’s alterity is discussed within the context of the linguistic tradition to which it belongs. Reference is also made to Derrida’s later work, as well as to Hillis Miller and Whish-Wilson. This places the practice-based inquiry in the context of more recent scholarship. Chapter two introduces the creative component of the thesis, with reference to the discontinuous style employed by Moorhouse. Framed by examples from the novel, this chapter outlines the original concept of ‘experiential representation’. With reference to philosophy (Nietzsche), linguistics (Lakoff and Johnson) and psychoanalysis (Laub), chapter two links remembering with the experiential act of representation at the heart of the creative process. In this way, chapter two deploys an argument against Bakhtin’s privileging of intentional and conscious processes. Chapter three and chapter four explore how the work of the unconscious, in the context of ‘experiential representation’, relates to the editorial work that supplements the initial work of creation. To unpick this process, reference is made to Freud’s distinction between the latent and the manifest content of dreams and, that is, to the work of the unconscious as it applies to representation and, by extension, creative writing. It is suggested that the relationship between the latent and the manifest content of narrative relies upon a metaphorical connection. The work of condensation and displacement are examined in the context of the ‘uncanny’ involuntary repetition of symbols and themes. In this way, Freud’s earlier and later work, together, explain the metaphorical manoeuvre that is understood to inform unconscious, alogical processes of association, in narrative representation. Schacter’s work on memory is used to explain how mnemonic processes might be applied to narrative. It is argued that ethical editing means being attentive to the work of the unconscious at a primal moment of narrative composition. Chapter five introduces the related concepts of hypnagogia and hypnopompia (Mavromatis). With reference to these concepts, this chapter investigates how it is possible to track back from the sign, to the operation of thought that produces the sign. This chapter investigates how processes of association, as they operate in the context of memory and dreams, mimic unconscious processes of association, as they operate within creative writing. Reference is made to mnemomic trace (Freud) and the operation of ‘similarity’ in hypagogia (Mavromatis). This discussion assists in returning the reader to the issue of narrative composition, because these concepts are concerned with the metaphorical, idiosyncratic nature of the ‘coming to expression’ in language. This final chapter collates the discussion about memory and metaphor (chapter two), and the analysis of the unconscious in the context of dreams, (chapters three and four), and returns to the issue of being and presence (chapter one). In this way, the reader returns to Derrida’s concept of alterity, and to the enigma of the otherwise empty sign. The concept of hypnagogia is a means for explaining how presence is simulated, because the concept illustrates how signs are empty but for the permanent traces that simulate presence and transform them. The concept of alterity gives voice to the ghostly shadow of the unconscious in writing. In this way, the issue of ‘coming to expression’, via alterity, is crucial to both the theoretical component, as well as the creative component, of the dissertation. In conclusion, it is suggested that it may be counter-productive to assess the work of the unconscious in the context of the strictures of full- consciousness and logic. At the heart of the theoretical argument is the desire to investigate the concept of alterity in the context of authorial intention. In particular, the focus is on the work of the unconscious at a primal moment of narrative composition, and the relationship between conscious and unconscious processes. The link between Derrida and Freud is crucial because it shows how Bakhtin’s prioritising of presence is superseded by ‘otherness’, by the work of the unconscious that is neither present nor absent, by work that invests and reinvests the sign with meaning in a never-ending chain of inversion and supplementation. The creative component of the dissertation is a novel: ‘The earth does not get fat’. The novel represents a quest: Annie’s daughter, Chelsea, attempts to find her ‘bygone’ family. This represents Chelsea’s quest for the memories that her mother, Annie, is incapable of accessing. The story is told in multiple first person voices, beginning with Chelsea’s voice in Book One, moving to a cacophony of voices from Annie’s past in Book Two, and concluding with Annie’s voice in Book Three. In this way, the narrative explores the ‘coming to expression’ of the expressionless: Annie’s story, Annie’s voice, the repressed ‘other’. The novel is thematically connected to the theoretical analysis, in the exegetical component of the dissertation, for at the heart of Derrida’s concept of alterity is a question: if the sign is empty, how does it mean? Derrida’s concept of alterity configures meaning in the context of trace, deferral, Différance. A fractured narrative, in its reliance on the connection between characters and events (and, that is, on the ‘other’ that does not form part of the manifest content of the narrative), makes Derrida’s alterity a particularly apt line of theoretical inquiry.

Load more

  369

Copy Link