Social Mind as Author(ity) in J. M. Coetzee's Foe

IF 0.3 3区 文学 0 LITERATURE, AFRICAN, AUSTRALIAN, CANADIAN
Sara Saei Dibavar, Pyeaam Abbasi, Hossein Pirnajmuddin
{"title":"Social Mind as Author(ity) in J. M. Coetzee's Foe","authors":"Sara Saei Dibavar, Pyeaam Abbasi, Hossein Pirnajmuddin","doi":"10.2979/reseafrilite.51.4.11","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT:Using Conceptual Metaphor Theory (CMT), we examine J. M. Coetzee's Foe (1986) to explain how the conceptual metaphor \"ARGUMENT IS WAR\" is central to the novel's thematics and to the fictional \"staging\" of debates concerning authorial emplotment through the workings of the \"social mind\"—here the prospective readership. We focus on the inter-character discourse staged during the civilized confrontation between Susan Barton (the character attempting to be an author) and Daniel Foe (the author) in an attempt to have their intended stories told. Thus the socially aware minds of both parties involved greatly contribute to the formation of the well-known plot of Defoe's Robinson Crusoe (1719). As a result of this argumentative path (ARGUMENT IS WAR), Susan and her framing narrative lose ground to the impositions by Foe and the exigencies of the social mind. A reading of the novel in terms of social mind with a focus on CMT reveals the cognitive complexity of the functioning of the social mind as a controlling medium in Foe.","PeriodicalId":21021,"journal":{"name":"Research in African Literatures","volume":"51 1","pages":"190 - 210"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research in African Literatures","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2979/reseafrilite.51.4.11","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LITERATURE, AFRICAN, AUSTRALIAN, CANADIAN","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

ABSTRACT:Using Conceptual Metaphor Theory (CMT), we examine J. M. Coetzee's Foe (1986) to explain how the conceptual metaphor "ARGUMENT IS WAR" is central to the novel's thematics and to the fictional "staging" of debates concerning authorial emplotment through the workings of the "social mind"—here the prospective readership. We focus on the inter-character discourse staged during the civilized confrontation between Susan Barton (the character attempting to be an author) and Daniel Foe (the author) in an attempt to have their intended stories told. Thus the socially aware minds of both parties involved greatly contribute to the formation of the well-known plot of Defoe's Robinson Crusoe (1719). As a result of this argumentative path (ARGUMENT IS WAR), Susan and her framing narrative lose ground to the impositions by Foe and the exigencies of the social mind. A reading of the novel in terms of social mind with a focus on CMT reveals the cognitive complexity of the functioning of the social mind as a controlling medium in Foe.
J. M.库切的《敌人》中的社会心理作者
摘要:本文运用概念隐喻理论(CMT)对库切(j.m. Coetzee)的小说《敌人》(1986)进行分析,以解释“争论即战争”这一概念隐喻如何在小说的主题和虚构的“舞台”中发挥核心作用,通过“社会心智”——这里的潜在读者——的运作来讨论作者的就业。我们关注的是苏珊·巴顿(试图成为作家的角色)和丹尼尔·福(作者)之间在文明对抗中上演的人物间对话,他们试图讲述自己想要讲述的故事。因此,双方的社会意识在很大程度上促成了笛福著名的《鲁滨逊漂流记》(1719)情节的形成。由于这种争论的路径(争论即战争),苏珊和她的框架叙事在敌人的强加和社会心理的紧急情况下失去了优势。以CMT为中心的社会心理视角解读小说,揭示了《福》中作为控制媒介的社会心理功能的认知复杂性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Research in African Literatures
Research in African Literatures LITERATURE, AFRICAN, AUSTRALIAN, CANADIAN-
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Founded in 1970, Research in African Literatures is the premier journal of African literary studies worldwide and provides a forum in English for research on the oral and written literatures of Africa, as well as information on African publishing, announcements of importance to Africanists, and notes and queries of literary interest. Reviews of current scholarly books are included in every issue, often presented as review essays, and a forum offers readers the opportunity to respond to issues raised in articles and book reviews.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信