Postmodern strategy of rewriting ancient myths in 'Weight' and 'Penelopiad'
| Autor: | Višomirskytė, Vijolė |
|---|---|
| Jazyk: | litevština |
| Rok vydání: | 2011 |
| Předmět: | |
| Zdroj: | Res humanitariae 2011, t. 9, p. 358-374. |
| ISSN: | 1822-7708 2538-922X |
| Popis: | Savita postmodernaus intertekstualumo praktika – postmodernus perrašinėjimas. Šis perpasakojimas skiriasi nuo tradicinės imitacijos tuo, kad jis nėra tik paprastas perdirbimas ir pagarbos atidavimas tam tikram „modeliui“. Remiantis Christiano Moraru mintimis apie tokio perrašinėjimo strategijas ir technikas, straipsnyje atidžiai nagrinėjami du postmodernistiniai romanai – Jeanette Winterson „Našta: mitas apie Atlantą ir Heraklį“ ir Margaret Atwood „Penelopiada: mitas apie Penelopę ir Odisėją“. Siekiama išsiaiškinti, kokios teksto konstravimo technikos yra taikomos būtent šiuose naratyvuose, kaip ardomas pirminis „modelis“ bei jį palaikančios ideologijos ir kokie socialinio konteksto, kuriame vyksta perrašyto ir perrašomo tekstų dialogas, aspektai yra kritikuojami. Classical myths are like ghosts or revenants. They are dead, living in our literary world, a part of our cultural tradition. In "Weight" and "The Penelopiad" the texts of the past are the ghost, which are loved. These two books can be called postmodern rewrites, which erode their model (myths about Odysseus and Penelope, Atlas and Heracles), but they do it selectively. The authors choose to rewrite those myths, in which they can find a character, with which they can identify with (to love), but which is at the background of the rewritten text. This character(s) and their stories trouble them as ghosts. In Atwood’s novel these ghosts from the Homer’s "Odysseus" haunts narrators (writer herself, Penelope) and Odysseus, and they are also shown as the ones, who serve as the basic condition of the survival of the myth, its travelling from one book to the other. In "Penelopiad" the maids, who do not have voice and names, are foregrounded, marking power relations, authority and masculine strength. These aspects are very clear in both novels, written by women writers. Heracles and Odysseus in ancient myths are heroes, "greatman", but they are pushed to the background of the rewrites by Atwood and Winterson. And this backgrounding technique is used in several different layers of the text: in the title; they do not acquire the right of the narrator’s voice; they are characterised as nowadays "heroes". The description of Heracles’s and Odysseus’s everyday life is presented using parody; the reader can easily identify their "doubles" in modern society, living nearby. The characters, which are foregrounded – Atlas and Penelope, on the contrary, live in some space, which the living people can not reach. Besides, the authors show sympathy and identify with the foregrounded characters and the voice of narrator is given to them. The novels are strongly carnivalised: ancient myths (as authorities) are both discrowned and decrowned. In both novels the picture of the ancient hero is eroded by foregrounding his shame, some spot, which spoils his perfect portrait: the killed maids "stand as a blot on an otherwise exceedingly distinguished career" of Odysseus, and Atlas’s strength is Heracles shame. While reading the two novels together, interesting oppositions, used in both novels showed up: work / heroic deed and staying in one place / travelling, and some other, that make a homologous relationship. The first terms of this opposition are always associated with foregrounded characters; and the second – with the backgrounded ones. The hierarchic reversal of this opposition also serves as a mean to criticise modern sociocultural context. The mingling and juxtaposing of mythic and science discourses is a technique to disclose their narrative nature, and show that they both are equally relative and have similar functions. But the novels also show that people need them, it is the only solace, which we have when we do not know the truth. The comparative analysis of both novels showed many similar techniques strategically used to erode ancient myths and its underpinning ideologies and also to criticise modern ideologies and sociocultural formations. Such reading of the two books together "doubles", strengthens certain nuances, showing that we read (and write) through other books. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|