The Concept of Self-Reflexive Intertextuality in the Works of Umberto Eco by Annarita Primier A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Centre for Comparative Literature University of Toronto © Copyright by Annarita Primier 2013 ii The Concept of Self-Reflexive Intertextuality in the Works of Umberto Eco Annarita Primier Doctor of Philosophy Centre for Comparative Literature University of Toronto 2013 Abstract Umberto Eco’s novels are complex texts that work, that can be read and thus interpreted on several levels, including but not limited to the literary, semiotic, linguistic, philosophic, and historical. Notwithstanding the postmodern ideology of the irrelevance of the author (in terms of identity and intentionality) to a text’s interpretation, Eco’s novels offer another level of reading and interpreting that includes the author’s own personal reading experiences. In this way, the author arguably becomes an integral part of the text and is directly involved in the interpretive process. This dissertation is a reconsideration of the figure of the postmodern author whose authority in a text’s interpretation has been challenged by theories of structuralism, post-structuralism, and intertextuality. It undertakes this rethinking by considering the role of the author as reader--and thus as writer in the process of rereading and rewriting. This study also investigates the postmodern theory of intertextuality (i.e., the notion that all texts are [re]iterations of other texts) from the point of view of the author’s own reading experiences (since inevitably, consciously or unconsciously, what the author reads becomes an intertext). Thus, through a combination of the author’s own reading and writing experiences, presented and perceived intertextually and intratextually throughout the text iii itself, and a series of fictionalized versions of personal experiences, not only is the reader able to gain insight into the author’s motives, intentions and personality, but the author is also able to retain or regain some of the authority over the text he or she creates. iv Acknowledgments I would like to express the deepest appreciation to the committee members who supported me throughout this process and without whose insight, guidance, persistent help, and patience this dissertation would not have been possible. I would like to thank Professor Rocco Capozzi, who first introduced me to Umberto Eco’s work and who will never really know how thankful I am not only for his insight and knowledge, but for his words of encouragement, his generous time, and for the opportunities he has provided me with throughout this process. I am indebted to Professor Andy Orchard for his vast knowledge and expertise, for tolerating my incredibly long paragraphs and my many, many apologies, and for encouraging me not only through kind words but through his awesome sense of humour. My sincere thanks to my Supervisor, Professor Linda Hutcheon, for her enthusiastic support. I greatly appreciate her indispensable suggestions and the faith she had in me and my work. A special thanks to Professor Norma Bouchard for her valuable comments and recommendations. I owe my deepest gratitude to family and friends for their endless support, but especially to my parents, Alessandro and Rosa, who believe in and are there for me always, and to whom I dedicate this work. v Table of Contents Abstract ii List of Abbreviations vi Introduction: How Eco Writes 1 Chapter 1 The First Phase: Eco, the Author--from Theories to Novels 32 Chapter 2 The Second Phase I: Intertextuality and Hybridity 100 Chapter 3 The Second Phase II: Intertextuality and (Re)Construction 144 A) Architecture as metaphor for texts B) Self-reflexive intertextual cities: Baudolino 176 Chapter 4 The Third Phase: Narrative Memory 212 Conclusion L’effetto- nebbia 254 Bibliography 261 vi List of Abbreviations AI Apocalittici e integrati AOC Aesthetics of Chaosmos AOTA The Aesthetics of Thomas Aquinas APG A passo di gambero BAG The Bomb and the General BI Baudolino (Italian) BE Baudolino (English) CDC Il costume di casa CHIL The Cambridge History of Italian Literature CYN Confessions of a Young Novelist DAAL Dall’albero al labirinto DQLSC Dire quasi la stessa cosa FP Foucault’s Pendulum FDC Forme del contenuto (1971) IDGP L’isola del giorno prima IODB The Island of the Day Before IO Interpretation and Overinterpretation IPETA Il problema estetico in Tommaso d’Aquino (1956) ITC I tre cosmonauti HTTWS How to Travel with a Salmon LBG La bomba e il generale LF Lector in fabula LOI The Limits of Interpretation MVASB La memoria vegetale e altri scritti di bibliofilia MFDRL La misteriosa fiamma della regina Loana NDR Il nome della rosa (1981) NOR The Name of the Rose OA Opera aperta (1962) OL On Literature (2002) OW The Open Work PF Il pendolo di Foucault PDJ Le poetiche di Joyce PNDR Postille Il nome della rosa (1983) PNOR Postscript to The Name of the Rose RR The Role of the Reader SA La struttura assente (1968) SL Sulla letteratura (2002) SSAS Sugli specchi e altri saggi ST Sylvie (Translation) TBC Turning Back the Clock TTA The Three Astronauts TH Travels in Hyperreality 1 Introduction: How Eco Writes Recently and especially after the publication of his fourth novel, Baudolino (2000), Umberto Eco has been less reticent in providing autobiographical information to readers who may not have followed both his literary and non-literary writing process since its inception. Baudolino was considered at the time of its release, by such reviewers as Maria Corti1 and Roberto Cotroneo,2 as Eco’s most self-reflexive novel, and many references to his own experiences both with reading and with culture, already well documented in such works as Diario minimo and Il costume di casa, could no longer be ignored. According to Rocco Capozzi, in his essay “The Return of Umberto Eco, Baudolino Homo Ludens: Describing the Unknown,” Eco himself encouraged readers to make connections between the protagonist of the novel and its author: The first reviewers of the novel have not failed to mention Eco’s narrative skills or picaresque and autobiographical features of his writing. To some extent the author may have encouraged readers to see a connection between Baudolino and Eco when he, in an interview with Laura Lilli and in his article ‘Baudolino c’est moi!!,’ boasted, much the same way as the protagonist does in the novel, about his capacity to tell stories, such as the one about the birth of his native city Alessandria (Capozzi 213). For new readers, the autobiographical level of Eco’s novel not only provides a foundation on which to base their reading but, together with his collection of essays in Sulla letteratura [SL] (On Literature) [OL] (2002), in particular essays on “Borges e la mia angoscia dell’influenza” (“Borges and my Anxiety of Influence”), “Sullo stile” (“On Style”), “Ironia intertestuale e livelli di lettura” (“Intertextual Irony and Levels of Reading”) and “Come scrivo” (“How I Write”), they 1 For one of the first reviews of Baudolino see: Corti. 2 For a more comprehensive look at autobiographical elements in Eco’s novels, see: Cotroneo. 2 are also able to get a glimpse of his early theories of l’opera aperta (the open work), culture, and the role of the reader. To readers already well-acquainted with Eco’s novels and theories, this collection of essays offered clarifications and explanations of issues that might have remained vague throughout the corpus of his works. Though these essays shed some light on Eco’s writing process, they do not, however, give much away in terms of his motivations or intentions. In fact, his last essay in the collection, “Come scrivo,” points precisely to his method of writing but not his reasons; anyone who has read the Postille to his first novel, Il nome della rosa, knows that he wrote the novel simply because he felt the impulse to do so.3 An in-depth look into the writing process he describes in these essays – with their combination of inter/intratextuality and personal and collective memories – reveals, at one moment, a process of hybridization that culminates in his novels and at another, certain other revelations, if not of his precise motivations and intentions, at least more generally about the author himself. The aim of this dissertation is a reconsideration of the figure of the postmodern author whose authority in a text’s interpretation has been challenged by theories of structuralism, post-structuralism and intertextuality; it will undertake this rethinking by considering the role of the author as reader and as writer in the process of rereading and rewriting. There already exist numerous studies seeking to define the figure of the author and his or her role in the interpretation of texts.4 Of these perspectives, those that are predominantly postmodern generally consider the author a non-relevant entity in a reader’s interpretation of the author’s work. They argue for an approach to reading that affirms that it is the text (not the author) that 3“Ho scritto un romanzo perché me ne venuta voglia” (PNDR 510). 4 For a study of the history of the role of the author, see Bennett. 3 speaks to the reader and it is the reader (not the author) who offers the interpretation of the text. Rather than working with established histories of the figure of the author, this study investigates the postmodern theory of intertextuality (i.e., the notion that all texts are [re]iterations of other texts)5 from the point of view of the author’s own reading experiences (since inevitably, consciously or unconsciously, what the author reads becomes an intertext). Thus, through this process, that is, through a combination of the author’s own reading experiences, presented and perceived intertextually throughout the text itself and a series of fictionalized versions of personal experiences, not only is the reader able to gain some insight into the author’s motives, intentions and personality, but the author is also able to retain and regain some of the authority over the text he or she creates.