Nonfictionality, Function, and Salience
Or, Affect, Ethics, Aesthetics and Huntington’s Disease in Saturday and Inside the O’Briens
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.52610/rhs.v22i78.40Nyckelord:
fictionality, nonfictionality, status, function, salience, Saturday, Inside the O’BriensAbstract
Focusing on different treatments of the same nonfictional entity, Huntington’s disease, in two global fictions, Ian McEwan’s Saturday (2005) and Lisa Genova’s Inside the O’Briens (2015), this paper seeks to understand the affective, ethical, and aesthetic dimensions of crucial problematic moments in each. It deploys the concepts of status (fictional, nonfictional, or a blurring of the two), function (how does the particular element contribute to the larger narrative purpose) and salience (how significant is that function for that larger purpose) in order unpack the rhetorical logic of those passages. This unpacking leads to a more positive view of McEwan’s construction of Saturday than the one offered by many of McEwan’s previous critics as well as a general defense of Genova’s construction of Inside the O’Briens. More generally, the essay offers new insights into the interaction of local nonfiction and global fiction.
Referenser
Banville, John. ”A Day in the Life.” New York Review of Books 52, no. 9 (May 26, 2005): 12-17.
Belling, Catherine. “A Happy Doctor’s Escape from Narrative: Reflection in Saturday.” Medical Humanities 38, no. 1 (2012): 2-6.
Dawson, Paul. “Ten Theses against Fictionality.” Narrative 23 (2015): 74-100.
Elias, Amy. “The Tipping Point of Badness.” American Book Review (January-February 2010): 5.
Genova, Lisa. Inside the O’Briens. New York: Gallery Books, 2015.
Hadley, Elaine. “On a Darkling Plain: Victorian Liberalism and the Fantasy of Agency.” Victorian Studies 48, no. 1 (2005): 92-102.
Hatavari, Mari, and Jarmila Mildorf. “Hybrid Fictionality and Vicarious Narrative Experience.” Narrative 25 (2017): 65-82.
McEwan, Ian. Saturday. New York: Doubleday, 2005.
Mitchell, David T., and Sharon L. Snyder. Narrative Prosthesis: Disability and the Dependencies of Discourse. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2000.
Nielsen, Henrik Skov, James Phelan, and Richard Walsh. “Fictionality as Rhetoric: A Response to Paul Dawson.” Narrative 23 (2015a): 101-11.
_______ “Ten Theses about Fictionality.” Narrative 23 (2015b): 61-73.
Phelan, James. Experiencing Fiction: Judgments, Progressions, and the Rhetorical Theory of Narrative. Columbus: Ohio State University Press, 2007.
_______. “Local Fictionality within Global Nonfiction: Roz Chast’s Can’t We Talk about Something More Pleasant?” Enthymema 16 (December 2016): 18-31. https://riviste.unimi.it/index.php/enthymema/article/view/7473.
_______ Reading People, Reading Plots: Character, Progression, and the Interpretation of Narrative. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1989.
_______. Somebody Telling Somebody Else: A Rhetorical Poetics of Narrative. Columbus: Ohio State University Press, 2017.
Phelan, James and Henrik Skov Nielsen. “Why There Are No One-to-One Correspondences among Fictionality, Narrative, and Techniques: A Response to Mari Hatavari and Jarmila Mildorf.” Narrative 25 (2017): 83-91.
Rader, Ralph W. “Fact, Theory, and Literary Explanation.” Fact, Fiction, and Form: Selected Essays of Ralph W. Rader, eds. James Phelan and David H. Richter, 31-57. Columbus: Ohio State University Press, 2011.
Walsh, Richard. A Rhetoric of Fictionality. Columbus: Ohio State University Press, 2007.
##submission.downloads##
Publicerad
Referera så här
Nummer
Sektion
Licens
Detta verk är licensierat under en Creative Commons Erkännande-Ickekommersiell-IngaBearbetningar 4.0 Internationell-licens.
Open Access; CC Erkännande-IckeKommersiell-IngaBearbetningar 4.0
