Bibliography

Cohen, Margaret.  “Narratology in the Archive of Literature.” Respresentations 108.1 (2009): 51-75. Print

                     “To chart accurately the contours of the novel, literary historians are in the process of recovering the variety and complexity of its generic practice across its history. “Narratology in the Archive” surveys this recovery and discusses its methodology, differentiating this recovery from symptomatic reading. The article then illustrates this method with the recovery of sea adventure fiction as an influential transnational practice of the novel from Defoe to Conrad. I suggest that sea adventure plots are defined by readers’ playful manipulation of information to solve problems posed by the text.  In this article I am interested in the consequences for literary history of the return to one kind of archive in particular that sometimes gets lost in the conflation of teh archive with history and materiality: teh archive of literary forms makes it once more possible to borach questions of literature’s aesthetic excellence.”

Walsh, Richard. “Who is the Narrator?” Poetics Today 18.4 (1997) 495-513. Print.

http://http://www.jstor.org/pss/1773184?searchUrl=%2Faction%2FdoBasicSearch%3FQuery%3Dfocalization%2Bin%2Bdon%2Bquixote%26gw%3Djtx%26prq%3Dmagical%2Brealism%26hp%3D25%26wc%3Don&Search=yes

                       “Who Is the Narrator?” calls into question the concept of the narrator as a distinct and inherent agent of fictional narrative. The effect of this concept has been, misleadingly, to frame and contain fictionality. The argument addresses Genette’s typology of narrators, first comparing the extradiegetic homodiegetic category with the intradiegetic categories in order to establish that all these narrators are equally represented, and are therefore characters. It then confronts the extradiegetic heterodiegetic case, examining the implications of omniscience and external focalization and dismissing the claim that distinct narrators are needed in such cases so that the fictional information may be presented as known rather than imagined. The issue of the author’s accountability for fictional statements is addressed with reference to speech act theory to show that the conventional “pretense” model of fiction is unsatisfactory and that an acceptable speech act account would not postulate a narrator. The narrator is therefore shown to be either a character or the author. Some possible objections to this position are then considered: The implications of unreliability, ideas about local and covert narrators, and the issue of the implied author are taken into account. In conclusion, some of the argument’s consequences for an understanding of fiction in rhetorical rather than representational terms are briefly indicated.”

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Leave a Reply