Page 202 - DENG501_LITERARY_CRITICISM_AND_THEORIES

Literary Criticism and Theories

Notes • Bakhtin discusses the origin and nature of the novel arguing that "mere literary styles" are
not enough to analyze and define the novel, and instead we should focus on the relationships
between the distinct elements that distinguish the novel from other genres.
• Bakhtin begins by briefly charting the course of the attempt to analysis and define the novel,
and the resulting failure, because of the failure to explore the "stylistic specificum, of the
novel as a genre." Bakhtin then provides a few examples of the use of imagery and metaphor
within a novel, and how these elements different from their use in poetics. Bakhtin points
out a distinctive characteristic of the novel "the image of the another's language and outlook
on the world…, simultaneously represented and representing, is extremely typical of the
novel."
• In the next section of "From the Prehistory of Novelistic Discourse," Bakhtin discusses the
idea of parody. Bakhtin spends a great deal of time going over the origin of parody and its
varying roles, all to conclude that the novel allowed the author to examine language from
"the point of view of a potentially different language and style."
• Bakhtin's essay was tough to comprehend. The beginning of the essay had a much easier
pace and clearer direction to read to, so that it was much more understandable. What I got
lost in was the myriad examples Bakhtin employed to illustrate his point. More so than any
other author we have read, Bakhtin relied upon the use of multiple and detailed examples to
make his point. However, I did identify with Bakhtin's first discussion on the language of
the novel. Here, Bakhtin was able to isolate what it is that distinguishes the novel from other
genre's, that is, its unique ability to represent an external object, but also be itself an object;
the language of the novel both represents and is representing simultaneously.
• Bakhtin did not belong to either of the formalist circles in Soviet Russia, but was claimed by
some of their members, including Jakobson, to be in their ranks. In actual fact what his
studies do share with formalism is the attempt to define the specific devices which articulate
a literary genre as different from others. Also he was interested in the literary structure per
se, analyzing its dynamic function within the historical traditions, particularly its subversive
roles.
• Bakhtin could not have been a Marxist proper, although here and there he criticized the
formalists for neglecting the sociological factors. His main principles and concepts surpass
by far the reductionist determinism of classical Marxist tenets.
• In "Discourse..." Bakhtin claims that some of the best instances of heteroglossia at work can
be found in the English comic novel, where there is a "re-processing of almost all the levels
of literary language, both conversational and written, that were current at the time", from
parliamentary eloquence, to the language of the speculators' dealings. For instance, in one of
the excerpts he supplies from Dickens's Little Dorrit, "the speech of another".
• The Bakhtinian concept has made a significant career in the last decades. Contemporary
critics have used the term mainly to refer to the modernist and postmodern fiction (Julia
Kristeva, for instance), but others (such as David Lodge) have rightfully argued that
polyphonic elements can also be found in realistic prose. Some feminists have appropriated
it in reference to l'écriture féminine, and connections between the notion of dialogic speech
and psychoanalytical or deconstructive approaches have also been established.
17.3 Key-Words

1. Heteroglossia : (Gk. ‘other/different gongues’) term used by Mikhail Bakhtin to describe the
variety of voices or languages within a novel, but can be used of any text to
give the sense that language use does not come from one origin but is multiple
and diverse, a mixing of heterogeneous discourses, sociolects, etc.

196 LOVELY PROFESSIONAL UNIVERSITY