Laura Zaharia - Narratology as Applied to James Joyce's Ulysses

8/9/2019 Laura Zaharia - Narratology as Applied to James Joyce's Ulysses

1/42

PART I: THEORETICAL CONCEPTS

Chapter 1 – Narratology. General Notions.

Reogni!e" as one o# the greatest theorists to ha$e reshape" %o"ern literary ritiis%&

'arthes "e#ines the ter% (narrati$e) as #ollo*s: (Narrati$e is #irst an" #ore%ost a pro"igio+s

$ariety o# genres& the%sel$es "istri,+te" a%ongst "i##erent s+,stanes – as tho+gh any %aterial

*ere #it to reei$e %an-s stories) /0. In plainer ter%s& a narrati$e is (the representation in art o#

an e$ent or story& *ritten or tol") http:22***.%erria%3*e,ster.o%2"itionary2narrati$e.

Narratology – as its na%e s+ggests – is a ritial approah to the st+"y o# narrati$es&

,ase" on the pres+%ption that all *ritten& spo4en or other*ise "eli$ere" stories ha$e a share"

+n"erlying str+t+re& or are onnete" thro+gh a set o# o%%on str+t+re3relate" r+les. (Caring

nothing #or the "i$ision ,et*een goo" an" ,a" literat+re& narrati$e is international&

transhistorial& trans+lt+ral: it is si%ply there& li4e li#e itsel#.) 'arthes /0. In 5ie4e 'al-s

*or"s& this (set o# generali!e" state%ents a,o+t a parti+lar seg%ent o# reality) 6 ai%s to

o+tline the +ni$ersal pattern on *hih parti+lar *ritten or oral *or4s are onstr+te"& so that ,y

loo4ing at 7+st a n+%,er o# s+h narrati$es one *ill ,e a,le to easily pre"it the internal str+t+re

o# all other *or4s& past an" #+t+re. Narratology is te8t3oriente"& in other *or"s the pro"+tion&

p+,liation& "istri,+tion an" reeption o# the story& altho+gh not altogether ine8istent& are not the

#o+s o# st+"y.

Loo4ing at a literary *or4 #ro% the insi"e to its #inal layers& #ro% its #o+n"ation to its

#inal #or% pro$i"es not only insight on in#or%ation tightly *ea$e" into the story rather than

apparent thro+gh "iso+rse1 – in#or%ation *hih there#ore %ight ,e har" to o%prehen" at a #irst

eno+nter *ith the *or4 –& ,+t also pro$i"es a %o"el o# approah *hih %a4es the rea"ing o#

any *or4 #ro% that point on*ar"s& easier& an" the o%parison ,et*een *or4s pertaining to"i##erent genres& #aile. (Ho* is no$el to ,e set against no$ella& tale against %yth& "ra%a against

trage"y as has ,een "one a tho+san" ti%es *itho+t re#erene to a o%%on %o"el9); is the


2/42

This ritial p+rs+it *o+l"& in theory& %a4e the +n"erstan"ing an" analysis o# literary te8ts %+h

%ore aessi,le to the large p+,li as *ell as to speialists in the "o%ain& ho*e$er& as *e are

a,o+t to #in" o+t& a +ni$ersal %o"el has not yet ,een p+t #orth 3 rather there are n+%ero+s s+h

patterns& eah *ith its o*n a+thor an" ter%inology& o#ten in$enting "i##erent ter%s to "e#ine the

sa%e pheno%enon& *hih an %a4e the approah e$en %ore on#+sing. Th+s analy!ing a piee

o# literat+re or another type o# story #ro% a narratologial point o# $ie* %+st start *ith hoosing

the approah that is ,est s+ite" #or the *or4 at han".

In her ,oo4& (An Intro"+tion to Narratology) 5oni4a =l+"erni4 tal4s a,o+t the %ain

types o# narrati$e theory: the #irst an" %ost *i"ely appro$e" o# %o"el& she says& "ra*s +pon

ling+istis as its so+re. This ,ranh o# narratology& =le+n"erni4 e8plains& is onsi"ere" to ,e

rigi"& less open to interpretation – *hih o%es as no s+rprise onsi"ering its al%ost

%athe%atial roots an" the str+t+re go$erne" ,y ,inary oppositions story $s "iso+rse& narrator

$s narratee et *hih it inherite". 'e#ore ta4ling the theoreti artiles *hih *ill %a4e the

,asis o# the analysis o# >a%es >oye-s no$el – an" the spei#i ter%inology that o%es *ith it –

there are a #e* essential ter%s +se" ,roa"ly in the st+"y o# narrati$es *hih *e %+st "e#ine.

The #irst "istintion *hih nee"s to ,e %a"e is ,et*een (story) an" ("iso+rse). As

"e#ine" ,y T!$etan To"oro$ re$i$ing the "istintion %a"e ,y R+ssian =or%alists& (story) is

onstit+te" o# the ation in a narrati$e& or the narrati$e threa"& *hat happens in the narrati$e an"

the haraters that %a4e it happen. (?iso+rse)& on the other han"& is (o%prising the tenses&

aspets an" %o"es o# the narrati$e) 'arthes @& in other *or"s the "ispositio an" elo+tio& the

stylisti ele%ents e%ploye" in the narrati$e – i# (stor y) is the see"& then ("iso+rse) is the shell

*rappe" aro+n" it. O# %ain in#l+ene in the "e$elop%ent o# ling+istis3inspire" narratology is

the synhroni rather than "iahroni approah propose" ,y the S*iss ling+ist =er"inan" "e

Sa+ss+re. His theory o# the signi#ier an" the signi#ie"6 is also transpose" into narratologial

ter%inology as (story an" "iso+rse)& part o# the narrati$e (lang+e). This theory an ,e #+rther

"e$elope" into a narrati$e ,eing #or%e" ,et*een the tight& strit o"e o# lang+age an" the e$en

2 Synchrony and diachrony are two dierent and complementary viewpointsin linguistic analysis. As dened in the Merriam-e!ster online dictionary" synchrony is #a

state in which things happen" move or e$ist at the same time% while diachrony is a #change

e$tended through time%. &n other words" a diachronic analysis implies historical change

suered !y the o!'ect while synchronism refers to analysis made at a certain point in time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic


3/42

striter narrati$e o"e (I# one atte%pts to e%,rae the *hole o# a *ritten narrati$e& one #in"s that

is starts #ro% the %ost highly o"e" the phone%ati& or e$en the %eris%ati le$el& gra"+ally

rela8es +ntil it reahes the sentene& an" then ,egins to tighten +p again& %o$ing progressi$ely

#ro% s%all gro+ps o# sentenes %iro3seoye "i" *as #in" a loophole in

the $ery tight narrati$e o"e *hih allo*e" hi% to e8peri%ent *ith *riting *hile still 4eeping

his *or4 +n"erstan"a,le.

et str+t+ralist narratology& altho+gh pre"o%inant in the literat+re& is not the only one in the

"o%ain. There are %any other narratologial approahes& #or e8a%ple those "eri$e" #ro%

Ger%an %orphology *hih are onsi"ere" to ,e less strit& #a$oring organi %etaphors& or others

*hih onsist in tria"s rather than the ,inary str+t+ralist syste%.

E$en i# they originate #ro% the sa%e set o# i"eas& or ha$e a o%%on anestor& narrati$e

theories $ary onsi"era,ly #ro% one theoretiian to the other. There are& ho*e$er& tren"s *hih

stan" o+t& are onsi"ere" to ha$e a larger in#l+ene an" to ha$e shape" narratologial ritiis%&

na%ely those *hih *ere theori!e" ,y Peter 'roo4s& Rolan" 'arthes an" Algir"as Grei%as. =or

this st+"y o# >a%es >oye-s no$el I ha$e hosen 'arthes- theory as I ,elie$e it *ill ai" in

re$ealing the %ost a,o+t (Dlysses)- o%pliate" narrati$e str+t+re an" at the sa%e ti%e gi$e

insight in the "iso+rse o# the *or4. That is not to say& ho*e$er& that any o# the other approahes

*o+l" not ,e applia,le to this no$el.

3 (he foundation of structural linguistics is a )sign") which in turn has two*3previous

lin+http,en.wi+ipedia.orgwi+iourse/in/0eneral/inguistics components, a

)signied) is an idea or concept" while the )signier) is a means of e$pressing the

signied. (he )sign) is thus the com!ined association of signier and signied.

For more information on #seuence% see page


4/42

As a theoretiian& 'roo4s pro$i"es +s *ith an organi approah to the s+,7et& o%,ining

str+t+ralis% *ith =re+"ian ritiis% an" re$ealing the eroti aspet o# narrati$es& *hereas

Grei%as- stan"point is p+rely str+t+ralist. Co%pare" to the other t*o narratologists& Rolan"

'arthes- approah is not ,o+n" ,y either str+t+ralist or %orphologial theory& altho+gh it "oes

"ra* on ling+isti onepts one o# its so+res. Ho*e$er& *hat is +ni$ersally regar"e" as

parti+lar in his *or4 is the #at that ('arthes- pro7et as a theorist *as to +nsettle e$ery i"ea

*hih too4 on the appearane o# ,eing nat+ral or o%%onsensial or in"isp+ta,le) Graha% B&

in other *or"s altho+gh he #o+n" inspiration in earlier *or4s& his onepts are still +ni


5/42


6/42

+tili!e" e8tensi$ely at #+ll length o# the no$el& inso#ar that it is so%eti%es "i##i+lt to "isting+ish

,et*een ation at speeh ti%e an" ation that ta4es plae solely in the harater-s onsio+sness.

=+ntions are not the only +nits *hih an ,e #+rther ,ro4en apart into lasses 3 the

in"ies& too& an ,e assigne" to the ategories o# in"ies proper on the one han"& an" in#or%ants

on the other han". In"ies proper are there to o##er in#or%ation a,o+t the haraters& at%osphere

an" are rele$ant not only at the ti%e *hen they appear in the narration& ,+t all thro+gho+t it in

other *or"s& they al*ays ha$e i%pliit signi#ie"s. In#or%ants& on the other han"& are (p+re "ata

*ith i%%e"iate signi#iation) 0@& li4e the "ate or the na%e o# the plae *here the ation is

ta4ing plae at a ertain %o%ent in the narration. E$en tho+gh it %ight see% li4e ar"inal or

n+lei #+ntions are the entral +nit o# e$ery narrati$e – sine they are the %ain no"es %a4ing +p

the narrati$e threa" 3 'arthes e%phasi!es on the #at that& in a narration& e$ery single ele%ent is

there *ith a p+rpose: (A n+le+s annot ,e "elete" *itho+t altering the story& ,+t neither an a

atalyst *itho+t altering the "iso+rse) 0.

A logial s+ession o# n+lei ,o+n" together ,y a relation o# soli"arity is alle" a

se


7/42

ategori!ations appear in the literat+re as #ollo*s: 're%on" ,elie$es that e$ery harater o##ers a

personal perspeti$e on the se


8/42

narrators "epen"ing on the a%o+nt o# in#or%ation they hol" or the role they play *ithin the story

3 o%nisient narrator& the harater3narrator et. Instea"& he s+ggests& regar"less o# the person o#

the narration 1st& n"& an" 6r" there are only t*o types o# narrators – personal an" apersonal.

E$i"ently& the +se o# the 1st person in a narration is a lear sign o# a personal narrator& *hereas

the n" person "iso+rse pertains to an apersonal narrator. Ho*e$er& in ase o# a 6r" person& i# the

6r" person an ,e hange" to 1st person *itho+t altering the "iso+rse& it %ay also ,e regar"e" as

personal. These t*o types o# narrators are not e8l+si$e #or a story& they are per%anently

interhange" to the point *here they an e$en alternate e$en *ithin the sa%e sentene. It is

there#ore %an"atory #or any st+"y o# narrati$es to ontain a st+"y o# the lang+age e%ploye"& or

*hat 'arthes alls (the syste% o# a narrati$e)& in or"er to #+lly perei$e these hanges *hih

a##et e$ery *or4 #ro% the o+t%ost layers an" all the *ay to its entral str+t+re.

The three layers are there#ore not the only o%%on str+t+re *hih 'arthes "iso$ers in

his analysis. In the ase o# a hapter *hih treats the s+,7et o# the syste% o# a narrati$e& the

theorist inspets (lang+e) or the lang+age o# a narrati$e& stating (Lang+agean ,e "e#ine" ,y

the on+rrene o# t*o #+n"a%ental proesses: arti+lation& or seg%entation& *hih pro"+es

+nits this ,eing *hat 'en$eniste alls #or%& an" integration& *hih gathers these +nits into

+nits o# a higher ran4 this ,eing %eaning) 'arthes 11/. It is a onept *hih #in"s its roots in

str+t+ral ling+istis& ,+t *hih 'arthes an" other narratologists s+ess#+lly apply in their

st+"ies o# stories.

The proesses *hih reg+late the "e$elop%ent o# lang+age *ithin a narrati$e are

"istortion an" e8pansion& ,oth o# the% eno+raging hanges at the le$el o# ti%e an" spae in a

narrati$e th+sly: (The #or% o# narrati$e is essentially harateri!e" ,y t*o po*ers: that o#

"isten"ing its signs o$er the length o# the story "istortion an" that o# inserting +n#oreseea,le

e8pansions into these "istortions) 'arthes 11/. The theory #in"s its origins in a ling+isti

onept alle" ("ysta8ia)& *here ling+isti ele%ents are intro"+e" *ithin a o%pat

gra%%atial str+t+re& hene "ist+r,ing its linearity – a pheno%enon *hih one an easily

o,ser$e in the #+ntional layer o# a narrati$e& in the ase o# o+nterpoint tehni


9/42

se$eral signi#ie"s ,oth hori!ontally or "istri,+tionally an" $ertially or integrationally& aross

layers.

One o# the %ost o,$io+s an" *i"ely3+se" %etho"s is (s+spense)& *hih 'arthes

harateri!es as a o%ple8 #ra%e*or4 starting #ro% a %ain se


10/42

PART II – NARRATOLOG APPLIE? TO (DLSSES)

Chapter 1 – The =+ntional Layer. N+lei.

(>oye-s onte%poraries *ere str+4 *ith the +nr+ly nat+re o# his *or4s& oye-s

*or4s& is not to ,e "one only hronologially& or in a straight line #ro% the #irst an" +ntil the last

page. In 'arthes- *or"s& in any narrati$e Mthe net*or4s are %any an" interat& *itho+t any one o#

the% ,eing a,le to s+rpass the rest this te8t is a gala8y o# signi#iers& not a str+t+re o# signi#ie"s

it has no ,eginning it is re$ersi,le *e gain aess to it ,y se$eral entranes& none o# *hih an

,e a+thoritati$ely "elare" to ,e the %ain one). In other *or"s i# *e are to #+lly +n"erstan" any

story *e ha$e to #in" its str+t+re& an" start the analysis #ro% the logial ore o+t*ar"s& hanging

the or"er in *hih *e rea" the hapters o# the *or4 at han".

This is tr+e #or (Dlysses) perhaps e$en %ore than #or any other no$el o# its ti%e an" %any

sine. As ?ere4 Attri"ge insight#+lly asserts in his Co%panion to >a%es >oye&

(In Dlysses& se


11/42

This ,eing sai"& *e %+st %ention that *e are not *itho+t help in o+r tas4 – an in3"epth

+n"erstan"ing o# the no$el ,eo%es a lot %ore easier *hen *e ta4e a loo4 at the *or4 thro+gh

the pris% o# a %o"el >a%es >oye hi%sel# pro$i"e" an" *hih is #+rther ,ro4en apart in o$er B;;

pages in St+art Gil,ert-s (>a%es >oye-s Dlysses. A St+"y). Ho*e$er o%prehensi$e this st+"y

%ight ,e *e %+st not "ee% this %o"el to ,e the only possi,le one& nor o%pletely tr+e an"

#la*less – as a %atter o# #at& >oye pro$i"e" his #rien"s *ith %ore than one s+h %o"els& one

e8a%ple ,eing the one gi$en to Carlo Linati& *ho shares oye-s no$el tro+gh Rolan" 'arthes- narratologial

theory I ,elie$e St+art Gil,ert-s %o"el is the ,etter hoie as it is the %ore "etaile" an" o%ple8

o# the t*o. Ho*e$er& as *e *ill see later in the thesis& there "o e8ist ertain ele%ents in Linati-s

she%e *hih are not present in Gil,ert-s an" *hih *e ha$e the o,ligation to inl+"e in o+r

analysis.

The #irst str+t+re3relate" aspet any rea"er o# (Dlysses) noties is its ,eing "i$i"e" into

eighteen hapters. In the p+,lishe" $ersion o# the ,oo4 all hapters are n+%,ere" instea" o#

ha$ing a spei#i title& ho*e$er in the %o"els >oye han"e" o$er to his #rien"s eah hapter ,ears

the na%e o# its e+ne 1@ th& 10;B.


12/42

As a #irst step in the str+t+ral analysis o# (Dlysses) *e %+st e8pan" on the onnetion

,et*een (Dlysses) an" Ho%er-s (O"yssey). Ho* is a onnetion ,et*een Ho%er-s an" >oye-s

*or4 rele$ant to the s+,7et o# narratology in (Dlysses)& one %ight ,e te%pte" to as4. The

ans*er is si%ple: +nli4e >a%es >oye-s no$el& the str+t+re o# the O"yssey is $ery lear an" easy

to #ollo* #or any rea"er. It there#ore gi$es +s a ,etter $ie* o# *hat the inner str+t+re o# Dlysses

is& a $ie* *e %ight %iss i# *e are to #o+n" o+r analysis solely on the no$el. (I# *e 4no* e$en

the ,are ,ones o# the O"yssean plot)& >enni#er Le$ine states& (the te8t+re o# Dlysses thi4ens

The %ore "etaile" o+r 4no*le"ge o# Ho%er-s epi& the stronger the ehoes *ith Dlysses. The

%ore preise& too& o+r sense o# "i##erene) 16

Let +s& there#ore& stop an" analy!e the "ate on *hih the ation ta4es plae. In the

intro"+tion to the or"s*orth e"ition& Ce"ri atts assesses that the 1@ th o# >+ne %ight ,e the

"ay *hen >a%es >oye #irst %et his *i#e ho*e$er& other st+"ies o# the *or4 – s+h as >enni#er

Le$ine-s an" St+art Gil,ert-s – "o not %ention a onrete reason #or >oye-s hoosing this

parti+lar "ate. Regar"less o# *hy the a+thor hose to set the ation o# the no$el on >+ne 1@&

*hether the "ate has a speial signi#iane #or hi% or not& one aspet re%ains +nhange" – #or

o+r three %ain haraters this is 7+st a "ay li4e any other& *itho+t any +ne8pete" t+rn o# e$ents&

(a per#etly or"inary "ay& in #at) Gil,ert 6. This is espeially +rio+s i# *e assoiate the "ate

*ith the title o# the no$el an" *ith Ho%er-s (O"yssey).

The title o# the no$el an" the at+al plot are in antithesis. Dlysses& the protagonist o#

Ho%er-s O"yssey& tra$els a long *ay #ro% ho%e in a #antasti 7o+rney #+ll o# perils an" trials on

the other han"& none o# the protagonists in (Dlysses) #ae anything o# the sort. >enni#er Le$ine

right#+lly alls the title (a pro$oation) 1& a pro$oation o# seeing the no$el as a a%es

>oye lea$es anything +nal+late" or in the han"s o# #ate or oini"ene.


13/42

The assoiation *ith Ho%er-s *or4 "oes not en" here. In the she%a pro$i"e" to Carlo

Linati& >a%es >oye o##ers a setion "e"iate" to the haraters present in e$ery hapter o# the

,oo4. All o# these haraters ,ear the na%e o# their o+nterparts in the O"yssey& an" it is

transparent that their presene in the ,oo4 is to ,e loo4e" at #ro% the perspeti$e o# Ho%er-s

*or4. hat is %ore& the persons *ho appear in eah hapter orrespon" to their analog+e in the

orrespon"ent hapter in the O"yssey& e$en tho+gh their personality %ight ,e ino%pati,le –

this& too& is a pro$oation inten"e" to eno+rage the rea"er to loo4 at Dlysses #ro% %ore than one

angle. A,o+t the in#l+ene Ho%er ha" +pon >a%es >oye-s hoie o# haraters an"& #+rther on&

lang+age& *e *ill e8pan" on %ore in the ne8t hapters o# this paper.

Going ,a4 to the str+t+re o# the no$el as presente" in St+art Gil,ert-s st+"y& alongsi"e

the na%es o# the hapters& the a+thor pro$i"es +s *ith a list o# ele%ents spei#i to eah o# the

hapters. These ele%ents are& in the #ollo*ing or"er: sene – or plae *here the ation is set

ho+r& organ& art& olor& sy%,ol an" tehni. hat has #irst stri4en e$ery rea"er as +n+s+al is the

#at that eah o# the thirteen hapters "isplays a +nioye planne"

eah o# these hapters so that none o# the a#ore%entione" aspets *o+l" repeat itsel#. I# *e are

to re#er to Rolan" 'arthes-s she%e o# the layers in a narrati$e an" start *ith the #+ntional layer&

*e an easily notie that all the in#or%ants are presente" in this part o# the st+"y& na%ely +n"er

(sene) an" (ho+r)& the plae an" ti%e *here eah part o# the plot ta4es plae are on$eniently

lai" o+t #or the rea"er-s ,ene#it. The stylisti approah #or eah hapter is also +ni


14/42

*ere& in reality& ,rightly lit +p) Gil,ert 1 et& oppose" to ho* they %ight see% at #irst& the

tho+ghts o# the haraters (are no %ore inoherent or ill3,alane" than the #rag%ents o# a

pit+re3p+!!le *hih& #itte" together& o%pose a li#e3li4e portrait& an" no %ore irrele$ant as to

"etail than the +ni$erse itsel#)1@& St+art Gil,ert asserts. He o##ers a


15/42

e re%in" the rea"er that atalysers are ele%ents o# the #+ntional layer *hih are ,o+n"

,y integrational relations. They onnet aross layers an" only %a4e sense *hen re+nite" *ith

all o# their signi#ie"s& *hih appear at "i##erent stages o# the plot. The #irst leit%oti# St+art

Gil,ert analyses is that o# (%ete%psyhosis). As e8plaine" in the no$el ,y 5r. 'loo% to his

*i#e& %ete%psyhosis is

(the trans%igration o# so+lsSo%e people ,elie$e that *e go on li$ing in another ,o"y a#ter

"eath& that *e li$e" ,e#ore. They all it reinarnation. That *e all li$e" ,e#ore on the earth

tho+san"s o# years ago or on so%e other planet. They say *e ha$e #orgotten it. So%e say they

re%e%,er their past li$es.

5ete%psyhosis onneting Calypso& Sire+s& Na+siaa& an" Cire is there#ore a

religio+s onept ,orro*e" #ro% eastern +lt+res& *hih +n"erlines >a%es >oye-s #asination

*ith the East – or *hat St+art Gil,ert alls the (?rang nah Ostern). Conepts an" i"eas

pertaining to the East are to ,e #o+n" all thro+gho+t the no$el& an" onnet not only n+lei& ,+t

are also a o%%on trait o# %any atalysers. (the #ar East3 lo$ely spot it %+st ,e: the gar"en o#

the *orl"& ,ig la!y lea$es to #loat on#lo*ers o# i"leness*ater3lilies) says 'loo% in the

hapter na%e" (Lot+s Eaters). The onept in itsel# is a ,a4gro+n" #or the *hole story& as the

i"ea o# reinarnation is *hat "ri$es the %eeting ,et*een the t*o %ain haraters& i.e. the enter

o# the no$el. (I& entelehy& #or% o# #or%s& a% I ,y %e%ory ,ea+se +n"er e$erhanging #or%s)&

in other *or"s (I a% I) thro+gh all the h+n"re"s o# li$es& a onept o# Eastern religions. As to

*hat this %eans to the t*o %ain haraters an" the n+lei o# the narrati$e& *e *ill see a#ter

analy!ing an" onneting all leit%oti#s.

The seon" leit%oti# *hih an ,e o,ser$e" in the no$el is that o# the o%phalos 3 the

"eepest onnetion e8istent& the or" *hih onnets all energy to its so+re. This& too& is an

Eastern onept relate" to reinarnation. 5ore po*er#+l than parenthoo" in the Christian

religion& the onnetion o# the energy to the so+re& to the o%phalos& goes all the *ay ,a4 into

one-s past li$es 3 th+s the onnetion *ith %ete%psyhosis. The na$el is the seat o# the propheti

po*er *hih in Dlysses ,eo%es %o"erni!e" into a telephone line *ith E"en.


16/42

The ,eginning o# the 7o+rney is an o%phalos: 5r 'loo% li$es at No./ Eles Street& a

replia o# the isle o# Ogygia& *here Calypso "*elt& states Gil,ert& a (na$el o# the sea& as Ho%er

alls it) B. Stephen-s to*er is also a re#erene to the O%phalos& a plae *here Stephen

%o4ingly reenats the Catholi religio+s tra"itions& the ro+n" to*er *here e$en tho+gh

tene%ents "ie the lan"lor" is i%%ortal.

et the o%phalos appears %+h earlier in the story& na%ely in the hapter na%e"

(Prote+s)& *hen *hile onte%plating on the ,eah Stepthen ?e"al+s sees t*o %i"*i$es& one o#

the% arrying a ,ag. (Creation #ro% nothing. hat has she in the ,ag9 A %is,irth *ith a trailing

na$elor"& h+she" in r+""y *ool. The or"s all lin4 ,a4& stran"ent*ining a,le o# all #lesh.)

6. The o%phalos th+s appears in %any ir+%stanes an" +n"er %any #or%s – a telephone

line *ith the Hea$ens& a na$elor" an" e$en in the shape o# 5rs 5ina P+re#oy& the propheti

%other *ith (no ,le%ish) i.e. no na$el& or in other *or"s the starting point o# all li#e. The sene

in *hih she appears in Cire onnets it *ith Tele%ah+s ,y the analogy o# rit+als – the

(halie) an" the (t*o sha#ts o# light) ,eing the o%%on setting in ,oth hapters.

Paternity is a $ery hea$y leit%oti# in (Dlysses) as it "i##ers #ro% one harater to the

other& an" is one o# the %ost o%%on onepts thro+gho+t the no$el. =irst an" #ore%ost& there is

an i"ea o# paternity in the ase o# Leopol" 'loo%& a #ather *ho an no longer #+l#ill his role as

his son "ie" in in#any. Tho+ghts o# little R+"y ha+nt this paternal #ig+re #ro% the ,eginning an"

+ntil the en" o# his "ay. In St+art Gil,ert-s *or"s& R+"y is the (%ista4e) o# 4ar%a& (the #ore

reate" ,y a persons ations that is ,elie$e" in Hin"+is% an" '+""his% to "eter%ine *hat that

persons ne8t li#e *ill ,e li4e) 5erria%3e,ster – in #at& all hil"ren *ho "ie at or soon a#ter

,irth are 7+st %isplae" so+ls *hih ha$e to "ie in or"er to ,e reinarnate" in their right#+l plae.

=or Stephen ?e"al+s& paternity o+rs in the shape o# a non3e8istent #ather& or %ore

e8atly& a non3onnetion *ith his #ather (Stephen-s attit+"e is really one o# "espair he has not

lost a #ather& ,+t he an ne$er #in" one)@B& St+art Gil,ert. Stephen ?e"al+s hi%sel# asserts:

(=atherhoo"& in the sense o# onsio+s ,egetting& is +n4no*n to %an. It is a %ystial estate& an

apostoli s+ession& #ro% only ,egotten to only ,egotten.) Dlysses 1/;

These are not the only leit%oti#s in the no$el – a n+%,er o# sy%,ols onnete" to +lt+ral

i"entity s+h as Irish or Se%iti re#erenes %a4e the s+,7et o# "ialog+es ,et*een haraters an"


17/42

o# reor"e" tho+ghts. As %entione" ,e#ore& all o# these leit%oti#s "o+,le as atalysers in the

sense that they trigger ertain strea%s o# tho+ghts #or eah harater – #or e8a%ple& the #+neral

5r 'loo% atten"s re%in"s hi% o# his "eease" son an" thene#orth an array o# regrets an"

sa"ness o$er the pages o# the no$el.

The leit%oti#s en+%erate" in the paragraphs a,o$e %a4e the rea"er analy!e the no$el

thro+gh an eastern spirit+al perspeti$e& *hih in t+rn lea"s +s to loo4 at the t*o %ain %ale

haraters not as +nonnete" people *ho %eet ,y hane& ,+t as intert*ine" so+ls ,ro+ght

together ,y a po*er#+l 4ar%a. So there *e ha$e a #ather *ho has lost a son too soon to all

hi%sel# a tr+e #ather& an" a son *ho has ne$er 4no*n the presene o# a paternal #ig+re in his li#e.

This is *here St+art Gil,ert #in"s the enter o# the no$el – *here all atalysers re+nite& they lea"

to the re+nion ,et*een spirit+al #ather an" spirit+al son& the 4ar%i onnetion *hih s+rpasses

ti%e an" e$en "eath an" #inally re+nites the t*o %ale protagonists& %a4ing all the other ations

in the no$el #all into plae. Here *e as rea"ers reali!e that all that has o%e ,e#ore this %o%ent

is intro"+e" as a #or% o# antiipation an" s+spense& an" e$erything that o%es a#ter& a

ontin+ation o# this +nion an" its #inale.

The #+ntional layer in >a%es >oye-s (Dlysses) is there#ore onstit+te" o# n+lei

re$ol$ing aro+n" a enter *hih is the %eeting ,et*een the t*o %ale protagonists& n+lei *hih

in t+rn #ollo* the pattern set ,y Ho%er-s (The O"yssey). The ations are a trail o# o%%on

happenings in a $ery or"inary "ay in the li$es o# the haraters –ha$ing ,rea4#ast& going to the

p+,li ,aths& atten"ing a #+neral et – easy to #ollo* in the ,a4gro+n" o# a so%eti%es

o$er*hel%ing strea% o# tho+ghts. The oye-s no$el as a physial


18/42

o%pati,le *ith the no$el lea"s& ho*e$er& to the sa%e narratologial pattern& o# a onstellation o#

n+lei re$ol$ing aro+n" the entral& #ate" %eeting.

Chapter 6 3 The Ation Layer

As %entione" in the intro"+tory hapter to this thesis& narratology "e#ines haraters as

atants rather than as psyhologially o%ple8 h+%an #ig+res. In other *or"s& haraters %atter

to the narratologist to the e8tent o# their role in the plot.

The #irst aspet *e nee" to %ention *hen analy!ing >a%es >oye-s (Dlysses) is that&

gi$en the strea% o# onsio+sness tehnienni#er Le$ine points o+t&


19/42

(one yo+ reali!e that %+h o# *hat is happening insi"e Stephen-s hea"*hole h+n4s o# the

no$el ,eo%e a$aila,le. Instea" o# +nner$ing an" #r+strating shi#ts #ro% one 4in" o# lang+age to

another& e$en #ro% one story to another& yo+ reogni!e that yo+ are tra4ing a %in" in ation an"

respon" aor"ingly.) 16

The three %ain haraters o# (Dlysses) are Stephen ?e"al+s – the son –& Leopol" 'loo%

– the #ather –& an" 5olly 'loo%. There is also a #o+rth harater *ho% ?on Gi##or" na%es&

inspire" ,y Aristotle-s "e#inition o# the "ra%a& (the hor+s)& onstit+te" o# the olleti$e ,o"y

o# iti!ens *ho pop+late the no$el. ho is eah o# these harater an" *hat "esires an"

o,sessions ha+nt the% is o# no interest to +s in this parti+lar analysis – apart #ro% ,eing stirre"

into ation ,y atalysers& the harater-s tho+ghts only %atter #ro% a narratologial point o# $ie*

,ea+se they "o+,le the physial 7o+rney that +nra$els thro+gho+t the no$el. It is& ho*e$er& a lot

easier to +n"erstan" the ations layer o# the no$el i# *e ta4e a loo4 at the onnetions ,et*een

these three %ain haraters.

As *e ha$e seen earlier in the thesis& the onnetion ,et*een Dlysses an" the O"yssey

"eter%ines a rea"ing o# the three %ain haraters as the %o"ern opies o# Tele%ah+s& Dlysses

an" Penelope. This interpretation eno+rages the rea"er to see not as %+h the rese%,lane – #or

e8a%ple the paternal relationship ,et*een the t*o %ale protagonists – as the "i##erene ,et*een

the t*o $ersions. The %ost pro%inent o# the three is 5olly 'loo%& *hose a"+ltero+s ,eha$ior is

the e8at opposite o# Penelope-s #a%e" loyalty to her long3gone h+s,an". Penelope-s e##orts to

re%ain p+re& "istant #ro% the "irty *orl" o+tsi"e her ho+se& the *ea$ing an" +n*ea$ing o# a

o%ple8 pattern 4eeps her loser to the spirit+al rather than the arnal sphere& *hih ontrasts

5olly-s oarse lang+age& her sens+al tho+ghts& her sharp an" +n#orgi$ing 7+"g%ent o# the %ale

psyhe.

O# Stephen ?e"al+s& >eni#er Le$ine states: (Stephen %ay ,e ast as Tele%ah+s& ,+t he

thin4s he is playing Ha%let). His ations are not those o# a son on a "esperate


20/42

searh #or his #ather 3 the t*o re+nite not as a res+lt o# s+staine" e##orts ,+t as a #ate"

oini"ene. 'loo% hi%sel# "oes not present the $irt+es o# the po*er#+l Dlysses – he is oye-s Catholi ,elie#s are to ,e #o+n" all thro+gho+t the no$el&

starting #ro% the %ost o,$io+s *hih Stephen-s o,session *ith his %other-s "ying *ish – an"

assesses that the protagonists are the i%age or the holy trinity – =ather& Son an" Holy Spirit. hy

'loo% an" Stephen are =ather an" Son has ,een e8plaine" earlier& yet #or a ,eing as #ar #ro% the

spirit+al as 5olly 'loo% the assoiation see%s #ore"& to say the least. Ho*e$er& *hen the t*o

%ale haraters are sitting silently in the roo% one o# the% is onte%plating 5olly-s silho+ette:

Fthe %ystery o# an in$isi,le attrati$e person& his *i#e 5arion 5olly 'loo%& "enote" ,y a

$isi,le splen"i" sign& a la%p- – the %ysterio+s sha"o* *hih is the Holy Spirit.

O+t o# these three interpretations& >a%es >oye hi%sel# see%s to lean to*ar"s the #irst

one. In a letter to Carlo Linati& he states (The harater o# Dlysses al*ays #asinate" %e – e$en

*hen a ,oy) Letters I& 1B@. Going ,a4 to o+r narratologial analysis& Rolan" 'arthes *rites

o# an a8is along *hih all haraters in a story %o$e – o%%+niation& "esire an" or"eal. Let +s

#irst stop an" apply this theory on Ho%er-s (O"yssey). Tele%ah+s& *ho in ter%s o# appearane

is +ne


21/42

,y the $oie o# the narrator. On the other han"& the haraters in >a%es >oye-s (Dlysses) see%

to stagnate instea" o# %o$ing along an a8is& or rather see% to ,e %o$ing o+t o# inertia instea" o#

,eing "ri$en ,y "esire all the *ay thro+gh or"eal. Stephen& *ho has o%e ,a4 to ?+,lin to

atten" to his "ying %other an" has re#+se" her last *ish& Leopol" 'loo% *ho ten"s to his

,+siness on that parti+lar "ay – atten"ing a #+neral& $isiting a ne*spaper ho+se et – all the

*hile a$oi"ing the reality o# his *i#e-s a"+ltero+s ,eha$ior& an" 5olly 'loo% *ho entertains

another %an on the %arital ,e"& all o# the% are on a 7o+rney ,+t none o# the% "esire anything

spei#i altho+gh in the en" Stephen reei$es a #ather an" Leopol"& a son.

hile %ost – i# not all – narrati$es +se their haraters as tools in #+l#illing a ertain

pattern o# ations – an" this& E.5. =orster o,ser$es& is %ost learly #elt starting %i"3story&

so%e*here hal#3*ay ,et*een the #irst page an" the last page o# the no$el – >a%es >oye-s

haraters "o not #all in the sa%e ro+tine. Stephen& Leopol" an" 5olly are the protagonists o#

(Dlysses) ,+t are not so %+h atants as they are story3tellers& narrators. This in t+rn %a4es #or a

thin ations layer& %+h thinner than in the ase o# other no$els o# the or ,e#ore the ti%e.

Chapter B – The Narration Le$el. ?iso+rse.

(ith no #irst3step narrati$e g+i"eline s+h as the Odyssey to #ollo*& an" th+s no "e#inite i"ea o#

*hat str+t+re an" the%ati priniples sho+l" #ra%e his ne* pro7et& >oye pi4e" #ro% ro+gh

le8ial 7ottings an" e%,ryoni story ele%ents o%pile" in the no* #a%iliar note,oo4s& o#ten

e8ploring ane* ol" onerns #ro% $ario+s narrati$e approahes& an" o%pose" "isonnete"

s4ethes& later to ,eo%e the *or4-s anhoring points& sattere" e$enly thro+gho+t the ,oo4 in

or"er to ens+re its ohesi$eness. 5ilesi& 6

>oye-s o,session *ith lang+age is no ne* in#or%ation to his rea"ers. An Irish%an ,oth

in heart an" in +p,ringing& >oye as a *riter assi%ilate" a reality *hih is spei#i to ?+,lin: a

o%,ination o# "ialets an" aents *hih are so hea$ily +se" that it gi$es the i%pression o# a


22/42

"i##erent tong+e altogether. >oye hi%sel# state" that #or hi% English is in"ee" a #oreign

lang+age an" *ill ne$er ,e anything else hene his %astery o# +sing it as a tool #or his o*n

p+rposes rather than proteting its aoye is the +se o#

i"io%s – o+ntless i"io%s o# the English lang+age& ,+t this is not the #inal stop. He ,orro*s #ro%

o$er a "o!en other lang+ages – not only i"io%s& ,+t also ter%s "e#ining philosophial onepts&

#or e8a%ple& *hih in (Dlysses) are not translate" ,+t rather +se" as s+h& in their lang+age o#

in$ention. Another "e#ining harateristi o# the "iso+rse in (Dlysses) is the +se o# n+%ero+s

aents pertaining to eah o# the haraters. hat >oye "oes is %i%i the e$ery"ay lang+age o#

Irish%en& th+s pro$i"ing the rea"er *ith an a+rate ao+nt o# a "ay in ?+,lin – an e##et *hih

is a%pli#ie" ,y the photographi "esriptions o# the ity as perei$e" thro+gh all #i$e senses o#

the haraters. The loyalty >oye has #or his Irish i"entity "oes not en" here: the synta8 o# the

sentene is typial #or a lang+age o# Gaeli "esent& H+gh enner points o+t& as it has a ten"eny

o# s4ipping any o$ert on7+ntions in ase o# sentene s+,or"ination.@

(Initial onsternation %ay relate to the %any *or"s >oye +se" that annot ,e #o+n" in stan"ar""itionaries an" to the #at that gra%%atial r+les appear #reoye o#ten "i"

not e"it his haoti %aterial into the spheres o# santione"& orret& perio"s.) 5ilesi states. It

is tr+e that >oye #elt the nee" to in$ent %any o# the *or"s he +se" in his *or4& an" the a+thor

"oes not hi"e the #at that stan"ar" English *hih he +ses e$ery"ay #ails in "eli$ering an

a+rate "esription o# the *orl". S+h an e8a%ple o%es at the ,eginning o# (Calypso)& in the

#or% o# a "ialog+e ,et*een 'loo% an" his at: (F54gnao- ries the at& an" then F5r4gnao-&

an" then again& lo+"ly& F5r4rgnao-) an" to his at-s $ery spei#i three ries& 'loo% ans*ers:

F5iao*& a reor"ing o# the %an-s ren"ition o# the so+n"s his at pro"+es& not


23/42

lear ,y +sing "i##erent spellings& >oye also +n"erlines t*o $ery i%portant aspets o# his *or4

as a *riter: the #irst is that he has to +se his a,ility to i"enti#y *hat >eni#er Le$ine alls (the

on$entionality o# lang+age)Attrige& 10 the seon"& that he has the o,ligation to transri,e it

as is.

e are not to #orget the %ost i%portant aspet o# the no$el #ro% the point o# $ie* o#

"iso+rse: the +se o# strea%3o#3onsio+sness tehnioye-s intention *hen he "isplays s+h "isorgani!e" "iso+rse see%ingly not

,othering *ith any o%%on3sense r+les o# gra%%ar an" +lti%ately& *ith the rea"er-s response

an" +n"erstan"ing o# the no$el9 An" ho* o%e& "espite the initial sho4 +pon a #ist eno+nter *ith the *or4& it still %a4es sense e$en to the rea"er *ho is not +lt+re" eno+gh to #ollo* e$ery

literary an" other*ise all+sion in the te8t& e$ery "ialet an" e$ery i"io%9

(>oye& *ho o#ten o%pare" $er,al reations to ,iologial proesses& trie" to ath tho+ghts in

statu nascendi& ,e#ore arti+lation. Stephen ?e"al+s has a highly "e$elope" $er,al onsio+sness

?ae"al+s *as an arhitet2engineer& his %in" see%s to ai% at instant en+niation. His %ost

on$ol+te"& Protean spe+lations on the ,eah are #or%ally per#ete". 'loo%& on the other han"&

la4ing the gi#t o# instant ga,& is ontin+ally groping.) 5ilesi& 6;

The e##et >oye ahie$es is "o+,le: on the one han"& there is a ,etter& %ore thoro+gh

+n"erstan"ing o# the "i##erene ,et*een haraters *hih penetrates thro+gh their appearane

an" the lang+age they +se *hilst in "ialog+e *ith other persons& an" thro+gh to the $ery ,irth o#


24/42

their tho+ghts& the other e##et ,eing that o# apt+ring an essene o# %in" *hih is +ni$ersal to

all h+%ans an" th+s +n"erstan"a,le e$en to the less3in#or%e" rea"er – a state ,e#ore the

per#ete" sentene& ,e#ore synta8 . (Rea"ers %ay not e$en notie the shi#t as shi#t an" a"7+st

a+to%atially. In o+r o*n pri$ate tho+ghts *e "o not ha$e to spei#y *hat or *ho it is *e are

thin4ing o# at any #leeting %o%ent one goo" reason *hy 5olly nee" not spell o+t the %+ltiple

he-s an" hi%-s in her %onolog+e) 5ilesi& 0

In his st+"y o# >a%es >oye-s (Dlysses)& inent Sherry states that (the hal#3*ay %ar4

loates the %o%ent at *hih the o%pliations o# sit+ation an" "esire ,egin to %o$e to*ar"

resol+tion. Ini"ents an" people that o+rre" at #irst #or their o*n sa4eno* ha$e to ontri,+te

to the "eno+e%ent.)B. (Dlysses)& ho*e$er& is an e8eption. In or"er to a$oi" this o%%on trap

*hih %ost no$elists #all into& >oye hooses to onentrate not so %+h on the +nra$eling o# the

plot as on the narrati$e tehni

treatise named #Aspects of the Eovel%

= Merriam-e!ster denes #catechism% as a collection of uestions and answers

that are used to teach people a!out the hristian religion


25/42

(In+,+s)& a night%are or night%arish spirit *hih atta4s h+%ans in their sleep 5erria%3

e,ster. et e$en tho+gh eah (tehni) ,ears a "i##erent na%e the #irst si8 hapters are all

onnete" ,y the strea% o# onsio+sness *hih is& a#ter all& present an" (per#ete") thro+gho+t

this #irst part o# the *or4. (Altho+gh >oye see%e" to e%,ar4 *ith eah ne* *or4 on a ra"ially

"i##erent e8peri%ent in literary lang+age& it is %ore help#+l to see the *hole >oyean o+tp+t as a

"isrete ontin++% in *hih apparently ne* "epart+res in #at re"eploye" earlier narrati$e3

ling+isti ha,its in a "i##erent g+ise). 5ilesi& 1

The #irst shi#t in narrati$e tehni


26/42

Chapter – The Narration Layer. Narrator an" ti%e.

e re%in" the rea"er o# this short paper that in ter%s o# narratologial theory the

narration layer is not only +se o# lang+age per se& ,+t ho* sai" lang+age ai"s in the proess o#

o%%+niating a %essage to the rea"er an" ho* it helps str+t+re the #+ntions o# the no$el. In

that respet& *e %+st #irst ta4e a loo4 at the +se o# *or"s *hih s+ggest the presene o# the

"onor (7e) an" o# the reei$er (t+). =or this p+rpose I ha$e hosen #or analysis 5olly-s speeh in

the last part o# the no$el (Setting +p ho+se #or her ti%e a#ter ti%e an" then pa*ning the #+rnit+re

on hi% e$ery Sat+r"ay al%ost.) The stan"ar" #or% o# this sentene sho+l" ha$e ,een (He the

h+s,an" is setting +p ho+se #or her ti%e a#ter ti%e an" she the *i#e is pa*ning the #+rnit+re on

hi% e$ery Sat+r"ay al%ost). The reason *hy the s+,7ets (he) an" (she) are not o$ert is& in

La+rent 5ilesi-s opinion& the #ollo*ing: (In o+r o*n pri$ate tho+ghts *e "o not ha$e to spei#y

*hat or *ho it is *e are thin4ing o# at any #leeting %o%ent) 0. In other *or"s& not stating the

s+,7et %a4es the ao+nt o# 5olly-s tho+ghts that %+h loser to the original an" that %+h

%ore realisti #or the rea"er. Ho*e$er& #ro% a narratologial point o# $ie*& >oye-s hoie o#

eli%inating i%portant parts o# the %essage is not an or"inary one& an" the %essage o%es aross

as ino%plete in ter%s o# "onor an" reei$er.

This +tter "isregar" #or na%ing either s+,7et or o,7et in the sentene ,y na%e 3 th+s

%a4ing it on#+sing as the harater shi#ts #ro% re#erene o# one %an to the other an" to all –

%ight s+ggest that #or >oye there is no reei$er (t+) at all – as *e ha$e state" in the intro"+tory

hapter to this thesis& the reei$er is not o$ertly %entione" ,+t rather s+ggeste" ,y presene o#

in#or%ation *hih the narrator or haraters *o+l" not nee" to %ention other*ise. In (Dlysses)

the tho+ghts o# the haraters are *ritten "o*n *ith s+h loyalty to their tr+e #or% in the

harater-s %in" that not only is the (t+) al%ost i%possi,le to perei$e& the (7e) the s+,7etitsel# is %ostly ne$er present – *hih& as the r+les o# gra%%ar tell +s& is a %ista4e in the English

lang+age. Ho*e$er& let +s ta4e a passage *hih 5ilesi analy!es #ro% 'loo%-s speeh: (Anyho*

+pon *eighing +p the pros an" ons& getting on #or one& as it *as& it *as high ti%e to ,e retiring

#or the night.) U [email protected]@;6–B E8a%ining the +se o# (it) in the passage 5ilesi o,ser$es:


27/42

(There is little oye-s *or4s: *hile the O"yssey is o%pletely e8ternally #oali!e" Dlysses

presents a range o# shi#ts in #oali!ation thro+gho+t the no$el. Literary ritis1; ha$e split the

no$el into three setions ,ase" on these shi#ts& as #ollo*s: the #irst part is o%prise" o# the

hapters (Tele%ah+s) thro+gh (Ha"es) the seon"& (Aelo+s) – (Na+siaa)& an" the thir"

(O8en o# the S+n) to the last hapter& (Penelope). The theory on *hih this ategori!ation is

,ase" o%es #ro% the shi#ts in #oali!ation – the e##et that >oye is trying to ahie$e is that o#

"ar4ening& o# #a"ing reason: as the night #alls on the ity an" #atig+e ta4es o$er the senses the

speeh& too& is %ore ,r+s


28/42

"epen"ing on *hether or not it an ,e hange" to 1st person *itho+t altering the "iso+rse. The

t*o narrators are o#ten interhange" an" 4eeping a reor" o# these hanges is not the p+rpose o#

this *or4 yet i# *e are to +n"erstan" the narration layer o# (Dlysses) *e %+st at least "eter%ine

*hih o# the t*o is pre"o%inant an" ho* they o%,ine to "eli$er the %essage #ro% a

narratlogial point o# $ie*. In or"er to analy!e this aspet o# the no$el *e %+st #irst i"enti#y the

narrator an" its $oie. In plain lang+age& (e$erything else that annot ,e i"enti#ie" *ith a

harater-s $oie ,elongs to that o# the narrator) Saraireh *hat is onsi"ere" as the

(harater-s $oie) is e$ery ele%ent o# "ialog+e& e8ternal an" internal %onolog+e11. (E$erything

else) in ter%s o# $oies in the no$el o%es in the #or% o# a +,i


29/42

Stephen. hihe$er presene the $oie ,elongs to is& ho*e$er& irrele$ant to 'arthes- theory: all

instanes o# s+h 6r" person o,ser$ations *hih annot ,e replae" *ith their 1st person

o+nterparts *itho+t altering the %essage are e$i"ene o# an apersonal narrator.

Ho* shi#ts #ro% an apersonal to a personal narrator o+r in (Dlysses) an ,e e8a%ine" %ore

losely in the #irst hapter o# the no$el:

(Her gla!ing eyes& staring o+t o# "eath& to sha4e an" ,en" %y so+l. On %e alone. The ghostan"le

to light her agony. Ghostly light on the tort+re" #ae. Her hoarse lo+" ,reath rattling in horror&

*hile all praye" on their 4nees. Her eyes on %e to stri4e %e "o*n.

Liliata rutilantium te confessorum turma circumdet: iubilantium te vergininum shorus excipiat .

Gho+l Che*er o# orpses

No %other. Let %e ,e an" let %e li$e.

– inh ahoy

'+4 5+lligan-s $oie sang #ro% the to*er. It a%e nearer +p the stairase& alling again.

Stephen& still tre%,ling at his so+l-s ry& hear" *ar% r+nning s+nlight an" in the air ,ehin" hi%

#rien"ly *or"s.)

The #irst paragraph is easily i"enti#ia,le as Stephen-s internal #oali!ation& not only

7+"ging #ro% the s+,7eti$e tone o# the passage& that o# a son a##ete" ,y tho+ghts o# his

%other-s ghost & ,+t gi$en the #at that the personal prono+ns +se" are all #irst person. The sa%e

thir" person $oie in the last paragraph no longer ,elongs to Stephen& or to any o# the haraters

present as it re#ers to the t*o as ('+4 5+lligan) an" (Stephen). It is still Stephen-s internal

i%personation o# his %other-s $oie *hen he says (Gho+l Che*er o# orpses) an" his preten"

response in this internal "ialog+e *ith hi%sel# *hen he re


30/42

?e"al+s- re%ar4s. hat is +rio+s is that altho+gh the harater *hih see%e" to ,e the %ain

#oali!er o# this hapter e8its the sene hal#*ay thro+gh the ation& the style re%ains +nhange".

I# *e are to re#er to >oye-s she%e as it *as p+,lishe" in St+art Gil,ert-s st+"y& the tehni


31/42

ha$e as %ain #oali!er one o# the t*o %ain %ale haraters in (Dlysses)& %ore or less ai"e" ,y

the apersonal narrator& there are a #e* e8eptions to this r+le. =or e8a%ple& the +nna%e" #irst

person narrator – *hih one riti atte%pte" to "e%onstrate is Si%on ?e"al+s& #ather o# Stephen

?e"al+s1B 3 is a lear re#erene to the harater o# (Cylops) #ro% Ho%er-s O"yssey an" o+rs

only in hapter t*el$e. Saraireh *arns +s a,o+t the i"entity o# this narrator: as oppose" to

Stephen ?e"al+s& 5r. an" 5rs. 'loo%& this narrator is one an" the sa%e $oie *hih appears

thro+gho+t the no$el& %ol"ing itsel# into styles an" assi%ilating "i##erent tehni5" considers

the anonymity of the narrator to !e #a deli!erate riddle posed as one of many

parallels to the original yclops story%


32/42

(Narratologists pay in#initely %ore attention to a narrator-s "iegeti sit+ation or "egree o#

o$ertness than& #or instane& to a narrator-s se8 or gen"er pres+%a,ly ,ea+se e$ery narrator an

,e "esri,e" as e8tra3 or intra3& ho%o3 or hetero"iegeti an" e$ery narrator an ,e "esri,e" as

%ore or less o$ert or o$ert ,+t not e$ery narrator an ,e harateri!e" in se8+al or gen"er ter%s)

oye see%s to %o4 gi$en the

#at that he pro$i"e" the sa%e lo4 ,+t *ith s%all "i##erenes to Carlo Linati – ,+t ti%e in the

sense o# "istortion an" its onse


33/42

is appro8i%ately #i#teen %in+tes a*ay #ro% the ne8t& yet ti%e ,eo%es %ore an" %ore +nertain

as the lo4 approahes %i"night& an" is al%ost o%pletely "isregar"e" a#ter that.

Trying to %ap all e$ents in (Dlysses) on a spei#i ti%eta,le is *hat Carlo Linati an" St+art

Gil,ert str+ggle" to ahie$e& yet #or narratologial p+rposes a+rate ti%ing is %ore or less

irrele$ant. hat %atters to o+r a+se is the #at that ti%e #or the rea"er – or rather& as ?on

Gi##or" alls it& (rea"ing ti%e) 6 – "istorts& an" *hile 'loo% ta4es a #i$e3%in+te stroll #ro% the

,ri"ge to the #ront o# Trinity College& the rea"er spen"s t*enty %in+tes going thro+gh the

"etaile" ao+nt o# his tho+ghts. (T*enty %in+tes o# prose ti%e is ,eing %anip+late" to i%itate

#i$e %in+tes o# hal#3#or%e" tho+ght3pereption ti%e& tho+ght3pereption that o+l" ,e $er,ali!e"

,+t +s+ally is not)6 an" e$en %ore e8tre%e are the hall+inations in (Cire)& *here

appro8i%ately 1 pages o# apparitions are #ra%e" ,et*een t*o rapi" +tteranes o# the sa%e

harater: (Go on. 5a4e a st+%p speeh o+t o# itTal4 a*ay till yo+-re ,la4 in the #ae) B/3

00.

e ha$e little *ay o# 4no*ing ho* long eah #rag%ent ta4es ti%e3*ise. Ho*e$er& eah

an" e$ery "istration an" "istortion ontri,+tes to the #asinating str+t+re o# (Dlysses): playing

*ith "i##erent %i%eti ti%es in the le$el o# narration& 7+%ping #ro% one tho+ght to the other

*itho+t any regar" #or tra"itional p+nt+ation r+les& "isr+pting ti%e an" spae an" #ol"ing it

,a4 to its original plae& shi#ting the narrati$e #o+s *ith #e* %ar4ers %a4ing it har"ly

notiea,le& all the *hile 4eeping the #+ntions *ithin their spei#i le$el stea"ily #lo*ing to*ar"sthe "eno+e%ent& an" the str+t+re o# the no$el& all the *hile& intat.


34/42

Part III – 5O?ERNIS5 AN? >OCE-S IN=LDENCE

hen (Dlysses) *as #irst p+,lishe" in 10 #ans an" ritis gathere" aro+n" it in t*o

$ery "i##erent a%ps: E!ra Po+n" *rote& in a letter to >oye in 5ay& 10 (Dnite to gi$e praise to

Dlysses those *ho *ill not& %ay ontent the%sel$es *ith a plae in the lo*er intellet+al

or"ers)1@. T.S. Eliot arg+e" that it (%a"e the %o"ern *orl" possi,le #or art)1/. Others& ho*e$er&

*ere not so enth+siasti. They regar"e" >oye-s re$ol+tionary no$el as r+"e& o,sene& proo#

,eing its prose+tion #or o,senity a#ter the p+,liation o# (Na+siaa) in the A%erian 7o+rnal

(The Little Re$ie*) in 10;. irginia ool#& too& alle" the *or4 (a %e%ora,le atastrophe –

i%%ense in "aring& terri#i in "isaster)1. ears a#ter its p+,lishing an" the ontestation o# its

ensorship *hih *as onse


35/42

(Dlysses) *as ,orn in a perio" o# t+%+lt an" the tho+ghts an" reati$e %in"s o# the *riters in

the t*entieth ent+ry *ere shape" ,y the history an" i"eas *hih s+rro+n"e" the%:

(That the age o# the earth is 6&;;;&;;;&;;; years that h+%an li#e lasts ,+t a seon" that the

apaity o# the h+%an %in" is ne$ertheless ,o+n"less that li#e is in#initely ,ea+ti#+l yet

rep+lsi$e that one-s #ello* reat+res are a"ora,le ,+t "isg+sting that siene an" religion ha$e

,et*een the% "estroye" ,elie# that all ,on"s o# +nion are ,ro4en& yet so%e ontrol %+st e8ist –

it is in this at%osphere o# "o+,t an" on#lit that *riters ha$e no* to reate)


36/42

Rihar"son. Their atte%pts to represent reality ha$e le" to a spei#i sort o# psyhologial

realis%:

(=or%ally ra"ial& s+,7eti$ely real an" aesthetially a+tono%o+s& e8pressi$e o# a *orl" in *hih

the present see%s "isloate" #ro% the past& e8periene is #rag%ente"& %+ltiple an" li%itless& an"

pre$io+s ertainties a,o+t the physial *orl" an" o+r sel#hoo" *ithin it ha$e ,een s*ept a*ay

this *as the art that >oye&ool# an" Rihar"son so+ght to reate.) Parsons& 6

As ali4e as their literary *ritings set o+t to ,e& the o+to%e is o%pletely "i##erent. They

all starte" #ro% the sa%e i"ea: that their no$els *ere to s4eth reality as it *as at the ti%e& to go

against tra"ition an" the %onotono+s *riting style *hih al*ays see%e" to #lo* the sa%e *ay&+na,le to grasp the e$er3hanging tr+th o# the ti%es. et their onept o# reality pro$e" to ,e

#+n"a%entally "i##erent& an" in her ritia%es >oye – *hose pre#erene #or strea%3o#3

onsio+sness tehnioye-s *or4& an" *rite (I re#lete" on ho* *hat I a% "oing is pro,a,ly ,eing ,etter "one ,y 5r

>oye) oye %a4es it lear that #or hi% the only rele$ant reality is that

#iltere" thro+gh the pris% o# h+%an onsio+sness. His *or4 is an atte%pt to grasp the inner%ost

22 Narsons chooses this grouping which & !elieve serves the purpose of comparing

#Llysses% to other wor+s of the time from a narratological point of view

23 Giary entry on August 15" 1=22


37/42

#rag%ents o# tho+ght& *hih tosse" into the *hirlpool o# a "ay-s strea% o# onsio+sness

"isappear ,e#ore they are e$en #+lly #or%e".

Rihar"son-s $ie*point in (Pilgri%age) re$ol$es aro+n" the i"ea that *hat her %ain

harater& 5iria%& alrea"y 4no*s& is not to ,e state" again in the no$el. The rea"er *ill see the

*orl" thro+gh the protagonist-s eyes an" any #+rther in#or%ation *o+l" spoil the nat+ral

+ni$erse o# the girl-s onsio+sness. The +n*a$ering #oali!ation is "o+,le" ,y the e8peri%ental

layo+t an" p+nt+ation: (Rihar"son lea$es o+t #+ll stops& allo*s sentenes to re%ain +n#inishe"&

or s*ithes ,et*een past an" present tense or #ro% thir"3 to #irst3 person narrati$e) Parsons&

66. Altho+gh the rea"ers- response s+ggests that the style *as har"er to aept than the

p+,lisher *o+l" ha$e ha" it "esira,le& the a+thor strongly arg+es that p+nt+ation is a tool *hih

%+st ,e +se" to ser$e a ertain p+rpose an" has ,een anoni!e" to the "isa"$antage o# re$ol+tion

in *riting.B Her ai% *as at a ertain type o# #e%inine realis% *hih *o+l" %i%i the nat+ral

psyhology o# *o%en. It *as not %o"ernis% *ho ,ro+ght a,o+t the onsi"eration that #or%

sho+l" hange aor"ing to %essage so that the %eaning o# e$ery literary *or4 *o+l" o%e

aross at its #+ll potential& ,+t i# Rihar"son ,ro4e ,o+n"aries *hih le" to on#+sion a%ongst

the rea"ers& >oye too4 this tas4 to the e8tre%e.

>oye *as not the person to 4eep to hi%sel# *hen it a%e to his opinion o# his o*n *ritings – he

a"$ertise" the% *ith ,+stling on#i"ene& an arti#ie *hih on$ine" the rea"ers o# the no$elty

an" $al+e o# eah *or4 e$en ,e#ore they starte" rea"ing the #irst lines. He pro$i"e" Gil,ert *ith

a she%a that he hi%sel# *o+l" later a"%it *as slightly e8aggerating the stylisti en"ea$ors o#

the original *riting. He ,asially #e" the rea"ers an interpretation o# his o*n no$el ,ase" on the

onnetion *ith Ho%er-s *or4. This is the #irst *ay in *hih >oye-s ,ol" literary ahie$e%ent

sho4s: those *ho ha" alrea"y gone thro+gh the pages o# the (O"yssey) no* #ae" a o%pletely

2 &n an essay #A!out Nunctuation% pu!lished in #Adelphi% in 1=2" Bichardson

argues that #the rules of punctuation are only mechanical tools that help to ma+e

communication straightforward and easyO!ut they dull our responses to the naturalrhythm of prose%


38/42

"i##erent *riting style& a 7o+rney *hih *as in no *ay o+t o# the or"inary an" a preonei$e"

i"ea that the t*o epis sho+l" %ath hapter ,y hapter. Contrasting all o# ool#-s an"

Rihar"son-s *ritings& >a%es >oye-s (Dlysses) ha" as a #+ntional layer the %ain str+t+re o#

n+lei o# an alrea"y *ritten – an" #a%o+s – literary *or4. Ha$ing this ,asi she%a as %ain

s+pport& he then onstr+te" a *or4 *hih rese%,le" noting o# the ti%e or ,e#ore it& an" *hih

*riters still str+ggle to eoye-s "epition is that

o# an or"inary "ay in the li#e o# his haraters. The haraters& too – per#etly or"inary& the

prototype %ales an" #e%ales o# a spei#i early3 t*entieth ent+ry soiety ho*e$er& they reei$e

a t*ist in interpretation ,ea+se o# the o%parison to their o+nterparts in the Ho%eri epi.

Co%ing #ro% a +lt+rally o%ple8 o+ntry s+h as Irelan"& >oye transposes %any o# the iss+es

o# i"entity in the #or% o# leit%oti#s& an" the lang+age is as "i$erse as the one in real3li#e ?+,lin.

(Shall *e p+t li#e – real li#e – on the stage9 . . . I thin4 o+t o# the "reary sa%eness o# e8istene& a

%eas+re o# "ra%ati li#e %ay ,e "ra*n. E$en the %ost o%%onplae& the "ea"est a%ong the

li$ing& %ay play a part in a great "ra%a. . . .Li#e *e %+st aept as *e see it ,e#ore o+r eyes&

%en an" *o%en as *e %eet the% in the real *orl"& not as *e apprehen" the% in the *orl" o#

#aery.)/ states >a%es >oye a,o+t the nat+re o# literary *or4s "+ring his ti%e. Co%ing #ro% a

+lt+rally o%ple8 o+ntry s+h as Irelan"& >oye #o+n" inspiration in the si%ple *orl" aro+n"

hi% – he transposes %any o# the iss+es o# i"entity *hih harateri!e the soiety in the #or% o#

leit%oti#s& an" the lang+age he +ses in his *or4 is as "i$erse as the one in real3li#e ?+,lin.

25 (.6. liot. #&n Lsing the Myth%" 1=23. Iuoted in Ge!orah Narsons page 3

2> Kames Koyce in his paper #Grama and ife% read to the Lniversity ollege iterary

and Distorical 6ociety in 1=" uoted in Ge!orah Narsons" page 34.


39/42

Inspiration #o+n" in a literary *or4 *ritten long ,e#ore its ti%e an" +se" as a ,asis #or the

str+t+re o# e$ents in the no$el is *hat %a4es the #+ntional layer o# (Dlysses) stan" o+t #ro%

other reati$e *ritings o# the ti%e.

ith regar" to the lang+age in (Dlysses)& nee"less to say it is onsi"ere" one o# the

greatest "isplays o# all ti%e. A,o+t it& E!ra Po+n" *rites: (One rea"s Pro+st an" thin4s hi%

$ery ao%plishe" one rea"s H. >. an" 4no*s he is $ery ao%plishe" one ,egins Dlysses an"

thin4s& perhaps rightly& that >oye is less so that he is at any rate less graile an" one onsi"ers

ho* e8ellently ,oth >a%es an" Pro+st Fon$ey their at%osphere- yet the at%osphere o# the

Gerty3Na+si4a episo"e *ith its ehoes o# $esper ser$ie is ertainly Fon$eye"-& an" on$eye"

*ith a ertit+"e an" e##iieny that neither >a%es nor Pro+st ha$e e8elle".) =or >oye the

n+%ero+s tehni


40/42

In his preo+pation *ith lang+age >oye lea$es asi"e his haraters. I# Rihar"son in

(Pilgri%age) #oregro+n"s 5iria% an" %a4es her not only enter& ,+t sole entity an" reei$er o#

attention& >oye slo*ly "i##+ses this attention as the story progresses. This is "one in t*o *ays:

#irst& ,y splitting the hapters into parts *hih he then assigns to "i##erent haraters *hose

presene in the no$el alternates +ntil the entral 7+8taposition the %eeting ,et*een Stephen

?e"al+s an" Leopol" 'loo%. 5oreo$er& the narrati$e #o+s shi#ts rapi"ly o+ntless ti%es& a

tehnioye hi%sel#& *ho #ar #ro% e##aing his a+thorial ontrol

,ehin" the tho+ghts an" pereptions o# his haraters& "e%onstrate" it *ith e$ery hange o# style&

repetition o# phrase or i%age& or sy%,oli parallel or 7+8taposition.) Parsons& @1.

Alternating the #o+s #ro% one harater to the other an" then stea"ily %o$ing the

rea"er-s attention #ro% haraters to lang+age& against the +ni$ersal e8petation #or ontin+ity

an" "eno+e%ent is *hat %a4es the le$el o# ations in (Dlysses) inno$ati$e.

T.S. Eliot *rites in his essay (Dlysses& Or"er an" 5yth): (The no$el en"e" *ith =la+,ert

an" *ith >a%es. It is& I thin4& ,ea+se 5r. >oye an" 5r. Le*is& ,eing in a"$ane o# their ti%e&

#elt a onsio+s or pro,a,ly +nonsio+s "issatis#ation *ith the #or%& that their no$els are %ore

#or%less than those o# a "o!en le$er *riters *ho are +na*are o# its o,solesene). hat Eliot

insin+ates is& o# o+rse& not the i"ea that >oye-s literary *or4s ha$e no #or% at all& ,+t that they

,rea4 o+t #ro% the presri,e" pattern o# the no$el. (Dlysses) reahes o+t ,eyon" its nat+re o#

literary reation an" e8plores #+rther than any *riting ,e#ore or sine: it o%,ines the #+ntional

str+t+re o# a 4no*n epi *ith o+tstan"ingly or"inary haraters *hih ,eo%e heroes o# real

li#e& all *rappe" in lang+age in its %ost nat+ral #or%& ,e#ore it is e$en ,orn. Loo4e" at #ro% a

narratorogial point o# $ie*& it has sho*e" +s $ery learly ho* #asinating a rea" it an ,e.

'I'LIOGRAPH

1. General surveys, literary histories, broad area or thematic studies


41/42

Attri"ge& ?ere4. he Cambridge Companion to !ames !oyce. "nd ed. Ca%,ri"ge: Ca%,ri"ge

Dni$ersity Press& ;;B.

Gi##or"& ?on an" Ro,ert >. Sei"%an. #otes for !ames !oyce$s Ulysses. n" e". Cali#ornia:

Dni$ersity o# Cali#ornia Press& 100.

Gil,ert& St+art. !ames !oyce$s Ulysses. % &tudy. Ne* or4: intage 'oo4s& 10.

5a+"& Ell%an. The #ets of Modernism. Henry !ames' (irginia )oolf' !ames !oyce' and

&igmund *reud . Ca%,ri"ge Dni$ersity Press& ;1;.

Parsons& ?e,orah. heorists of the Modernist #ovel. !ames !oyce' +orothy ,ichardson' (irginia

)oolf. O8#or": Ro+tle"ge& ;;/

Tin"all& illia% or4. % ,eader$s -uide to !ames !oyce. Ne* or4: The Noon"ay Press& 100.

2. Monographs, biographies, author studies

=aragnoli& Niholas A. an" 5ihae4 Patri4 Gillespie. Critical Companion to !ames !oyce. %

Literary ,eference to His Life and )or. Ne* or4: In#o,ase P+,lishing& ;;@.

Po+n"& E!ra an" >a%es >oye. he Letters of /0ra 1ound to !ames !oyce' with 1ound$s /ssays

on !oyce. E". =orrest Rea". Ne* or4: Ne* ?iretions 'oo4s& 9

atts& Ce"ri. Intro"+tion. Ulysses. 'y >a%es >oye. Hert#or"shire: or"s*orth E"itions Lt"&

;1;.

3. Theoretical and methodological studies

Allen& Graha%. ,oland 2arthes. Ro+tle"ge& Taylor =ranis e3Li,rary& ;;B.

An"re*s& Gi,son. !oce$s ,evenge. History' 1olitics' and %esthetics in Ulysses. Ne* or4:

O8#or" Dni$ersity Press& ;;.

'al& 5ie4e. #arratology. 3ntroduction to the heory of #arrative. n" e". Torono: Dni$ersity o#

Toronto Press& 1000.


42/42

'arthes& Rolan". (Intro"+tion to the Str+t+ral Analysis o# Narrati$es). 3mage' music' text. E".

Stephen Heath. D: =ontana Press& 10//.

'ro*n& Rihar". !ames !oyce and &exuality. Ca%,ri"ge: Ca%,ri"ge Dni$ersity Press& 10.

=l+"erni4& 5oni4a. %n 3ntroduction to #arratology. Trans. Ha+sler3Green#iel"& Patriia an"

5oni4a =l+"erni4. Ro+tle"ge& Taylor =ranis e3Li,rary& ;;0.

Lit!& A. atton. he %rt of !ames !oyce. Method and +esign in Ulysses and *innegan$s )ae .

Lon"on: O8#or" Dni$ersity Press& 10@1.

5ilesi& La+rent. !ames !oyce and the +ifference of Language. Ca%,ri"ge: Ca%,ri"ge

Dni$ersity Press& ;;6.

5enna& 'ernar". !ames !oyce$s Ulysses. % ,eference -uide. Conneti+t: Green*oo" Press&

;;.

Spoo& Ro,ert. !ames !oyce and the Language of History. +edalus$s #ightmare. O8#or": O8#or"

Dni$ersity Press& 100B.

Laura Zaharia - Narratology as Applied to James Joyce's Ulysses

Documents

Transcript of Laura Zaharia - Narratology as Applied to James Joyce's Ulysses