Article.
Марія Оробінська
УДК 801.7
ТEXTUAL DEPTH AS A CHARACTERISTIC FEATURE OF
JAMES JOYCE’S “GIACOMO JOYCE”
У статті наведено результати аналізу твору Джеймса Джойса
«Джокомо Джойс» в аспекті глибини тексту
(характеристики, що відображає складність та варіативність сприйняття
тексту). Для встановлення глибини тексту використано парадигматичний аналіз текстової інформації: парадигми
тексту аналізуються в контексті їхніх функцій, складу, способу
вираження, актуальності, конфігурації та зв’язків.
Ключові слова: глибина тексту, парадигматичний
аналіз, функціональна лінгвістика, постмодернізм.
James Joyce is “a towering figure in the
development of English-language modernist prose fiction” (Milton, 3). A
lot of researches focus on different problems of his creative
activity analysis (Ellmann, Mahaffey,
McCourt, Milton, Power, etc.), however
many issues have not been considered yet. James Joyce
said that he had put in so many enigmas and puzzles that it would keep the
professors busy for centuries arguing over what he meant, and that’s the only
way of insuring his immortality (Ellmann “James
Joyce” 521). “Giacomo Joyce is said to remain the most
enigmatic of Joyce’s writings.
Considering the
density of James Joyce’s novels and short stories with allusions, puzzles,
metaphors and other stylistic and rhetorical devices it is expedient to
use the linguistic category the textual depth as a tool to explore the
complexity of Joyce’s literary works. All the foregoing determines the
research relevance.
The goal of the
analysis is to determine specific features of the paradigmatic
organization of “Giacomo Joyce” and reveal the influence they have
on the textual depth.
A recipient's
consciousness correlates the text with the reality during the process of text
understanding, in other words connections are established between the systems
of verbal images (reflections of the word forms in the person’s mind) and
"objective" images (images of extralinguistic real-life
phenomena and situations). Language laws regulate the system of verbal images.
This system has a syntagmatic character, which reflects the linear principle of
the text deployment in the act of reception. Verbal images generate
"objective" images on the conceptual level (level of thinking). The
connections between these images are paradigmatic whereas the text
understanding determines them. The system of "objective" images can be
considered as a conceptual paradigm, and the system that generates a conceptual
paradigm is a verbal paradigm. The degree of "discrepancy" of links
on the verbal and conceptual levels defines the degree of understanding textual
complexity and is regarded as its depth (Stepanchenko “Poeticheskiy iazik Sergeia Esenina (analiz leksiki)”).
To demonstrate my
understanding of the term “textual depth” I will compare two word combinations:
“a burning needleprick stings of bees”and “a burning needleprick stings
of eyes”. In the first word combination (“a burning needleprick stings
of bees”), the links between verbal images are established on the basis of a
regular lexico-grammatical model. The corresponding "objective"
images can also be linked to one another directly. Such a connection does not
contradict the recipient's perception of the surrounding reality (bees
have needlepricks and they can sting). In this case, the system of
"objective" images is combined with a system of verbal images. In the
word-combination "a burning needleprick stings of
eyes", the links between the verbal images are established on the
basis of a regular lexico-grammatical model, the words are arranged in a
linear sequence. However, the corresponding "objective" images cannot
be directly related to each other. Such a connection is contrary to the
recipient's ideas about the world (eyes do not have needlericks and
they cannot sting). In this case additional association links are
necessary to understand this word combination. Because the connections of
objective images system do not coincide with the connections of the verbal
images system. Thus the first word combination is characterized by a
vast depth.
The textual
depth may characterize both a separate text and an
individual style. The textual depth is an unvalued textual
category, because it describes the text in terms of the complexity of its
perception, but it does not assess the aesthetic value of a fictional
text.
The complex of
paradigm characteristics influences the textual depth (paradigm
composition, paradigm relevance, paradigm function,
paradigm configuration, paradigm mode of expression and the connection
between paradigms).
The main
paradigms of James Joyce’s “Giacomo
Joyce” are the following:
·
BELOVED,
that includes paradigms ILLUSORY (“A pale face”, “The long eyelids beat
and lift”, “a burning needleprick stings”, “quivers in the velvet
iris”, “High heels clack hollow”, “Tapping clacking heels”, “a high and hollow
noise”, “A form of speech”, “the lesser for the greater”, “ungainly grace”,
“pale cheeks”) , FRAGILITY (“a brief syllable”, “A brief
laugh” , “A brief beat of the eyelids”, “A flower given by her to my
daughter”, “Frail gift”, “frail giver”, “frail blue-veined child”, “A white
flash: a flake, a snowflake” “A gentle creature”, etc.), CORPOREALITY (“heavy
odorous furs”, “Cobweb handwriting”, “traced long and fine”, “with quiet
disdain and resignation”, “She never blows her nose”, “Rounded and ripened”,
“rounded by the lathe of intermarriage”, “ripened in the forcing-house of the
seclusion of her race”, “the wings of her drooping hat”, “her false smile”,
“her falsely smiling face”, “smitten by the hot creamy light”,
“grey wheyhued shadows”), YOUTH (“a young person of
quality”, “frail blue-veined child”, “She follows her mother”, “A girl on horseback”,
“Hedda! Hedda Gabler!”, “Youth has an end“). The paradigms
ILLUSORY and FRAGILITY oppose the paradigm CORPORELITY. They form an
antinomy unsolved within the framework of “Giacomo Joyce”.
·
ENAMORED (“I
launch forth on an easy wave”,”The wave is spent”, “Papa and the
girls”, “the Grand Turk and his harem” “And when she next doth ride abroad
/ May I be there to see!” “rush out of the tobacco-shop”, “call her name”,
“my jumbled words of lessons”, “hours”, “Si pol?”). Besides, the paradigm is formed
with paradigms BETRAYAL (“Easy now, Jamesy!”, “Did you never walk the
streets of Dublin at night sobbing another name?”, “Aber
das ist eine Schweinerei!”, “Belluomo rises from the bed of
his wife's lover's wife”, ‘the busy housewife is astir, sloe-eyed”, “a
saucer of acetic acid in her hand”, etc.) and PASSION (“A dark wave
of sense”, “again and again and again”, “Mine eyes fail in darkness, mine
eyes fail, / Mine eyes fail in darkness, love”, “Again”, “No more”, “Dark
love”, “dark longing”, “Darkness.” “This heart is sore and sad”, “Crossed
in love?”, “these words were spoken softly”, etc.). These
paradigms create the image of Giacomo associated with the writer James Joyce.
Richard Ellmann believes that “Joyce allows no doubt that the hero is
to be identified with himself” (Ellmann, 12)
·
NATURE (“Pure
air”, “silence”, “the upland road and hoofs”, “Pure air on the upland road”,
“Trieste is waking rawly”, “raw sunlight over its
huddled browntiled roofs”, “testudoform”, “a multitude of prostrate
bugs awwait a national deliverance”, “raw veiled”, “spring morning
faint odours float of morning Paris”, “aniseed”, “damp sawdust”, “hot
dough of bread”, “the steelblue waking waters”, “chill”, etc.).
·
ANTAGONIST (“The
old man's face”,” handsome”, “flushed”, “with strongly Jewish features”, “long
white whiskers”, “courtesy”, “benevolence”, “curiosity”, “trust”, “suspicion”,
“naturalness”, “helplessness of age”, “confidence”, “frankness”, “urbanity”,
“sincerity”, “warning”, “pathos”, “compassion”, “a perfect blend”).
·
PASSION (“She
raises her arms in an effort”, “hook at the nape”, “her neck a gown of black
veiling”, “She moves backwards towards me”, “mutely”, “I raise my arms to help
her”, “her arms fall”, “websoft edges of her gown”, “drawing them out to
hook”, “I see”, “the opening of the black veil”, “her lithe body”, “sheathed in
an orange shift”, “It slips its ribbons of moorings”, “at her shoulders”,
“falls slowly”, “a lithe smooth naked body”, “shimmering with silvery scales”,
“Fingers”, “cold and calm”, “moving”, “A touch”, “a touch”, “Small witless
helpless”, “thin breath”, “a voice”, “A sparrow under the wheels of
Juggernaut”, “shaking shaker of the earth”, “Please, mister God”, “big mister
God!”, “Goodbye, big world!”, “A skirt caught back”, “her sudden moving knee”,
“a white lace edging of an underskirt lifted unduly”,
“a legstretched web of stocking”).
·
ROUTINE (“tepid
speech” “Swedenborg”, “the pseudo-Areopagite”, “Miguel de Molinos”,
“Joachim Abbas”, “Her classmate”, “retwisting her twisted body”, “purrs in
boneless Viennese Italian: Che coltura!”, “the resonant stone
stairs”, “Wintry air in the castle”, “gibbeted coats of mail”, “rude iron
sconces over the windings of the winding turret stairs”, “one below would speak
with your ladyship”, “A ricefield near Vercelli”, “under creamy
summer haze”, “Padua”, “far beyond the sea”, “The silent middle age”, “night”,
“darkness of history”, “under the moon”, “The city sleeps”, “Under the arches
in the dark streets”, “near the river”, “the whores' eyes spy out for
fornicators”, “Cinque servizi per cinque franchi”,
“Twilight”, “Crossin the piazza”, “grey eve lowering on
wide sagegreen pasturelands”, “sheddin silently dusk and
dew”, “Corpses of Jews lie about me”, “rotting in
the mould”, “their holy field”, “the tomb of her people”, “black
stone”, “silence without hope”, “Pimply Meissel brought me
here”, “beyond those trees”, “standing with covered head”, “at
the grave of his suicide wife”, “wondering how the woman who slept in his
bed has come to this end”).
Textual paradigms
may be characterized from different perspectives. All of the paradigm
characteristics affect the textual depth.
The composition of
paradigms is a system of verbal images that generates a system of objective
images on a mental level. If there is a logical connection between units of
textual paradigms (the composition of a verbal paradigm is logically
homogeneous). All the depth of the text will be less significant as
to the associative connection between the elements of the paradigms, i.e. if the
paradigm composition is logically heterogeneous. The composition of a paradigm
can be motivated by the text (verbal images may be integrated into a paradigm
just in this context) or due to an extra-textual reality (verbal images may be
combined outside the text framework). E.g. the elements of the
paradigm ILLUSORY (“A pale face”, “The long eyelids beat and
lift”, “a burning needleprick stings”, “High heels clack hollow”, “A
form of speech”, “the lesser for the greater”, “ungainly grace”, “pale cheeks”,
etc.) cannot be connected outside the text frame. As a result, the
paradigm composition is motivated by the text. This characteristic
may be applied to the majority of the text paradigms. There is
no logical connection between the paradigm elements (e.g. “A form of speech”,
“pale cheeks” and “High heels clack hollow” cannot be
connected logically). Therefore, the paradigm is logically
heterogeneous. Still the composition of
some peripheral paradigms is logically homogeneous (ROUTINE (“under
the moon”, “The city sleeps”, “Under the arches in the dark streets”, “near the
river”, “the tomb of her people”, “black stone”), NATURE (“Pure
air”, “silence”, “the upland road and hoofs”, “Pure air on the upland road”,
“Trieste is waking rawly”), ANTAGONIST (“The old
man's face”,” handsome”, “flushed”, “with strongly Jewish features”, “long
white whiskers”, “courtesy”, “benevolence”, “curiosity”, “trust”, “suspicion”,
“naturalness”, “helplessness of age”, etc.).
The degree of the
paradigm relevance is the degree of the paradigm significance for the
comprehension of the text. The degree of relevance of paradigms varies
from hypoactual (paradigm has insignificant relevance)
to hyperactual (paradigms dominate in texts, reducing the importance
of other paradigms; their functioning predetermines the functioning of other
paradigms). The idea of a piece of fiction in which
a hyperactual paradigm functions is usually related to the function
of this paradigm. The depth of the texts in which
the hyperactual paradigms function is not as vast as in
comparison with the fictional works in which hypoactual paradigms function
(Stepanchenko, Ivan, Miroshnichienko, Mariia, Nesterenko,
Kseniia, Piekharieva Mariia and Prosianik,
Oksana 42).
Two hyperactual paradigms
(PASSION and ILLUSORY) function in the text under consideration. These
paradigms form the main conflict of the text. Enamored Giacomo Joyce
(James Joyce’s alter ego) cannot achieve his Beloved (so called “dark lady”
(Ellmann “Introduction” 8) because of her illusory nature. “In
the course of these shifting perspectives, Joyce unfolds the paradigm of
unsatisfied love as it takes hold of no longer
young” (Ellmann “Introduction” 16). The story contains an
abortive attempt of seduction. Mahaffey called it a “seduction piece’. Thus the
central conflict is based on the opposition of the paradigms of PASSION and
ILLUSORY. The protagonist fails in his attempts owing to his
beloved’s illusory nature.
Depending on the
number of functions performed, the paradigms may
be monofunctional (performing one function in the text)
and polyfunctional (performing several functions in the text). The
number of functions performed by the paradigm is directly proportional to
the textual depth . The paradigm can be divided into projective
(forming image) and conceptual (defining the concept). The conceptual function
of the paradigm increases the textual depth (Stepanchenko, Ivan, Miroshnichienko, Mariia,
Nesterenko, Kseniia, Piekharieva Mariia and Prosianik, Oksana 43).
The majority of the
text paradigms performs but a single function (that’s why they may be
called monofunctional). E.g. the paradigm BETRAYAL (“Easy
now, Jamesy!”, “Did you never walk the streets of Dublin at night sobbing
another name?”, “Aber das ist eine Schweinerei!”,
“Belluomo rises from the bed of his wife's lover's wife”, ‘the busy
housewife is astir, sloe-eyed”, “a saucer of acetic acid in her hand”) forms
the concept “infidelity”, and performs in this way a conceptual function
similar to the majority of text paradigms.
The paradigms
configuration is the relationship between separate paradigms. It determines the
features of their unification into the hyperparadigm of the whole
text (Stepanchenko,
“O konfigurazii paradigmaticheskikh struktur poetichieskogo teksta (na materiale stikhotvorieniy S.
Esenina)” 329). The texts whose paradigms are connected by relationships
analogous to parataxis (paradigms complement each other in the composition of
hyperparadigms, form an open conceptual set (configuration of unconditional
paradigms)), apparently, have a smaller depth in comparison with the texts
whose paradigms are united by relationships analogous to hypotaxis
(configuration of conditional paradigms) (Stepanchenko, Ivan,
Miroshnichienko, Mariia, Nesterenko, Kseniia, Piekharieva Mariia and Prosianik,
Oksana 49).
The paradigms
configuration of James Joyce’s “Giacomo Joyce” is unconditional.
The paradigms are connected by relationships that are analogous to
parataxis in the hyperparadigm of the text. They form an
open conceptual series.
The connection of paradigms
in the text may be established on the language level (lexical and
grammatical links) and on the mental level (associative and logical
connections), and also on both levels simultaneously. Texts, whose paradigms
connection is established on the mental level, have bigger depth (Stepanchenko,
Ivan, Miroshnichienko, Mariia, Nesterenko,
Kseniia, Piekharieva, Mariia and Prosianik,
Oksana 50).
The paradigms are
united on both language and mental levels. E.g. paradigms ILLUSORY
and CORPOREALITY oppose one another in the framework of
one syntagma (“A pale face surrounded by heavy odorous furs”). The
paradigms ENAMORED, BELOVED and PASSION are united with paradigms ROUTINE
and NATURE. E.g. “Moving mists on the hill as I look upward from night
and mud. Hanging mists over the damp trees. A light in the upper room. She is
dressing to go to the play”. In this abstract elements of the
paradigms ROUTINE (“A light”, “the upper room”) and NATURE (“Moving
mists”, “on the hill”, “night”, “mud”, “Hanging mists”, “the damp trees”)
unite paradigms ENAMORED and BELOVED with the help of associative and logical
means. The nature and surrounding word reflect the relationships
of the main hero and heroine that are covered with “mist” and
“illusory”.
Thus the
paradigmatic organization of the text is textually
motivated, logically heterogeneous, hyperactual, and
monofunctional. Conceptual paradigms are united on both language and
mental levels and the paradigms configuration is unconditional. Such a paradigmatic
organization determines quite a big textual
depth (Orobinska). Such a textual depth makes the understanding
of the texts hard and more often occurs in poetic works.
Such a paradigm
organization may be a reflection of the main hero’s inner chaos (all the main
paradigms’ elements are connected with some strange logic that works just in
the text framework). Giacomo Joyce tries to overcome this chaos by applying
some fixed elements of the world (paradigms ROUTINE and NATURE are linking
means of paradigms ENAMORED, BELOVED and PASSION). Vicki Mahaffey finds
that “Giacomo Joyce” represents “an opposition between inner and outer reality”
and “how that opposition breaks down” (Mahaffey “Joyce’s Shorter
Works” 188). Still Giacomo fails in his intentions. The major text
antinomy (that is determined with opposition of paradigms PASSION and
ILLUSORY) does not find its solution within the text
framework. We find in “Giacomo Joyce”: “It will never be. You know
that well. What then? Write it, damn you, write it!”. The research prospects are the comparative analysis
of “Giacomo Joyce” with other James Joyce’s works and other modernistic
literature works for figuring out more essential characteristics of the
work. The development of the meaning of the linguistic category of
the textual depth is also one of the perspective
directions of the research.
References.
References
Ellmann, Richard.
Introduction. Giacomo Joyce. London: Farber and Faber, 1968. Print.
Ellmann, Richard.
James Joyce. New York: Oxford University Press, 1982. Print.
Kiberd, Declan. Ulysses
and Us. London: Faber and Faber, 2009. Print.
Mahaffey, Vicki.
“Joyce’s Shorter Works”. Ed. Derek Attridge. The Cambridge Companion to
James Joyce. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990.185-211. Print.
Mahaffey, Vicki “Giacomo
Joyce”. Giacomo Joyce: Envoys of the Other. Eds., Louis Armand and ClareWallace.
Prague: Litteraria Pragensia, 2006. 26-70. Print.
McCourt, John. “The
Years of Bloom – James Joyce in Trieste, 1904-1920”. Dublin: Lilliput Press,
2001. Print.
Milton, Colin. James
Joyse. Critical assessments of major writers. Routledge: Taylor& Francis
Group, 2011. Print.
Power, Arthur. “Conversations
with James Joyce”. London: Lilliput Press, 1999. Print.
Orobinska, Maria. “Russkaia
rok-poeziia: modelirovaniie glubiny teksta (Russian rock poetry: the textual
depth modeling)”. Kyev: Ivanchenko I.S.
2016. Print.
Stepanchenko, Ivan. “O
konfiguratsii paradigmaticheskikh struktur poetichieskogo teksta (na materiale stikhotvorieniy
S. Esenina) (About poetic text paradigmatic structures configuration (based on
S. Esenin poems)”. Filologichni studii (Philological studies) (2009):
328-339. Print.
Stepanchenko, Ivan
“Poeticheskiy iazik Sergeia Esenina (analiz leksiki)” (Sergey Esenin’s poetic
language (the lexicon analysis). Kharkiv: KhSPU, 1991. Print.
Stepanchenko, Ivan, Miroshnichienko,
Mariia, Nesterenko, Kseniia, Piekharieva Mariia and Prosianik, Oksana Paradigmatichieskiy
analiz lieksiki poetichieskogo proizviedieniia (Paradigmatic analysis of poetic
work). Kyiv: Ukrajnske vydavnitstvo, 2014.
Надійшла до редакції 22 березня 2018 року.
|