Modernist Alienation and the Solace of Form
Christophe Den Tandt
Abstract:level, signifies reality itself without actually addressing it in any substantial way; it signals the text’s overall devotion, if not to reality, at least to the referential function. As such, the “reality effect” is in essence a literary device: it is the very mechanism by which realist writing covers up its status as an autonomous verbal artifact (Barthes 89). Jakobson’s essay of 1921 fails to mention a second formal feature of realism often discussed in formalist and structuralist theory—the metonymic structuring of literary prose. This topic became a key element of Jakobson’s reflections on language and literature only in the Modernist Alienation and the Solace of Form 60 later developments of his theoretical corpus, most famously in his essay on aphasia and in several articles on poetics. In these texts, Jakobson describes metaphor and metonymy as the expressions of two fundamental structuring principles of discourse. Metaphor is based on a general principle of “deliberate similarity,” which is dominant in poetry (“Notes marginales,” 64); metonymy relies on “association by contiguity,” which determines the workings of (realist) prose (“Notes marginales” 64). Poems, in this logic, are regulated both in their verbal chain and in their mechanisms of meaning production by a logic of likeness and equivalence. Similarity determines the presence in the verbal chain of symmetries, repetitions and contrasts (Lévi-Strauss and Jakobson, “Les chats” 183-84). At the level of meaning, it is the matrix of poetic comparisons and metaphors, which dominate poetic imagery. Prose, on the contrary, is structured according to relations of proximity, which are the foundations of metonymy. This figure of speech substitutes one sign for another, provided their referents are contiguous in space, time, or within a causal chain. Smoke can therefore be made to mean fire; a train may be identified by the time at which it departs (“the 9:42”), and a book by the name of the author who brought it into existence (“open your Shakespeares”) (Groupe μ 117-18). “Narrative prose” obeys this logic, Jakobson argues, in so far as its “inherent momentum” drives the story “from one neighboring object to the other, along a causal or spatial-temporal pathway” (“Notes marginales” 64). Thus, in the sequence of the reading chain, readers of (realist) prose are encouraged to reconstruct a world whose elements are tied by relations of proximity. The relevance of Jakobson’s remarks on metonymy and prose to the analysis of realist description is patent. Balzac’s portrayal of Saumur in the first chapter of Eugénie Grandet is a complex weave of metonymies, synecdoches (i.e. spatial metonymies), and occasional metaphors in which the leading principle is the metonymic progression of an observer’s gaze zooming in on the urban landscape, starting from a totalizing perspective toward an ever closer scrutiny of the city’s local details. Likewise, the opening chapter of Dreiser’s Sister Carrie, as it chronicles the heroine’s travel to Chicago, prepares the reader for the discovery of the metropolis by means of a carefully planned management of contiguity. As the train approaches the city, signs of the 9 The relevance of Jakobson’s theory of metonymy to realist representation is discussed in Furst (69) and Herman (56). Christophe Den Tandt On Virtual Grounds 61 latter’s presence proliferate and are itemized according to their rank in a spatial-temporal sequence. The heroine’s later investigation of the “miles and miles of streets” of the Midwestern metropolis, notably during her frustrating job hunts, follow the same metonymic path (Dreiser 16). Ironically, we will see in a later section that Jakobson’s argument on metonymy partly contradicts formalism’s and structuralism’s disregard for reference. Metonymy, the above reflections suggest, is a referentially based trope: it takes for granted an objective ordering of the world as well as the procedures securing the latter’s proper discursive representation. Metonymies are indeed rhetorically felicitous only if the extra-linguistic universe has a given shape: the world must be governed by contiguity and therefore devoid of discontinuities, even free from strangeness or surprise. Additionally, metonymies require a determinate relation between language and world. In the absence of the latter, the world’s orderly contiguity could not be mimicked in prose. Therefore, Jakobson’s argument about the metonymic nature of literary mimesis is partly grounded in knowledge of the world; it cannot be derived from the merely formal analysis of
Philosophy