{"title":"有限性概念作为文学记忆研究的理论工具——萨尔曼·拉什迪《午夜的孩子》中记忆的有限方面","authors":"Claudia Mueller-Greene","doi":"10.1515/jlt-2022-2025","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract There is something peculiar about memory insofar as it tends to be formed across boundaries. We can think of it as located in an in-between zone, on the threshold »where the outside world meets the world inside you« (Salman Rushdie, Midnight’s Children). Somehow, memory oscillates between the inside and the outside, connecting the subjective and the objective, the imaginary and the real, the self and the other, the individual and the collective. Memory involves all aspects of human life, be they biological, psychological, social, or cultural. Due to its omnipresence, memory is the object of a diverse range of disciplines. Correspondingly, the field of memory studies is situated at the intersection of a bewildering variety of disciplines, which creates exciting interdisciplinary opportunities, but also epistemological and methodological challenges. According to Mieke Bal, interdisciplinarity »must seek its heuristic and methodological basis in concepts rather than methods«. Liminality is a concept that seems particularly well-suited to address problems that arise from the distinctive in-between position of memory. So far, however, it has been largely ignored in memory studies. The concept of liminality deals with ›threshold‹ characteristics. Liminal phenomena and states are »betwixt and between«; they are »necessarily ambiguous« and »slip through the network of classifications« (Victor Turner). The concept of liminality helps to avoid »delusions of certainty« (Siri Hustvedt) by drawing attention to interstitial entities and processes that resist clear-cut categorizations and are inherently blurry and impalpable. »Every brain is the product of other brains« (Hustvedt) and so is memory: »we always carry with us and in us a number of distinct persons« (Maurice Halbwachs). Instead of being able to distinguish clearly between individual, social, and cultural memory, we are confronted with their dynamic interactions and complex entanglements: »to understand me, you’ll have to swallow a world« (Rushdie, Midnight’s Children). There is »the constant ›travel‹ of mnemonic contents between media and minds« (Astrid Erll), as well as their ›migration‹ from one culture to another (Aby Warburg). Memory is deeply relational and always in motion in regions of the ›between‹. This contribution focuses on these qualities through the lens of liminality. Its purpose is to introduce the concept of liminality as an analytical tool in literary memory studies and to put it to the test by applying it to a paradigmatic literary text about memory. Section one provides an introduction to the concept of liminality as it was developed by the anthropologist Victor Turner. The second section brings liminality and memory together and reflects on liminal, relational, and complex aspects of memory, with the main emphasis on complexity. In section three, the focus shifts to literature and the applicability of liminality as a concept in literary memory studies. Theories implicitly dealing with liminality are given special consideration: the triadic model of Wolfgang Iser’s literary anthropology, Paul Ricœur’s circle of threefold mimesis, and Homi Bhabha’s theory of ›Third Space‹. Section four examines liminal aspects of memory in Midnight’s Children, using the concept of liminality as a tool for literary analysis. The article ends with a brief conclusion and outlook. This contribution argues that liminality is an innovative concept in literary theory and literary memory studies. Liminality facilitates processual approaches and helps to avoid false certainties created by static concepts. Two different perspectives on liminality can be taken in literary memory studies: we can either study the mnemonic liminality of literature itself or the mnemonic liminality represented in literature. The ›fictional privileges‹ of literature in dealing with mnemonic liminality receive particular attention. Literature’s experientiality and its unique freedom in the depiction of consciousness allow fictional texts to portray the subjective experience of mnemonic liminality. Literature can represent mnemonic liminality in practically all of its aspects. Such representations concern, for instance, the multi-layered overlappings between memory and imagination, the complex interactions between the individual and collective levels of memory, the intricacies of communication and the crucial role of language and media in these processes. As a theoretical tool in literary memory studies, the concept of liminality enables us to identify and interpret the literary staging and reflection of these liminal aspects of memory as well as the narrative techniques involved. Although the variety of techniques is potentially unlimited, some devices seem especially effective. The analysis of Midnight’s Children shows that magic realism as well as metaphors and allegories are particularly powerful means of representing the liminality of memory. Furthermore, the narrator’s behavior plays a crucial role in the staging of mnemonic liminality. In the case of Midnight’s Children, the narrator’s partial unreliability as well as his numerous intertextual and intercultural references signify liminal aspects of his memory. The narrator crosses certain boundaries when his remembering self overlays his remembered self or when he oscillates between his first-person perspective and a miraculous omniscience that makes him appear to be the receptacle of other people’s memories. Moreover, structural means of representation such as leitmotifs and the semanticization of space and objects are forceful techniques to depict mnemonic liminality.","PeriodicalId":42872,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Literary Theory","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Concept of Liminality as a Theoretical Tool in Literary Memory Studies: Liminal Aspects of Memory in Salman Rushdie’s Midnight’s Children\",\"authors\":\"Claudia Mueller-Greene\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/jlt-2022-2025\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract There is something peculiar about memory insofar as it tends to be formed across boundaries. We can think of it as located in an in-between zone, on the threshold »where the outside world meets the world inside you« (Salman Rushdie, Midnight’s Children). Somehow, memory oscillates between the inside and the outside, connecting the subjective and the objective, the imaginary and the real, the self and the other, the individual and the collective. Memory involves all aspects of human life, be they biological, psychological, social, or cultural. Due to its omnipresence, memory is the object of a diverse range of disciplines. Correspondingly, the field of memory studies is situated at the intersection of a bewildering variety of disciplines, which creates exciting interdisciplinary opportunities, but also epistemological and methodological challenges. According to Mieke Bal, interdisciplinarity »must seek its heuristic and methodological basis in concepts rather than methods«. Liminality is a concept that seems particularly well-suited to address problems that arise from the distinctive in-between position of memory. So far, however, it has been largely ignored in memory studies. The concept of liminality deals with ›threshold‹ characteristics. Liminal phenomena and states are »betwixt and between«; they are »necessarily ambiguous« and »slip through the network of classifications« (Victor Turner). The concept of liminality helps to avoid »delusions of certainty« (Siri Hustvedt) by drawing attention to interstitial entities and processes that resist clear-cut categorizations and are inherently blurry and impalpable. »Every brain is the product of other brains« (Hustvedt) and so is memory: »we always carry with us and in us a number of distinct persons« (Maurice Halbwachs). Instead of being able to distinguish clearly between individual, social, and cultural memory, we are confronted with their dynamic interactions and complex entanglements: »to understand me, you’ll have to swallow a world« (Rushdie, Midnight’s Children). There is »the constant ›travel‹ of mnemonic contents between media and minds« (Astrid Erll), as well as their ›migration‹ from one culture to another (Aby Warburg). Memory is deeply relational and always in motion in regions of the ›between‹. This contribution focuses on these qualities through the lens of liminality. Its purpose is to introduce the concept of liminality as an analytical tool in literary memory studies and to put it to the test by applying it to a paradigmatic literary text about memory. Section one provides an introduction to the concept of liminality as it was developed by the anthropologist Victor Turner. The second section brings liminality and memory together and reflects on liminal, relational, and complex aspects of memory, with the main emphasis on complexity. In section three, the focus shifts to literature and the applicability of liminality as a concept in literary memory studies. Theories implicitly dealing with liminality are given special consideration: the triadic model of Wolfgang Iser’s literary anthropology, Paul Ricœur’s circle of threefold mimesis, and Homi Bhabha’s theory of ›Third Space‹. Section four examines liminal aspects of memory in Midnight’s Children, using the concept of liminality as a tool for literary analysis. The article ends with a brief conclusion and outlook. This contribution argues that liminality is an innovative concept in literary theory and literary memory studies. Liminality facilitates processual approaches and helps to avoid false certainties created by static concepts. Two different perspectives on liminality can be taken in literary memory studies: we can either study the mnemonic liminality of literature itself or the mnemonic liminality represented in literature. The ›fictional privileges‹ of literature in dealing with mnemonic liminality receive particular attention. Literature’s experientiality and its unique freedom in the depiction of consciousness allow fictional texts to portray the subjective experience of mnemonic liminality. Literature can represent mnemonic liminality in practically all of its aspects. Such representations concern, for instance, the multi-layered overlappings between memory and imagination, the complex interactions between the individual and collective levels of memory, the intricacies of communication and the crucial role of language and media in these processes. As a theoretical tool in literary memory studies, the concept of liminality enables us to identify and interpret the literary staging and reflection of these liminal aspects of memory as well as the narrative techniques involved. Although the variety of techniques is potentially unlimited, some devices seem especially effective. The analysis of Midnight’s Children shows that magic realism as well as metaphors and allegories are particularly powerful means of representing the liminality of memory. Furthermore, the narrator’s behavior plays a crucial role in the staging of mnemonic liminality. In the case of Midnight’s Children, the narrator’s partial unreliability as well as his numerous intertextual and intercultural references signify liminal aspects of his memory. The narrator crosses certain boundaries when his remembering self overlays his remembered self or when he oscillates between his first-person perspective and a miraculous omniscience that makes him appear to be the receptacle of other people’s memories. Moreover, structural means of representation such as leitmotifs and the semanticization of space and objects are forceful techniques to depict mnemonic liminality.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42872,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Literary Theory\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-08-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Literary Theory\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/jlt-2022-2025\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LITERARY THEORY & CRITICISM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Literary Theory","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/jlt-2022-2025","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LITERARY THEORY & CRITICISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
The Concept of Liminality as a Theoretical Tool in Literary Memory Studies: Liminal Aspects of Memory in Salman Rushdie’s Midnight’s Children
Abstract There is something peculiar about memory insofar as it tends to be formed across boundaries. We can think of it as located in an in-between zone, on the threshold »where the outside world meets the world inside you« (Salman Rushdie, Midnight’s Children). Somehow, memory oscillates between the inside and the outside, connecting the subjective and the objective, the imaginary and the real, the self and the other, the individual and the collective. Memory involves all aspects of human life, be they biological, psychological, social, or cultural. Due to its omnipresence, memory is the object of a diverse range of disciplines. Correspondingly, the field of memory studies is situated at the intersection of a bewildering variety of disciplines, which creates exciting interdisciplinary opportunities, but also epistemological and methodological challenges. According to Mieke Bal, interdisciplinarity »must seek its heuristic and methodological basis in concepts rather than methods«. Liminality is a concept that seems particularly well-suited to address problems that arise from the distinctive in-between position of memory. So far, however, it has been largely ignored in memory studies. The concept of liminality deals with ›threshold‹ characteristics. Liminal phenomena and states are »betwixt and between«; they are »necessarily ambiguous« and »slip through the network of classifications« (Victor Turner). The concept of liminality helps to avoid »delusions of certainty« (Siri Hustvedt) by drawing attention to interstitial entities and processes that resist clear-cut categorizations and are inherently blurry and impalpable. »Every brain is the product of other brains« (Hustvedt) and so is memory: »we always carry with us and in us a number of distinct persons« (Maurice Halbwachs). Instead of being able to distinguish clearly between individual, social, and cultural memory, we are confronted with their dynamic interactions and complex entanglements: »to understand me, you’ll have to swallow a world« (Rushdie, Midnight’s Children). There is »the constant ›travel‹ of mnemonic contents between media and minds« (Astrid Erll), as well as their ›migration‹ from one culture to another (Aby Warburg). Memory is deeply relational and always in motion in regions of the ›between‹. This contribution focuses on these qualities through the lens of liminality. Its purpose is to introduce the concept of liminality as an analytical tool in literary memory studies and to put it to the test by applying it to a paradigmatic literary text about memory. Section one provides an introduction to the concept of liminality as it was developed by the anthropologist Victor Turner. The second section brings liminality and memory together and reflects on liminal, relational, and complex aspects of memory, with the main emphasis on complexity. In section three, the focus shifts to literature and the applicability of liminality as a concept in literary memory studies. Theories implicitly dealing with liminality are given special consideration: the triadic model of Wolfgang Iser’s literary anthropology, Paul Ricœur’s circle of threefold mimesis, and Homi Bhabha’s theory of ›Third Space‹. Section four examines liminal aspects of memory in Midnight’s Children, using the concept of liminality as a tool for literary analysis. The article ends with a brief conclusion and outlook. This contribution argues that liminality is an innovative concept in literary theory and literary memory studies. Liminality facilitates processual approaches and helps to avoid false certainties created by static concepts. Two different perspectives on liminality can be taken in literary memory studies: we can either study the mnemonic liminality of literature itself or the mnemonic liminality represented in literature. The ›fictional privileges‹ of literature in dealing with mnemonic liminality receive particular attention. Literature’s experientiality and its unique freedom in the depiction of consciousness allow fictional texts to portray the subjective experience of mnemonic liminality. Literature can represent mnemonic liminality in practically all of its aspects. Such representations concern, for instance, the multi-layered overlappings between memory and imagination, the complex interactions between the individual and collective levels of memory, the intricacies of communication and the crucial role of language and media in these processes. As a theoretical tool in literary memory studies, the concept of liminality enables us to identify and interpret the literary staging and reflection of these liminal aspects of memory as well as the narrative techniques involved. Although the variety of techniques is potentially unlimited, some devices seem especially effective. The analysis of Midnight’s Children shows that magic realism as well as metaphors and allegories are particularly powerful means of representing the liminality of memory. Furthermore, the narrator’s behavior plays a crucial role in the staging of mnemonic liminality. In the case of Midnight’s Children, the narrator’s partial unreliability as well as his numerous intertextual and intercultural references signify liminal aspects of his memory. The narrator crosses certain boundaries when his remembering self overlays his remembered self or when he oscillates between his first-person perspective and a miraculous omniscience that makes him appear to be the receptacle of other people’s memories. Moreover, structural means of representation such as leitmotifs and the semanticization of space and objects are forceful techniques to depict mnemonic liminality.