Hannah Jacobmeyer. Märchen und Romanzen in der zeitgenössischen englischen Literatur. Münster etc.: LIT, 2000. 220 pp.
This study on the renaissance of fairy tale and romance under the auspices of postmodernism, which is one of the principal feature of late twentieth-century literature, is based on a meticulous survey of both research on folk literature and postmodern epistemology or ontology. This makes the book a very reliable introduction to the genre in any given period.
Jacobmeyer's approach is embedded in the discussion of genre and expectation, and, more prominently, in the network of intertextual relations. This kind of positivistic groundwork seems to be a prerequisite for the definition of any postmodern work of literature. The third issue discussed in this methodological framework, and which is equally revealing, concerns the tension between the pre-modern tradition of the fairy tale and its re-emergence. Ritual and repetition appear to be the best mould for conveying the ideology of postmodernism, as the autor concludes: When we have become familiar with and duly lost our faith in any 'Lyotardian' meta-narrative, only repetition remains plausible, which is often playful. Thus, the "pre-modernism" inherent in romance and fairy tale is a feature widely felt to be "postmodern" (201). The reader may agree to what Zipes said on the "Changing Function of the Fairy Tales": they persist, indeed, in being a "cultural institution" due to the level of moderate experimentalism where self-referentiality and conventional realism are merging (202 f.).1
Surprisingly, in this comprehensive study of postmodern genre and intertextuality, traditional categories of literary criticism still loom large. Postmodernism is considered a quasi-metaphysical entity. This becomes obvious when she remarks on how far individual works fulfil the requirements of postmodernism or when she, as I understand, regrets that Angela Carter and other writers appear to falter when matched with radical feminism, which is supposed to be a tenet of true postmodernism. This reminds one of the fact that in former times critics were prone to discuss how far a work was pervaded by romanticism or by the baroque. This sort of applied platonism or idealism preoccupied generations of critics especially in Germany. Anyway, as we have to come to terms with the recent past in criticism, the battle for imposing the terminology, i.e. the critic fighting for public recognition of his own definition of postmodernism, is still raging and, as an ongoing concern, has left its mark in Jacobmeyer's study.
However, any reader who follows Jacobmeyer across the fields of fairy tale and romance will get a deeper understanding of one of postmodernism's greater achievements. We come to appreciate the close-reading practiced on pieces by prominent authors such as A.S. Byatt, Rushdie or Angela Carter. This book includes sound methodology (Pfister's "taxonomy" of intertext, above all),2 which any student of literature will appreciate, and produces lucent insight into the workings of postmodern fairy rale and romance, which make it a powerful small book on a central cultural issue. If so, it is suggested that 'Lacanian' desire, the fulfilment of which must be forever postponed being the true realization of "différance", and endless textuality meet. Accordingly, closure never occurs in romance. This is the keystone of the approach underlying this study. Apart from puzzling the scholar, the sole function of intertext is its potential of meaning, which, from the ontological point of view, is located in-between the signs. The more significants are piled on each other for generating significance, the more the latent significance of the void [between text and intertext] itself grows. We are to develop an awareness that the immediacy of meaning cannot possibly include the desire for it. Romance, which aims at postponement is intended to be performed in a space never to be reached, the phenomenon of which is shared by intertext. It is "in-dicible, inter-dite", in-between the said, as intertext is produced in-between the carriers of significance.3 In line with this assumption widely shared by critics nowadays, the most interesting chapters are those devoted to the case studies of Graham Swift, Barbara Cartland, A.S. Byatt, Salman Rushdie, Tanith Lee, and Angela Carter.
To conclude, Jacobmeyer succeeds in conveying an excellent 'morphology' of postmodern fairy tale and romance. She exactly displays the qualities of a premodern genre reshaped under the conditions of media society. The conclusions drawn from the very detailed coverage of a phenomenon which is by no means marginal in postmodern culture will frame the ongoing debate. However, as her concepts of postmodernism and intertext are restricted to the disciplined methodology of literary scholarship, cultural analysis might provide further readings. If ambiguity pervades late twentieth-century literature, this will prompt the question whether postmodern excess should be read rather as a symptom of a failure of confidence, perhaps rendered obsessive by unextinguishable desire, than just a fashion in literature. The very concept of "intertextuality" cannot be understood without thinking about the function which literature may have in reflecting the mentality of the society concerned. Its communicative potential and its dialoguicity are, first of all, an intellectual pastime in an epistemological void. In the cultural setting of the late twentieth century, intertext, which was revived by the founding fathers of literary modernism, had become the craze among elitist writers - modernism was definitely so - busily scribbling it down against the rising tide of semi-illiteracy and electronic pictorialism in an age of surfeit of information and of the deluge of data. Or, as one TLS critic recently put it when reviewing Peter Ackroyd's Clerkenwell Tales (2003): "the self-conscious acceptance of writing as recycling literature."7 It does not seem pointless to argue that ambiguity and even a lack of confidence sell. The notorious instability of the postmodern self will be duly compensated by the stable amount on the monthly cheque.
1 Jacobmeyer is referring to systems theory as conceived by Gerhard Plumpe, Epochen der modernen Literatur. Ein systemtheoretischer Entwurf (Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag, 1995), and by Christoph Reinfandt, Der Sinn der fiktionalen Wirklichkeiten. Ein systemtheoretischer Entwurf zur Ausdifferenzierung des englischen Romans vom 18. Jahrhunderts bis zur Gegenwart (Heidelberg: Winter, 1997).
2 See Manfred Pfister, "How Postmodern is Intertextuality?" Ed. Heinrich F. Plett, Intertextuality (Berlin/New York: de Gruyter, 1991); "Konzepte der Intertextualität". Eds. M. Pfister and Ulrich Broich, Intertextualität. Formen, Funktionen, anglistische Fallstudien (Tübingen: Niemeyer).
3 "Die Beanspruchung des Intertexts kommt zustande durch den Wunsch nach Bedeutung - Bedeutung, die eben nur zwischen Zeichen liegt. In dem Maße, in dem ein Signifikant auf den nächsten gehäuft wird im Bemühen, Bedeutung zu generieren, wächst der Intertext als unsichtbarer, bedeutungsvoller Zwischenraum. Das Bewußtsein von der Unmöglichkeit einer vollen Präsenz zusammen mit dem Begehren nach einer solchen Präsenz findet Ausdruck in der Form der Romanze. Das Ziel, das in der Romanze verfolgt wird, schiebt sich immer weiter hinaus: Romanze spielt - und das hat sie mit dem Phänomen der Intertextualität gemeinsam - in einem nicht erreichbaren Raum. Sie ist "in-dicible, inter-dite", zwischen Gesagtem, wie auch der Intertext zwischen Bedeutungsträger entsteht." (59)
4 See, e.g., Bernhard Paukstadt, Paradigmen der Erzähltheorie: ein methodengeschichtlicher Forschungsbericht mit einer Einführung in Schemakonstitution und Moral des Märchenerzählens (Freiburg: Hochschulverlag, 1980).
5 See Jack Zipes, Don't Bet on the Prince. Contemporary Feminist Tales in North America and England (Aldershot: Gower Publishing, 1986), and, more widely acknowledged, Zipes (ed.), The Trials and Tribulations of Little Red Riding Hood. Versions of the Tale in Sociocultural Context (London: Heinemann, 1983).
6 Jacobmeyer is referring to Lillian M. Heldreth, "Tanith Lee's Werewolves Within: Reversals of Gothic Traditions", JFA 2 (1989), 17.
7 Stephen Abell, "The visionary nun of EC1", TLS August 1, 2003, 19.
|