1. Introduction The presentthesiswillanalyse IanMcEwan’slatenovel Enduring Love inlightofthe theoriesof postmodernism.Theaimistoreveal postmodernityasthesubjectmatterofthe givennovel. Enduring Love ’sinherentdebateoverthe changeoftheapproachtosciencein aftermathofthedemiseofthe proEnlightenmentmodernitywill be identified.Themain protagonist’stendencytosupposean“objective”truth,his relentless endeavouringof rationalizingtherealityandprovidingaunifiedaccountofit,will bedescribed,alongwiththe relatedpostmodernist interestindeconstructingnotionsoftruthandrationality.Thethesis supposesthecentralcharacter’s likingfora“universal” judgement,histendencyto“totalize.” Besides,the notionsofsubjectivity,the“self”,andknowledge’srelationtopowerwill be touchedupon.The postmodernist ideaof Enduring Love isthatnokindofknowledgehasa privilegedaccesstorealityanditsexplanation.Thatis tosay,postmodernism’scentralvalues aremultiplicityanddifference.Thereforetheethicalsubsoilof postmodernitytakesinto account the needfortoleranceofheterogeneity.The present paperwillconsider the main protagonist JoeRose’sapproachtothis postmodern“obligation.”Doeshevaluediversity entirely?Rose’streatmentofthe“other”(characters)will be outlined.Postmodernism’s distrustofthemodernity’s projectof rationalitybecomestheleitmotifof Enduring Love . Thethesiswillattendtothe“schizophrenia” of Enduring Love ’snarration.Thenarrating charaterRosewill be consideredambivalent,hence“unreliable.”Theaimistosuggest inconsistenciesinRose’sthinkingandtheconsequentsubversioninthenarration.The narrator’s purposefultellinginretrospect bearsimportance.Thesimultaneous prominenceof contradictorydiscourses pervades Enduring Love .Nevertheless,thedisunityofRose’strain ofthoughtthroughoutthetext initiatesthecharacter’sethicalconfusion.Thatis tosay,with thecomingof postmodernity,theformerideaof moralityisaltered.Rose’smindisusedto thecomfortsofthe“totalities”ofmodernism,inwhichthesuppositionofobjectivityfreed 1 individuals ofethical responsibility.However,heisnot releasedfromthefeelingofguilthe experiences withmerescientificexplanation.Inotherwords,thefinal planofthe present paperis toconsider Enduring Love ’snostalgiaforthe tragicoutlook. 2 2. Ian McEwan’s Late Fiction Theimmediatesubjectmatterof Enduring Love ,thesubjectofthe presentthesis,butalso otherMcEwan’slatenovels, Amsterdam , Atonement and Saturday ,is postmodernity.The issuesofthelifeinthe postmodernageandsocietyarewhatthesenovels areclearly concernedabout.ThesettingsofMcEwan’srecentnovels carrypostmodernfeaturesandthe writer’sdescriptionsoftenevokeknowledgeabilityofthetheoretical accountsof postmodernism(e.g.implicitcommentson“hyperreality”in Saturday ).IanMcEwanisare- creatorofthe postmodernistexperienceinfiction.Moreover,McEwan’s ownnarrativevoice isaffectedbythedilemmasof postmodernity.Theauthorhimselfisinterpretableasatruly postmoderncharacter,whooscillates betweena“returntorealism”andthemetafictional postmodernistwriting; a ratherschizophrenicfigure,indeed.Notableisthehybridityof McEwan’sfiction,itssimultaneous useofliteraryrealismandinclusionofthe postmodern era’s issuesintermsofhisnovels’ content.ItcanalsobeclaimedthatMcEwanpackshis nostalgiafor modernism inaclearlypostmodernistwrapping. Theauthor’slatenovelsconstituteanew phaseinhisoeuvre.McEwanabandonsthe classicrelishingofhis“trademark” shockingsubjectmatter –the pathologiesofmodernlife. Nerve-rackingscenesand“tragicclashes”donotcompletelyvanishfrom hisfiction;yet,they arecreditedlessdetailedattentionintheframeworkofanyof thelatenovels.Therather favorabledescriptionofthefamilyin Saturday positivelycontrasts The Cement Garden ’s portraitofa disintegratingfamily.Theshockingsubjectmatteris practicallytransformed, recycled,nolonger playingthecentralrole; theneedto“disgust”thereadernolonger permeatesMcEwan’s writing.Nevertheless,vexingmoralquestions becomeleitmotifsofall mentionedlatenovelsallthesame,eventhoughMcEwanis notsympathetic tothe tragic outlook.McEwanisstillonefootinmodernistconvictions,butismovingawayfromthemat thesametime.The balloonaccidentin Enduring Love ,forexample,doesnot“mean” 3 anythingbutadeepeningnuisance,intheend.Inthis,McEwanaffirms postmodernity,as theoriesof postmodernismallowfor Nietzscheannotionofthedeathoftragedy.Yet,Joein Enduring Love cannot stopthinkingabouthismoral“failure”–lettinggoofthe balloon’s rope.Themaincharacterofthenovelisdrivenbyadubious senseofguilt.Ethical considerationsquietlycentre thenovel’s trainofthought.Thecharacters’ behavior becomes unjudgeableinpostmodernity;theethical confusionarises. Enduring Love issetinthe post- humanist,post-masculineworld,but stillechoestheideasofhumanismandsuperiorityof masculinity.Thenovelisacontemplationofthe conceptof paranoia(wellaccommodatedin the postmodernistliterarywriting).The protagonistsofthe postmodernist novelssometimes suspect that theyaretrappedatthecentreofintrigue,oftenwithjustification. Enduring Love ’s JoeRoseis hauntedbythe possessedcharacter ofJedParryandhishomoeroticobsession. However,Rose’s“paranoia”isresolvedinthe endofthenovelas justified,inwhichthe validityofrationalityis established.Besides,the principleof paranoiafeaturesalsothe narrationof thenovel.McEwanhintshisnarratingcharacter’sunreliability,onlytodenyitin theend.The metafictionalimpulseiswell presentin Enduring Love ,whosenarrator frequentlycommentsonthewritingprocess. ThecritiqueofEnlightenmentuniversals iscentraltothethinkingofthe philosophersof the post-modernperiod. Enduring Love happens toscrutinize itsmainprotagonist’srationalist thinking.Thenovelisa contemplationofthemodernity’sstrategyofunityagainstthe postmodernity’sstrategyof plurality. Enduring Lov ereveals McEwan’snew preoccupation: thefascinationwiththe scientificthoughtandtherelatedrationality.The novelinvestigates thescientificmindofits mainprotagonistJoeRose,and,at thesametime,McEwan juxtaposesdifferentwaysofthinkinginindividualcharactersthatareintroduced. Interestingly,themainintellectualantipoleofthe rationalmainprotagonistRoseisa female protagonist.Asa matter offact,Clarissahasaffinitieswithliterature; she isascholar on 4 Keats.McEwanputsemphasisonthefactofexistenceofdiverseworlds –andtherelated pluralityof acceptable ethics that shouldbetakenintoconsideration.Oneofthe basic questions McEwanpositsin Enduring Love is–whatifthe“other”,whomIdonotwantto oppressinanywayandwhomIam readytoconsideranequal,despitehisorherdifference, refusestoplaythegameoftheacceptabilityofvarietyandtriestoclaimhisorher superiority? The peacefulmindofthetolerantmanisthreatened,inthat case.Roseisalmost vividlyunabletocopewithJedParry’sauthoritarianpersuasion.Hisrootedsuppositionof solidaritymakeshimunabletoefficientlycontradict,faceand“fight”the psychoticintruder. Whathedoes,atfirst,is accept theneurotic’s rulesofthegame,inwhichhisimpulseto tolerance is noticeable.However,Rose’stolerant postmodernselfisaccompaniedbya “modern”andoppressivealterego,whichoverwhelms Rose’sconsciousness. Inhislatefiction,McEwancomestoquestionthe purposeandvalue ofliterature.The suggestiongoesthatwritingfictionisanunnecessaryandfrivolousoccupation.Theauthor provideshis novelswithcriticismofliterature,however paradoxical this mightseem. McEwannevercompletelydiminisheshisownart,though;a certaintoleranceis always admitted.Thelatentcondemnationof themoralvalidityofliterarywritingisneverfully completed.Inthis pervadingpolemic,theauthor’smoralambiguitytakes place.McEwan’s hesitationmirrorsinthe charactersofhisnovels.Perownein Saturday resentsliterature,butit isaVictorianpoem,intheend,whichpracticallysaveshisfamily’sfurtherassault.In Atonement ,theliterarycreativity’sdestructive impulseisoutlined,asitsmaincharacter’s compulsiontonarrate becomesthesourceofacrime; butisshetobe blamed?In Enduring Love ,Rose,eventhoughhesucceedsinmakingsenseofJedParry’s extraordinarybehavior bymeansofclassifyingitasa pathological condition,“deClerambault’ssyndrome”,isleft withhis partner’s incomprehension.Ambivalenceismaintainedandthe postmodernismofthe texts confirmed.“McEwan’sfictionmight be bettercharacterizedintermsofitsstruggleto 5 articulate the possibilityofanarrativevoice that isself-consciousinits refusaloffull coherenceorcontrolandunableorunwillingtodisguise theextentofitsowninstabilityand unease” (Morrison).TheideaofthetragicechoesinallMcEwan’slatenovels.Thecharacters arenolongercapableof beingtragic heroes,but sensethe potentialinthemselves,all the same.Thetroubleis thatthetimestheylive indonotallowfortrulytragicfeelings. In Atonement ,Briony“recycles”herfamily’stragedyinwriting.Thenarratorutilizes the feelingofguilt asaframeworkfor“hernovel.” Atonement can bedescribedasanostalgic recollectionoftheethicsofhumanism.WhatisimplicitlymournedbyMcEwanhereis the postmodernist preferenceforaestheticsover ethics(i.e.Briony’srelentlessaestheticizationof experienceasa postmodernimpulse). Atonement attemptsa“re-memory”,re-writingof history. 1The leitmotifinBriony’scharacterizationistheurgetorationalizethedisordered (whichisnotdissimilartotherationalthoughtof Perownein Saturday or, moreimportantly forthe present paper,Rosein Enduring Love ).Thecharacter’s psyche is fragmentedinthe aftermathoftherealizationofguilt.Briony’s“orderlyspirit” makesherconstantlyre-invent theself-evidentworldby meansimposingorderuponit.The metafictionalcommenthereis thatanauthoristheauthority,thecontrollerof atext.Yet,Briony’slongingfordefiniteness, herwantfordramatization,isshownasharmful.JoeRosein Enduring Love hasthesame compulsionasBriony,andhisisalso,inasense,understandableasharmful(e.g.tothe relationship betweenRoseandhis partnerClarissa). Enduring