Lost in the Funhouse (Life-Story)

8/17/2019 Lost in the Funhouse (Life-Story)

1/6

I. Abstract: The essay depicts John Barth s sophisticated dealing with the fiction of forms. By referring to

short stories from his 1968 collection Lost in the Funhouse and especially to !Life"#tory$ Barth s approach

of creating metafiction as response to supposedly e%hausted literary topics is highlighted. Fiction consisting

of forms as e&ui'alent of e%istence in (eing and consisting of thoughts as e&ui'alent of essence in (eing

cannot (asically change until essence in (eing itself will change. )s forms will only repeat again and again

Barth challenges the reader (y ha'ing him witness the demanding process of creating a wor* of art. +arying

the *uenstlerroman he anticipates identity issues of su(se&uent decades as well as issues of (eing and art.

1. Turning Away from Plot in the Short Story

,hile the early tall tales had shaped the image of man in stories for authors to come authors of the )merican hero in spite of their optimism as an e%pression of pro'en confidence in their own power and inspite of humor as an attitude toward a reality e%perienced as con&uera(le had to recogni-e the comple%ity of life. 1/ )fter s*epticism a(out superficial optimism and passed"on societal (eha'ioral codes and attitudeshad (een enunciated (y the dar* authors li*e 0oe and el'ille in the nineteenth century now

psychological aspects of life were focused on. ,ith that a dynamic plot (ecame o'ershadowed in fa'or of astatic episode depicting e.g. a part of daily routine. The su(2ect matter would often (e the e%periencing of acomple% reality (y an ine%perienced character. 3/

4n the short story genre !.../ the techni&ues of representation stem not from realism which emulatesreportage (ut from sym(olism which descends from poetry.$ 5/ ) traditional linear de'elopment li*ee'ents happening realistically or in causality coming to a crisis and leading to denouement ga'e way notonly to psychographs (ut to an increasing use of sym(ol modes. oreo'er !4n the new short story .../ theepiphany is a(olished and the writer s theme or perception is diffused throughout the wor* which (ecomesin effect a succession of re'elatory moments.$ /4n high modernism of the 1937s authors li*e emingwayand Faul*ner had their protagonists act apparently free of plot yet endowing any details with significance.Later on authors li*e #alinger and ary carthy in the 197s aligned themsel'es with plot. The ina(ilityof mastering the realities of e%istence was put in moral conte%t. 4ndi'idual moral shortcomings were alsodepicted (y authors li*e Bellow and Flannery : onnor in the 19;7s. ,hile readers of these wor*s nowcould identify with the characters the 1967s would confront them with modernistic traits again. !4n thesewor*s the narrati'e is more discontinuous and the chronology e'en more distorted .../.


2/6

the author. !The fiction of forms at one le'el simply accepts the legacy and repeats the form (e&ueathed itsatisfying an audience that wants this familiarity.$ 17/ The fiction of forms may (e aware of this still it istrapped in that entity of forms. 0arody may (e an attempt to escape from it mostly !.../ in a parasiticrelationship to romance. 4t feeds off the organism it attac*s and precipitates their mutual destruction.$ 11/


3/6

shows the author"narrator reflecting on the issue of his role indirectly addressing reader reception@ whereasthe reader reads a story a(out the creation of a story the author"narrator is not sure a(out his own function inthis creation yet he is conscious of this fact. oreo'er the e%istential issue is put in conte%t with themedium in general@ !e rather suspected that the medium and genre in which he wor*ed = the only ones for which he felt any 'ocation = were mori(und if not already dead.$ 3;/ But fiction in decline stands for society@

!e rather suspected that the society in which he persisted = the only one with which he felt any degree of identification = was mori(und if not et cetera.$ 36/ The synta% structure returns a(ridged the more hisreflections are narrowing on a personal le'el = leading to a (odily perspecti'e = and (roadening on auni'ersal le'el at the same time. From literature to medium to society to indi'idual (eing the circle (ecomesmore and more constricting. This circle (eginning with the loss of thoughts culminates in addressing

physical su(stance@ !e *new (eyond any dou(t that the (ody which he inha(itated = the only one et cetera = was et cetera.$ 3>/ This is clima%ing and anti"clima%ing at the same time. #tupendously or not theauthor"narrator is pleased (y his loss of thoughts may(e this is due to reflecting his loss of thoughts as a factof creating new thought. Those a(ridged thoughts mirror the endlessly reflected facts that = no matter whatthey refer to = always lead to the same results. Being pleased !The idea pleased him.$/ 38/ goes into

decline though. )fter the last constriction the reflection of the mori(und onto his own (ody/ this thought isnot articulated anymore !The idea et cetera.$/ 39/ C'en this train of thought of pleasure or satisfactiona(out finiteness and transience is in itself a mirroring of the e'er same result namely the fact that whate'er he may thin* it will always (e an imitation of the preceding. C'en assessing this fact is imitation. That iswhy o(2ecti'e reality cannot e%ist.

ere the *uenstlerroman or entwic*lungsroman issue is 'aried in a new postmodernistic manner. !.../ (yintroducing himself as protagonist of his own te%t the writer proposes a distance from his former self. Theartist *nowing himself to (e an artist de'ises his own Bildung in retrospect.$ 57/ The 'ery way how hedoes it is new as it has to do with the concept of the (lan*. The author"narrator in !Life"#tory$ has left the

process of his (ecoming aware of the issues at sta*e (ehind? the story itself mirroring this fact throughredundant synta%. is auto(iographical parado% = his former self in relation to his present self = 51/ is notcreated within the story (ut su(2ect of the story. 4t can almost (e seen as an artifact of human history. !,asthe no'el of his life for e%ample a roman clefD$ 53/ The author"narrator approaches the issue of hise%istence from the 'iewpoint of fiction@ might some author of Barth s ha'e written his own !Life"#tory$D 4f so@ in the shape of a no'el with real persons and real actionsD This &uestion Barth approaches with disdainof the genre referring to the lac* of a(ility to reflect in the potential characters of a roman clef? the&uestion remains unanswered. 55/ C&ually unanswered for the author"narrator is the (eginning of the storyany his referring to himself the story of his life/ as well as to any potential author the one who writes thelife story a(out him/. 5/ Following shortly he words his displeasure a(out that (y parodying his initially

introduced statement of the idea that he might (e fictional ma*ing it the target of his moc*ery@ !od so tospea* spare his readers from hea'y"footed forced e%positions of the sort that (egin in the countryside near

GGG in ay of the year GGG it occurred to the no'elist GGG that his own life might (e a GGG in which he wasthe leading or an accessory character.$ 5;/ This fiction"irony e%presses pessimism toward the story to (ecreated? again the author"narrator conscious of the con'entions (rea*s them (y telling the reader a(out hisown reaction on a literary genre. e practically neutrali-es the te%t s character disassem(ling it (y astatement that generally might only (e made after reception of the te%t. e withdraws (y reflecting onreception e%pectations depicting metafictionality while ma*ing fun of it.

%. &ariations of the Blan' in Barth

s (etafiction

!Beginning@ in the middle past the middle nearer three"&uarters done waiting for the end.$ 56/ The firstsentence of the short story !Title$ 5>/ ma*ing one of a few companion pieces to !Life"#tory$ and

3


4/6

pu(lished in the story collection Lost in the Funhouse once more thematically relates to the issue of storytelling. )gain the narrati'e genre and its traditional functioning is pointed at again the narrator stepsout of his traditional position (efore the story the story he is in and the story he is a(out to write/ cande'elop. #ince he fails to de'elop the story the narrator s consciousness li*e in !Life"#tory$ is put at thecenter of interest. is reflection !The worst is to come. C'erything leads to nothing@ .../ The final &uestionis an nothing (e made meaningfulD$ 5>/ shows the narrator conscious of his supposed (lan* of thoughtsin a fashion similar to the author"narrator in !Life"#tory$ stating medium and (eing in decline and putting et

cetera as reflecting agent of the (lan*. The narrator in !Title$ directly uses (lan* as e%pression of the (lan*e'en choosing the technical term title as a heading again a metaphor not representing itself. Being in aninner dialogue pondering functions of storytelling he finds this state !.../ self"defeating to tal* a(out .../instead of 2ust up and doing it.$ 58/ The issue of storytelling also (ecomes o('ious through the dialogue of the narrator s 'oices referring to reception aesthetics@ !Hie eine #timme des Cr-aehlers in !Title$ die dieEe(erhand gewinnt plaediert denn auch mit sich steigernder Cindringlich*eit dafuer .../ dass dasCr-aehlen wenn es nicht an der eigenen Hauerrefle%ion -ugrunde gehen will sich auf den enschen undseine emotionalen und psychischen Beduerfnisse -uruec*(esinnen muss.! 59/ #torytelling will ha'e tore'erse to man s emotional and psychical needs the message seems to (e. By means of syntactic congestion

= !)nd that my dear is what writers ha'e got to find ways to write a(out$ = 7/ the narrator s *nowledge is

illumined. 1/ ,ith that the 'ery crucial issue of literature s sole depiction of its own metafictionality isanticipated directly in the te%t.

The issue of self"e%pression coins the whole collection of stories. 4n its title story !Lost in the Funhouse$3/ thirteen"year"old )m(rose finds himself in a ma-e in a theme par*? he got lost. This seems to lead to)m(rose s e%periencing of his self? yet while reflecting Barth has the story interrupted (y comments onnarrati'e functioning@ !.../ a pretty girl and e%&uisite young lady who li'ed not far from them .../ in thetown of HGGG aryland. 4nitials (lan*s or (oth were often su(stituted for proper names in nineteenth"century fiction to enhance the illusion of reality.$ 5/ #uch statements do not appear incidentally (ut are putat the center of interest whereas fictional e'ents in the story get in (ac*ground. )s lost as )m(rose is in his

ma-e the narrator is in his own story. )gain storytelling itself is representati'e of the matter the narrator triesto communicate. e is as conscious of his issue as his protagonist is conscious of himself.

4n !,ater"essage$ / )m(rose again is searching for e%perience. ) little older now he is in an inner andouter ma-e. :n a (each he finds some (ottle with a paper inside that reads@ !T: ,: 4T )I:AC


5/6

story that is cited o'er and o'er again in the shape of the topic of lo'e endless repetition comes out into'iew. Just li*e in !enelaiad$ where se'eral transmission le'els are distorted toward non"comprehensi(ility )m(rose s mirror image in (eing !Lost in the Funhouse$ is dissipated in an infinitenum(er of single images confronting him with an !.../ endless replication of his image in the mirrors .../.$>/ 4n )m(rose concluding to (ecome an artist Barth hints at the a(surdity of the world that can only (efaced (y creating a counter"world . !Life"#tory$ has the grown"up artist reflect on that counter"world assuming himself as part of it.

!Both the forms of e%istence and the forms of fiction are most satisfying when they are in harmony withtheir essential &ualities. But (ecause these forms e%ist in time they cannot persist unchanged without losingtheir harmonious relationship to the essence of (eing and the ideas of fiction.$ 8/ This is what Barth in hisshort stories is a(out? his e%perimental approach attempts merging of presence of action and presence of telling in order to depict the 'ery issue of imitation in the fiction of forms. The analogy with thedeconstructionist approach in referring to its infinite referring of one te%t to another 9/ is o('ious. The

(rea*ing up of passed"on ways of storytelling lea'es the reader una(le to decide whether witnessing thereflections of the narrator or of the protagonist !Lost in the Funhouse$/. ,hen Barth constantly has thenarrator s situation refer to )m(rose or the author"narrator !Life"#tory$/ is a(out to (ecome one with his

own wor* of art traditional reader reception is challenged. )m(rose s image as is dissipated in the mirrorsremains a multi"reflected image? its details ma*e for the !Life"#tory$ of the author"narrator and allimitations in the forms of fiction esta(lish one fiction = the fiction that is pri-ed open to (e reflected (ymetafiction.

II. )"ife#Story is self"referential in that it is a simulacrum a(out an author writing a story a(out a fictionalcharacter writing a story in which the character is ha'ing dou(ts a(out his real e%istence. 4n essence arewe all simply characters trapped in our own life"stories as )m(rose is in the funhouse e%isting only as we

are (eing readD ere the author of one story is a character in another story his life"story which is (eing read (y a reader who is himself a character in and author of his own life"story and on and on. Cach author createscharacters in a fictional story (ut are themsel'es fictional characters in a story as well. This story amongother things deals with the notion that the reader controls the ma*ing and meaning of a particular te%tespecially in the third section where the narrator addresses the reader himselfKherself@ The reader Ioudogged uninsulta(le print"oriented (astard itMs you who 4Mm addressing who else from inside thismonstrous fiction 13>/ the narrator shouts. The narrator later (egs the reader to stop reading for the author cannot stop writing the story and the character in the story cannot stop writing the story and so on until thereader stops reading 138/. ,ithout the reader these stories as all stories would mean nothing? there would

(e no one to reali-e the fictionMs e%istence and so therefore no one to reali-e the authorMs e%istence.

III. *i'i+e,ia:

Lost in the Funhouse 1968/ is a short story collection (y )merican author John Barth. The postmodernstories are e%tremely self"conscious and self"refle%i'e and are considered to e%emplify metafiction.Though BarthMs reputation rests mainly on his long no'els the stories Aight"#ea Journey Lost in theFunhouse Title and Life"#tory from Lost in the Funhouse are widely anthologi-ed. The (oo* appearedthe year after the pu(lication of BarthMs essay The Literature of Exhaustion in which Barth said that thetraditional modes of realistic fiction had (een used up (ut that this e%haustion itself could (e used to inspirea new generation of writers citing Aa(o*o' Bec*ett and especially Borges as e%emplars of this newapproach. Lost in the Funhouse too* these ideas to an e%treme for which it was (oth praised and condemned

(y critics.

-verview

5

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Barthhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postmodern_literaturehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postmodern_literaturehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metafictionhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Literature_of_Exhaustionhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladimir_Nabokovhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_Becketthttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_Becketthttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jorge_Luis_Borgeshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postmodern_literaturehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metafictionhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Literature_of_Exhaustionhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladimir_Nabokovhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_Becketthttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jorge_Luis_Borgeshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Barth


6/6

Cach story can (e considered complete in itself and in fact se'eral of them were pu(lished separately (efore (eing collected. Barth insists howe'er on the serial nature of the stories and that a unity can (e found inthem as collected. Barth shows his pessimism in the stories and says he identifies with )nonymiad.

Bac'groun,,hen Barth (egan attending Johns op*ins Eni'ersity in 19> he enrolled in one of only two creati'ewriting courses a'aila(le in the E# at the time. e went on to (ecome one of the first full"time professors of creati'e writing. The stories in Lost in the Funhouse display a professorial concern with fictional form.

Lost in the Funhouse was BarthMs first (oo* after the 196> The Literature of C%haustion an essay in whichBarth claimed that the traditional modes of realistic writing had (een e%hausted and no longer ser'ed thecontemporary writer (ut that the e%haustion of these techni&ues could (e turned into a new source of inspiration. Barth cited a num(er of contemporary writers such as +ladimir Aa(o*o' #amuel Bec*ett andespecially Jorge Luis Borges as important e%amples of this. The essay later came to (e seen (y some as anearly description of postmodernism. Barth has descri(ed the stories of Lost in the Funhouse as mainly latemodernist and postmodernist.InfluencesJorge Luis Borges was a primary influence as ac*nowledged (y Barth a num(er of times most nota(ly inThe Literature of C%haustion. Bec*ett was another influence.

0u(lication history,ritten (etween 1966 and 1968 se'eral of the stories had already (een pu(lished separately.Barth has said he has written his (oo*s in pairs@ the realistic e%istential no'els The Floating Opera and The

End of the Road were followed (y the long mythical no'els The Sot-Weed Factor and Giles Goat-Boy. Lost in the Funhouse came out in 1968 and was followed in 19>3 (y Chiera a collection of three self"aware interrelated metafictional no'ellas.StoriesThe (oo* opens with Frame"Tale a story in which :AC E0:A ) T4C TC

Lost in the Funhouse (Life-Story)

Documents

Transcript of Lost in the Funhouse (Life-Story)