A SCRIPT FOR HERSELF: CHARACTERIZATION AND FREE INDIRECT STYLE IN CONRAD'S VICTORY

Nataša Tučev
{"title":"A SCRIPT FOR HERSELF: CHARACTERIZATION AND FREE INDIRECT STYLE IN CONRAD'S VICTORY","authors":"Nataša Tučev","doi":"10.22190/FULL1702063T","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Some of the most influential studies written about Joseph Conrad in the 1950s (by Douglas Hewit, Thomas Moser and Albert Guerard) established a critical paradigm that continued to dominate Conrad studies for decades to come – especially with regard to his later novels, which according to these critics represented a decline after the achievements of his major period. The principal reason for this decline, as Moser argues, was Conrad's altered choice of subject matter from the novel Chance onwards – i.e., his newly-discovered interest in romance and female protagonists. Conrad's failure in representing intimate erotic relationship in his later novels, as Moser maintains, is inseparable from his inclination to create melodramatic and inauthentic heroines, incomparably less complex than the striking male protagonists of his earlier works. More recently, critics such as Robert Hampson and Susan Jones have proposed a different approach to the romances of Conrad's later period. A case in point is Hampson's analysis of Lena's character in Victory. Unlike the earlier critics, who accused Conrad of sentimentality in female characterizations, Hampson argues that it is Lena herself who views her own being and her role in Heyst's life through a prism of sentimental romance. Lena's subjective perception of reality amounts to writing a script for herself (Hampson 2004), which casts her in the role of a sacrificial heroine. By using free indirect style, Conrad allows us to see Lena presented through her own idiom, in a manner comparable to Joyce's treatment of Gerty McDowell in Ulysses. The paper draws on Hampson's contention, exploring Conrad's narrative strategies in Victory, while also referring to the theoretical frameworks such as Genette's Narrative Discourse and Bakhtin's Dialogic Imagination.","PeriodicalId":30162,"journal":{"name":"Facta Universitatis Series Linguistics and Literature","volume":"15 1","pages":"063-071"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Facta Universitatis Series Linguistics and Literature","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22190/FULL1702063T","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Some of the most influential studies written about Joseph Conrad in the 1950s (by Douglas Hewit, Thomas Moser and Albert Guerard) established a critical paradigm that continued to dominate Conrad studies for decades to come – especially with regard to his later novels, which according to these critics represented a decline after the achievements of his major period. The principal reason for this decline, as Moser argues, was Conrad's altered choice of subject matter from the novel Chance onwards – i.e., his newly-discovered interest in romance and female protagonists. Conrad's failure in representing intimate erotic relationship in his later novels, as Moser maintains, is inseparable from his inclination to create melodramatic and inauthentic heroines, incomparably less complex than the striking male protagonists of his earlier works. More recently, critics such as Robert Hampson and Susan Jones have proposed a different approach to the romances of Conrad's later period. A case in point is Hampson's analysis of Lena's character in Victory. Unlike the earlier critics, who accused Conrad of sentimentality in female characterizations, Hampson argues that it is Lena herself who views her own being and her role in Heyst's life through a prism of sentimental romance. Lena's subjective perception of reality amounts to writing a script for herself (Hampson 2004), which casts her in the role of a sacrificial heroine. By using free indirect style, Conrad allows us to see Lena presented through her own idiom, in a manner comparable to Joyce's treatment of Gerty McDowell in Ulysses. The paper draws on Hampson's contention, exploring Conrad's narrative strategies in Victory, while also referring to the theoretical frameworks such as Genette's Narrative Discourse and Bakhtin's Dialogic Imagination.
一个属于自己的剧本:康拉德《胜利》中的人物塑造与自由间接风格
20世纪50年代关于约瑟夫·康拉德的一些最具影响力的研究(由Douglas Hewit、Thomas Moser和Albert Guerard撰写)建立了一种批判范式,这种范式在未来几十年继续主导康拉德的研究——尤其是关于他后来的小说,这些评论家认为,这代表着在他主要时期取得成就后的衰落。正如莫瑟所说,这种衰落的主要原因是康拉德从小说《偶然》开始对题材的选择发生了变化,即他对浪漫和女性主角的新发现的兴趣。正如莫瑟所说,康拉德在后期小说中未能表现出亲密的情色关系,这与他倾向于塑造情节剧和不真实的女主人公是分不开的,这些女主人公比他早期作品中引人注目的男主人公要复杂得多。最近,罗伯特·汉普森和苏珊·琼斯等评论家对康拉德后期的浪漫主义提出了不同的看法。汉普森在《胜利》中对莉娜性格的分析就是一个很好的例子。与早期批评康拉德在女性形象塑造中多愁善感的人不同,汉普森认为,正是莉娜本人通过多愁善情的浪漫棱镜来看待自己的存在和她在海斯特生活中的角色。莉娜对现实的主观感知相当于为自己写了一个剧本(汉普森,2004年),这让她扮演了一个牺牲的女英雄。通过使用自由间接的风格,康拉德让我们看到了莉娜通过她自己的习语呈现出来,其方式堪比乔伊斯在《尤利西斯》中对格蒂·麦克道尔的处理。本文借鉴了汉普森的观点,探讨了康拉德在《胜利》中的叙事策略,同时借鉴了吉内特的叙事话语和巴赫金的对话想象等理论框架。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
14 weeks
×
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