Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Linearity and Its Discontents: Rethinking Narrative Form and Ideological Valence

2000; National Council of Teachers of English; Volume: 62; Issue: 6 Linguagem: Inglês

10.2307/379008

2161-8178

Brian Richardson,

Short Stories in Global Literature

t is widely assumed that the form of the traditional novel, with its insistent linearity, causal chains, omniscient narrator, formal totality, and relentless closure is by its very nature conservative or reactionary and that, by contrast, certain experimental narrative practices that reject conventional forms are in themselves progressive or liberatory. These original strategies include an open ending, nonlinear sequencing, causal gaps, decentered text, and a self-reflexive style that does not pretend to claim a specious naturalness.1 Though frequently assertedindeed it is something of a critical clich6 in some circles-this doctrine has to my knowledge rarely been examined in depth or pursued for nuance. This lack of examination is unfortunate since the doctrine inevitably simplifies complex issues of narrative representation even as it fails to discern the full reach of a number of innovative techniques. Still worse, this general claim is in many instances simply false; when we actually sit down and examine a number of significant modem texts, we find that they do not begin to conform to any clear ideological opposition, but instead complicate it in interesting ways or fail to fit altogether. Sadly, this theoretical mistake is not the kind that can be expected to correct itself, since it tends to preclude the very analyses that would yield more varied results. In what follows, I examine how a number of modem innovative authors actually use chronological progression, causal connection, and narrative voice and then go on to analyze two recent short texts by Alain Robbe-Grillet and Jeanette Winterson, noting the areas of connection and disjunction between the large, well-established theoretical claims and the actual practice of experimental authors. I attempt to show not only the inaccuracy of some common ideological stances, but also how such claims may obscure some of the distinctive features of the oppositional literatures they intend to promote.