800 Literatur und Rhetorik
Refine
Document Type
- Part of a Book (13)
- Article (5)
- Part of Periodical (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (19)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (19) (remove)
Keywords
- Erzähltheorie (19) (remove)
Institute
- Extern (1)
As Bakhtin noted, chronotopes arise from the density and fusion of temporal and spatial indicators. In prose narrative, the density of temporal and spatial indicators arises as a natural consequence of setting scenes and explaining action, and those indicators are fused by the centripetal forces of plot, character and so on that encourage us to read the various elements of the text as aspects of a coherent story and world. In non-narrative poetry, however, there is no story to drive the setting of scene or generation of character; there may not even be scene or character. As a result, temporal and spatial indicators can be quite sparse, and there may be little centripetal force to encourage their fusion. In a textual environment bereft of character, plot, scene, in which even the centripetal forces of syntax are frayed by linebreaks and other poetic devices, how can chronotopes form and function? [...] In the centripetal environment afforded by most prose narratives, the stable chronotopes and the relationships among them define consciousness, world and values. In the centrifugal environment of non-narrative poetry, chronotopes flicker and flow in a series of hints, glimpses, dissolves, defining consciousness, world and values via evanescence rather than stability. However, as I hope to show below, the evanescence of chronotopes in non-narrative poetry can be as central to the vitality and meaning of those texts as the stability of chronotopes is to the vitality and meaning of prose narratives.
En el relato periodístico retrospectivo de un partido de futbol –el de Chile contra México por la Copa América, el 30 de junio de 1999- se puede observar el uso de diversos elementos narratológicos que lo vuelven interesante. Los reportajes de distintos diarios chilenos contienen crónicas, historias y esquemas narrativos construidos a partir del antagonismo entre adversarios, el protagonismo de ciertos personajes y los puntos culminantes que ellos viven. Además, hay en los relatos una identificación con el punto de vista del equipo chileno. El resultado son construcciones variadas de una misma realidad, cuya elaboración explica, al menos en parte, el interés del público por acceder a ellas. Incluso cuando esos lectores han asistido al estadio o han conocido el encuentro por radio o televisión, buscan historias para entender mejor y mas completamente lo ocurrido.
The Fugue of Chronotope
(2010)
As the survey by Nele Bemong and Pieter Borghart introducing this volume makes clear, the term chronotope has devolved into a veritable carnival of orismology. For all the good work that has been done by an ever-growing number of intelligent critics, chronotope remains a Gordian knot of ambiguities with no Alexander in sight. The term has metastasized across the whole spectrum of the human and social sciences since the publication of FTC in Russian in 1975, and (especially) after its translation into English in 1981. As others have pointed out, one of the more striking features of the chronotope is the plethora of meanings that have been read into the term: that its popularity is a function of its opacity has become a cliché. In the current state of chronotopic heteroglossia, then, how are we to proceed? The argument of this essay is that many of the difficulties faced by Bakhtin’s critics derive from ambiguities with which Bakhtin never ceased to struggle. That is, instead of advancing yet another definition of my own, I will investigate some of the attempts made by Bakhtin himself to give the term greater precision throughout his long life. In so doing, I will also hope to cast some light on the foundational role of time-space in Bakhtin’s philosophy of dialog as it, too, took on different meanings at various points in his thinking.
In this contribution, I would like to examine the way in which Bakhtin, in the two essays dedicated to the chronotope, lays the foundations for a theory of literary imagination. […] His concept of the chronotope may be interpreted as a contribution to a tradition in which Henri Bergson, William James, Charles Sander Peirce and Gilles Deleuze have been key figures. Like these four authors, Bakhtin is a philosopher in the school of pragmatism. His predilection for what Gary Saul Morson and Caryl Emerson have called “prosaics” puts him right at the heart of a philosophical family that calls forth multiplicity against metaphysical essentialism, and prefers the mundane to the universal. It seems wise to proceed carefully in the attempt to reconstruct Bakhtin’s theory of imagination. In this contribution to the debate, I choose to develop a philosophical dialogue between Bakhtin and the above-mentioned philosophical family. More specifically, it seems to me that the ideal point of departure for examining the way in which Bakhtin attempts to get to the bottom of the mysteries of literary imagination is Gilles Deleuze’s synthesis of Bergson’s epistemological view on knowledge as “the perception of images”, as well as Peirce’s theory of experience based on a typology of images. In the following, I show that Bakhtin’s view of the temporal-spatial constellations in literature demonstrates a strong affinity to the Bergsonian view that perception of the spatial world is colored by the lived time experienced by the observer. Based on this observation, I then develop a typology of images which places the concept of the chronotope in a more systematic framework.
Bakhtin and Dostoevsky shared the conviction that human life must be understood in terms of temporality. Both thinkers were obsessed with time’s relation to life as people experience it. For each, a rich sense of humanity demanded a chronotope of open time. In many respects, the views of Bakhtin and Dostoevsky coincide. Theologically speaking, one could fairly call them both heretics, as we shall see. Their differences reflect their different starting points. Bakhtin began with ethics, whereas Dostoevsky thought about life first and foremost in terms of psychology. For Bakhtin, any viable view of the world had first of all to give a rich meaning to moral responsibility. Dostoevsky could accept no view that was false to his sense of how the human mind thought and felt.
This paper proposes a reflection on the potential of the chronotope as a heuristic tool in the field of adaptation studies. My goal is to situate the chronotope in the context of adaptation studies, specifically with regard to perhaps the most central treatise in the field of literary adaptation, Gérard Genette’s “Palimpsests: Literature in the Second Degree”, and to draw attention to perhaps one of the most overlooked works in the field of adaptation studies, Caryl Emerson’s chronotope-inspired “Boris Godunov: Transpositions of a Russian Theme”. I will demonstrate how the chronotope might be used in the study of literary adaptation by examining the relationships between Daniel Defoe’s “Robinson Crusoe”, its historical sources, and Michel Tournier’s twentieth-century adaptation of the Robinson story, “Friday”. My analysis draws upon three of the semantic levels of the chronotope presented in the introduction to this volume: (1) chronotopic motifs linked to two opposing themes: enthusiasm for European colonial expansionism and skepticism regarding the supremacy of European culture; (2) major chronotopes that determine the narrative structure of a text; and (3) the way in which such major chronotopes may be linked to broader questions of genre.
Bernhard Hennens zeitgenössischer Roman "Nebenan" erzählt über einen Zeitraum von einigen Monaten hinweg die Geschichte einer Gruppe von Studenten der Universität zu Köln, die – nach der Öffnung eines Tors in die als "Nebenan" bezeichnete Anderswelt – im Mittelpunkt des Konfliktes zwischen "guten" fantastischen Wesen – Heinzelmännchen, die unter der Universität wohnen, und deren Verbündeten, die die reale Welt vor negativen Einflüssen aus der fantastisch-magischen Sphäre "Nebenans" schützen – und "bösen" fantastischen Wesen wie den aus "Nebenan" nach Köln entrückten Erlkönig und Grafen Cagliostro stehen. Dieser Konflikt kulminiert in einem Krieg in der realen Welt, der von den Studenten gemeinsam mit den Heinzelmännchen und anderen Parteien gewonnen wird, wodurch die reale Welt vor einer Invasion von Wesen – von Drachen bis hin zu Riesen – aus der Anderswelt und deren Machtübernahme bewahrt wird.
Der Roman zeichnet sich unter anderem durch einen mehrfachen parallelen Diskurs aus, der die beiden Ebenen des realen und fantastischen Raumes kontinuierlich miteinander kombiniert. Im Zentrum der narrativen Struktur steht das räumliche und zeitliche Nebeneinander von Fantasie und Realität, deren Ebenen nicht zu trennen sind und die nicht ohne einander existieren können. Der Wegfall der einen Ebene würde den Zusammenbruch der Handlung, der Ästhetik, der tieferen Bedeutung der Fiktion etc. bedeuten – kurzum: Der Wegfall einer Ebene würde dem Wegfall der epischen Relevanz des Textes gleichkommen.
Dieser Paralleldiskurs äußert sich in einem Verschwimmen der Grenzen, denn solche werden im Roman auf primärer Ebene kaum gezogen. So ist beispielsweise der Technisierungsgrad der Heinzelmännchen bemerkenswert, die sich als mahnende Quälgeister mit magischen Fähigkeiten und Gegenständen in die Realität einmischen, wenn esgeboten erscheint – das heißt, dass sich fantastische Wesen ganz unproblematisch, fast "natürlich", realer Technologien bedienen können, und andersherum ist nicht nur die Existenz realen Lebens in der märchenhaften Anderswelt denkbar, sondern eindeutig möglich: Die Studentengruppe rund um den Träumer Till bewegt sich ohne physische Einschränkungen oder dauerhaft Schaden zu nehmen in der völlig anders organisierten und strukturierten Welt von "Nebenan".
In his book "Fiction and Diction", Gerard Genette bemoans a contradiction between the pretense and the practice of narratological research. Instead of studying all kind of narratives, for Genette, narratological research concentrates de facto on the techniques of fictional narrative. Correspondingly, Genette speaks of a "fictional narratology" in the pejorative sense of a discipline that sets arbitrary limits on its area of study. In his objection, the narratology that literary scholars practice considers fictional narrative to be at least the standard case of any narrative. In other words, what is merely a special case, within a wide field of narratives, is here elevated to narrative par excellence. According to Genette, narratology does not omit the domain of non-fictional narratives from its investigations with any justification, but rather annexes it without addressing its specific elements.
What are possible ways in which this perspective, which Genette criticizes as truncated, can be set right? Can the problem, as outlined, simply be solved by expanding the area of study in narratological research? Or are there not, perhaps, important differences between fictional and nonfictional narratives which seem to encourage narratological research, understood as a fundamental discipline of literary study, under the heading of "fictional narratology"?
In order to come to an answer here, we will first discuss the problem of differentiating between fictional and non-fictional narratives, as well as the possibility of a connection between narrative and fictionality theory. Second, we will expand our considerations to encompass pragmatic and historical aspects of narratives in order to delineate the scope of our proposal.
Es gehört zu den besonderen Merkmalen fantastischer Literatur und Kunst, fiktive Welten hervorzubringen, deren Entwurfscharakter Modellhaftigkeit und spielerische Experimentierfreudigkeit ebenso implizieren kann wie Perspektiven des Utopischen. Die Beiträge des Sammelbands gehen auf Vorträge der Jahrestagung der Gesellschaft für Fantastikforschung im September 2013 zurück, die unter dem Motto "Writing Worlds" stand. Sich Welten zu erschreiben, zu erzählen oder zu erträumen ist zweifellos ein zentraler Bestandteil und eine wichtige Motivation zur Kreativität, die sich insbesondere im Genre der fantastischen Literatur beobachten lässt. In der Gegenwart lässt sich die spatiale Ebene, die Welten und Räume konstruierende Dimension des Fantastischen, allerdings nicht weniger ausgeprägt in den neueren Medien des Rollenspiels und des Films entdecken. So eröffnen die Aufsätze des Themenhefts ein weites Spektrum, das von Modellierungen mittelalterlicher Sujets über expressionistische Städte-Visionen und Batmans Metamorphosen bis hin zu neueren U.S.-amerikanischen Fernsehserien um das Jahr 2000 reicht.
One of the most fundamental problems of systemic approaches to literature is the question of how systemic principles might be translated into a manageable methodological framework. This contribution proposes that a combination of functionalistsystemic theories (in casu Itamar Even-Zohar’s Polysystem theory – especially the textually oriented versions – and the prototypical genre approach proposed by Dirk De Geest and Hendrik Van Gorp 1999) with Mikhail Bakhtin’s chronotope theory shows great promise in this respect. Since I am primarily interested in literary genres, the prototypical genre approach assumes a central position in my theoretical framework. My main argument is that Bakhtin’s chronotope concept offers interesting perspectives as a heuristic tool within a functionalist-systemic approach to genre studies, enabling the study not only of the constitutive elements of genre systems, but also of their mutual relations. Bakhtin’s own vague definitions of the concept somewhat hamper the process of putting it into practice for this purpose, but with the aid of the distinction between generic and motivic chronotopes, that problem can be solved. A detailed, comprehensive account of the theoretical premises underlying my proposal can be found in Bemong (under review); here I restrict myself to the basics.