NARRATOLOGÍA DE TZVETAN TODOROV

por: Gener José Avilés Alatriste Universidad de Montemorelos NARRATOLOGÍA DETZVETAN TODOROV

Contenido • Preguntas generales • Narratología y Tzvetan Todorov • “La estructura de la Narrativa” • Ejemplos

Preguntasgenerales • ¿Cuáles son las estructuras básicas posibles de la narrativa? • ¿Cuáles son las funciones in getting las estructuras básicas? • ¿Y las limitaciones posibles?

La narratologíaestructuralista • Narratología– la ciencia de la narrativa; popularizadaen los 1970’s. • Narratologíacontemporáneaincluyenarratologíacomparativa, teorías la autoría, enunciacion, acción, historia y narración, recepción, auto-referencialidad e intertextualidad. • NarratologíaAplicada:psicoanálisis, estudios de género, lector-respuesta, críticaideológica.

Narratología 1. Contextos sociales, Convenciones culturales 5. Semiólogos, marxistas 3. Punto de vista 2. Formalistas rusos 4. Respuesta del lector Tradiciones literarias Marco teórico del análisis formal (literario,lingüistico, interdisciplinario)

Narratologíaestructuralista : MayoresTeóricos • Levi Strauss – 4 términos (2 conjuntos binarios) • V. Propp –7 esferas de acciones (Villano, héroe, falso héroe, sought-for person, etc.)y 31 funciones fuera de Russain fairy tales • TzvetanTodorov –centrado más en la sintaxis; • A. J. Greimas –centrado en la semántica (actantes—Sujeto/Objeto, Emisor/Receptor, Ayudante/Oponente, and 3 estructuras—contractual, performative, disyunctiva) • Claude Bremond -- virtualidad una situación abierta, una posibilidad); actualización o no actualización de la posibilidad; achievement or nonachievement. • Roland Barthes – 5 diferentes códigos (S/Z). • Etc.

Structuralist Narratology: Possible Criticisim • Reductive; • too static and unable to characterize the very engine that drives a narrative forward to its end, the very dynamics that dictate its shape. • Ignore context –depends on how it is used; • The possibility of a coherent narratology, one that successfully integrates the study of the what and the way, has been put into question by poststructuralist theorists and critics invoking the so-called double logic of narrative (e.g. story and discourse, event and meaning). • (Ref. http://www.press.jhu.edu/books/hopkins_guide_to_literary_theory/narratology.html )

T. Todorov • 3 aspects of the narrative: semantic, syntactic and verbal (Todorov’s focus is more on syntax.) • Grammar of narrative –sentence structure with the following basic units: • 1. Propositions and sequences//sentences and paragraphs • 2. parts of speech –characters as nouns; their attributes as adjectives, actions as verbs.

T. Todorov: “Structural Analsys of Narrative” Outline • Structural approach to literature defined; • Exemplified by his analysis of plot in Decameron; • The nature of narrative and the principles of its analysis.

I. Structural approach to literature defined • Theoretic but not descriptive, logical but not spatial. (2099) • Different from both Marxism (external, an abstract structure out side of the work) and New Criticism (internal). • Structuralism –“its object is the literary discourse rather than works of literature, literature that is virtual rather than real.” (2100). • New Criticism (description)—articulates a paraphrase; • Structuralist (poetics)– lit. works  abstract literary properties

I. Structural approach – further compared with modernist views • Henry James – p. 2101 -- disagrees with 1) isolating a text’s dialogue, description for analysis; 2) disregarding the novel as ‘a living thing, all one and continuous.’ • T’s responses – • A theoretical concept (e.g. temperature) does not need to exist in ‘a pure state’; • The fact that we find them (blood, muscle, etc) together does not prevent us from distinguishing them.) • Subjectivity is inevitable in studies of humanities (or social science) but we can limit it.

II. Decameron • From some stories he finds • Plot unit shown as a clause; • Characters as proper nouns; with adjectives; three actions as verbs – violate, punish, avoid; • Actions with different statuses (e.g. negation) • Modality – legends –imperative, fairy tale– optative, a wish; • perception • Relations between clauses (e.g. causal, temporal, spatial); • common sequence of a group of stories (punishment avoided)

II. Decameron (2) • 8. further analysis: • a. more concrete analysis of syntax -- each clause can be written as an entire sequence; • b. thematic study: study the concrete actions; • c. rhetoric study: examines the verbal medium

II. Decameron (3) • His goal – not knowledge of Decameron but an understanding of literature and plot. • 1) avoid punishment: From equilibrium to a new equilibrium. • 2) conversion • The story illustrates the superiority of the individual over the social, or nature over culture.

III. Conclusion • Literature and poetics • (2106) Ambiguity in moving back and forth between the two poles: auto-reference and its object

II. Grammar of Decameron e.g. 3 adjectives – states, interior properties and exterior conditions (status) 3 verbs – to ‘modify’ a situation, to ‘transgress,’ and to ‘punish.’ (3 modes—indicative, predictive and obligatory, 3 relations between propositions, 3 sequences) Ambiguity – at both the levels of proposition and sequence.  Boccaccio – a defender of free enterprise and even, . . . , of nascent capitalism.

T. Todorov: Grammar of Decameron e.g. Peronella’s story (of hiding her lover in a barrel) – X commits a misdeed  X modifies the situation  X is not punished.

T. Todorov: another example Given by Robert Scholes X – A+ (XA) opt X  Xa  XA X = Boy A = Love, to be loved by someone A = to seek love, to woo Opt X = Boy (X) wishes (opt) - = negation of attributes: -A lack love

T. Todorov: another example Given by Robert Scholes XA + XB  X-C + YaX + (X-A+X-B  XC) predX (XbY)predX+XA!  (XB+X-C)!imp X –Eveline, Y – Frank, A—a Dubliner, B—Celibate, C—happy—respected, secure, a – to offer an elopement; b-to accept elopement -- negative of attribute, not negative of verb pred –predicts or expects, imp – is implied by discourse

T. Todorov: Questions for Discussion • What could be the advantages of scientific and abstract descriptions? • Can we use Todorov’s method on a novel such as Heart of Darkness? Or a story from The Dubliners? A Hollywood film, The Titanic?

Possible Attempts • Chinese-American uses of traditional legends (e.g. Fox, Tang-Ao) to re-write canonical history  as initial causes for disequilibrium; later confirmed to bring up a new equilibrium; • How/where modification of situation is possible. • The Heart of Darkness: no equilibrium, or in the final sympathy between Kurtz and Marlow. • The Titanic: transgression  obstacles (human and natural)  a new equilibrium in spiritual love and death. • The Working Girl: transgression by the women (first the boss and the secretary), mutual punishment, modification by the man.

T. Todorov: critique • Jonathan Culler’s critique in Structuralist Poetics • –Modification can be done without the use of ruse or deception. • -- anything which modifies a situation will receive the same structural description. • “Todorov has not considered what facts his theory is supposed to account for and so has not considered the adequacy of the implicit groupings which it establishes” (217) • Another example –‘the sentence “The man out of the last house passed on his way home” can be excluded from any account of the plot’ -- since it has no consequences. (Barthes kernels + satellites)

T. Todorov: critique (2) • Seymour Chatman’s Story and Discourse • p. 92 to transfer Propp’s and Todorov’s method to any narrative macrostructure whatsoever is questionable. Most do not have the necessary overarching recurrences. The worlds of modern fiction and cinema are not two-valued, black and white, as are the Russian tales and the Decameron. • P. 93 Whatever success Scholes achieves in his analysis of ‘Eveline’ depends on his knowledge of the overriding thematic framework of the Dubliners. “Why a Dubliner instead of an Irishwoman or a European or a female? Why celibate instead of poor. . .?”

NARRATOLOGÍA DE TZVETAN TODOROV