Magical Hyperrealism: A Reading of Orbitor through Magical Realism and Maximalism

Q1 Arts and Humanities Revista Transilvania Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.51391/trva.2023.05-06.10
Santiago Daniel Gutiérrez Echeverría
{"title":"Magical Hyperrealism: A Reading of Orbitor through Magical Realism and Maximalism","authors":"Santiago Daniel Gutiérrez Echeverría","doi":"10.51391/trva.2023.05-06.10","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this stylistic study I propose a reading of Orbitor [Blinding] through two literary modes: magical realism and maximalism, as Mircea Cărtărescu’s trilogy contains elements that fit into both literary modes, albeit with some differences. Such a reading would allow the formulation of the term magical hyperrealism as a new literary mode. The understanding of magical realism is based on three features: authorial reticence, amplification of reality through “faith” and social comprehension. Regarding authorial reticence, Beatrice Amaryll Chanady compares magical realism with the fantastic as defined by T. Todorov. Unlike the fantastic, which creates doubt between a real or a supernatural explanation for unlikely events, magical realism allows the ordinary and the marvelous to coexist as two components of a harmonious reality that is given without explanation (authorial reticence). The amplification of reality through faith in the marvelous and the social comprehension of the marvelous are concepts based on Alejo Carpentier’s lo real maravilloso. In Orbitor all of these features appear in many episodes, although unlike traditional magical realism, faith in the marvelous is expressed through personal-intellectual convictions rather than social-collective beliefs. As for maximalism, Orbitor fulfills most of the ten characteristics of this genre as defined by Stefano Ercolino. The main difference is point 10: “hybrid realism.” In this case, maximalism usually distorts reality for representational purposes, but Orbitor distorts it for purely literary purposes or for a psychic-subjective exploration of the author. From comparing Orbitor with both literary modes, magical hyperrealism as a literary mode is defined as follows: a totalizing-encyclopedic vision of reality that, with authorial reticence, harmonizes the real and the marvelous through a strong faith. Some applications and future possibilities are discussed in the conclusions.","PeriodicalId":39326,"journal":{"name":"Revista Transilvania","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista Transilvania","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.51391/trva.2023.05-06.10","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this stylistic study I propose a reading of Orbitor [Blinding] through two literary modes: magical realism and maximalism, as Mircea Cărtărescu’s trilogy contains elements that fit into both literary modes, albeit with some differences. Such a reading would allow the formulation of the term magical hyperrealism as a new literary mode. The understanding of magical realism is based on three features: authorial reticence, amplification of reality through “faith” and social comprehension. Regarding authorial reticence, Beatrice Amaryll Chanady compares magical realism with the fantastic as defined by T. Todorov. Unlike the fantastic, which creates doubt between a real or a supernatural explanation for unlikely events, magical realism allows the ordinary and the marvelous to coexist as two components of a harmonious reality that is given without explanation (authorial reticence). The amplification of reality through faith in the marvelous and the social comprehension of the marvelous are concepts based on Alejo Carpentier’s lo real maravilloso. In Orbitor all of these features appear in many episodes, although unlike traditional magical realism, faith in the marvelous is expressed through personal-intellectual convictions rather than social-collective beliefs. As for maximalism, Orbitor fulfills most of the ten characteristics of this genre as defined by Stefano Ercolino. The main difference is point 10: “hybrid realism.” In this case, maximalism usually distorts reality for representational purposes, but Orbitor distorts it for purely literary purposes or for a psychic-subjective exploration of the author. From comparing Orbitor with both literary modes, magical hyperrealism as a literary mode is defined as follows: a totalizing-encyclopedic vision of reality that, with authorial reticence, harmonizes the real and the marvelous through a strong faith. Some applications and future possibilities are discussed in the conclusions.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
魔幻超现实主义:从魔幻现实主义和极致主义看《轨道》
在这一文体研究中,我建议通过两种文学模式来解读《轨道》:魔幻现实主义和极致主义,因为米尔恰·克里特雷雷斯库的三部曲包含了适合这两种文学模式的元素,尽管存在一些差异。这样的解读将使“魔幻超现实主义”这一术语成为一种新的文学模式。对魔幻现实主义的理解基于三个特征:作者的沉默、通过“信仰”放大现实和社会理解。关于作者的沉默,Beatrice amaryl Chanady将魔幻现实主义与T. Todorov所定义的幻想进行了比较。奇幻小说对不可能发生的事件的真实或超自然的解释产生怀疑,魔幻现实主义不同,它允许普通和奇妙作为一个和谐现实的两个组成部分共存,而不需要解释(作者的沉默)。通过对不可思议的信仰来放大现实和对不可思议的社会理解是基于阿莱霍·卡彭迪埃的“不真实的不可思议”的概念。在《轨道》中,所有这些特征都出现在许多情节中,尽管与传统的魔幻现实主义不同,对奇迹的信仰是通过个人智力信念而不是社会集体信念来表达的。在极简主义方面,《Orbitor》满足了Stefano Ercolino定义的这一流派的十大特征中的大部分。主要区别在于第10点:“混合现实主义”。在这种情况下,极端主义通常是为了表现的目的而扭曲现实,但Orbitor是为了纯粹的文学目的或作者的心理-主观探索而扭曲现实。通过对两种文学模式的比较,魔幻超现实主义作为一种文学模式被定义为:一种对现实的整体百科全书式的看法,以作者的沉默,通过一种强烈的信仰来协调真实与奇妙。在结论部分讨论了一些应用和未来的可能性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Revista Transilvania
Revista Transilvania Arts and Humanities-Literature and Literary Theory
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Mircea Eliade’s Unpublished Manuscripts from Private Collections: Notebooks I & II (Calcutta, 1929-1931). Critical edition Samuel Beckett and E. M. Cioran: The Passion for Ruins Ignacio Prat y la transducción dantesca Un manuscris ascuns în văzul lumii: jurnalul lui Mihail Sebastian din anii 1930-1931 Romanele lui Camil Petrescu din perspectivă substanțialistă
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1