Dual Perspective: Free Indirect Discourse and Related Techniques Paul Hemadi Comparative Literature, Vol. 24, No. 1 (Winter, 1972), 32-43. Stable URL: httpflinksjstor.orgsicisick=0010-4 124% 28197224%2024%%3 | %8C32%3 ADPFIDA%3E20.CO%IB2-Q Comparative Literauure is currently published by University of Oregon ‘Your use of the ISTOR archive indicates your acceptance of ISTOR’s Terms and Conditions of Use, available at hhupvful-jstor-orp/abouv'terms.himal. ISTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have ‘obtained prior permission, vou may not download an entire issue of a joumal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial us. Please contact the publisher cegarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at bhupfuk-jstor-orp/journals/uoregon-tm Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transtnission. ISTOR is an independent not-for-profit organization dedicated to creating and preserving a digital archive of scholarly journals. For more information regarding ISTOR, please contact support @jstor.org- hupsfuk.jstor.org/ ‘Wed May 26 03:15:51 2004PAUL HERNADI Dual Perspective: Free Indirect Discourse and Related Techniques TIS WELL KNOWN that Socrates, in the third book of Plato's Republic, distinguished three modes of literary discourse according 16 whether the poet, the characters, or poet and characters alternately speak. What has been overlooked too often is this: Mindful of his inter Tocutor’s slow understanding, Socrates illustrated his concepts of au- torial, igurat, and mixed speech in the manner of a "bad speaker” who “will not take the whale of the subject, but will break a piece off” in fotder to support his argument (B, Jowett’s translation). We wilt, of course, never know how Socrates conceived af the “whole of the sub- Jject.” Yet the last twenty-three hundred years of literary history have ‘persuasively supplemented his example for mixed speech, the Hlamerie type of direct quotation, with new techmiques of integrating diegasis and ‘mionesis, the authorial presentation and the impersonating representa ton at aetion.* Prose fiction is 2 choice example, Employing both narrative and islogue, it has inherited the mixed status of che great epie poem, but TTT take the ikerty af replacing “narrative,” the feavliar Ragin rondering of degen, hy te pnease“authorial presentation” Ta the context of Plato's Repaslic, the teadivionaltrantlation incurs a harly felicitous concept of Grama as that form ‘of narration in which mimetis eepresentatign completely supertedes aarection, Furthermore, the extant fragments of rather hymnle eithyrams da not soggeat that the pare diageie” of dithycambie pocis was 2 narrative in out sense ofthe ‘word. Indeed, the revise edition of Liddell and Sent’s (reek English Levicon (1825-40) informs us chat che fet recorded oveutrenee af the corresponding verb [diegeossi) should be translated as "set out in detail, describe," and that Arise totle’s Rhetoric employs the very tas diegess in the sense of “statement of the case." Ths it should be permisaie to conjecture that degesie meant for Plato something ike “presentaton”™=the autigrial aspect of poet. 2DUAL PERSPECTIVE IN PROSE FICTION it can also surpass the Homeric degree of structural complexity through such devices as inserted poems, letters, diaries, or the presentation of a character's strearn of consciousness, Beyond doubt, the original cri- terion of apealers must be modified if we want to adapt Plato's classif- cation to the needs of modem eviticism, Instead of aszing, “Who spezks?,” we should try to clarify whose perceptions, thoughts, and feelings inform the world of a given work of literature, Yet our more sophisticated fine of inquiry need not dismiss Plato's early attempt at “structural” criticism. The modern critic may accept the authorial and the figural perspective as points of compass within the world of literary works, even though he questions whether the Homeric type of direct quotation is the only way in which writers interrelate those two primary riodes of orientation? Consider, for example, the following passage from a contemporary novel, Saul Bellow's Herzog: “Then the tafe opened and the cab rattled in Low wear and jerked ima second, For Chest sake let's make time the driver said. They made a sweeping tum into Parke Avenue and Herzog clutched the brakes window handle. Te wauldert ‘pen, But if i€ opened dust would pou in. They were dematishing and raising buildings, The Avenue was Sled with coneretenixing trucks, smells of wet saad and powdery grey cement. “Most readers will agcee that this passage evokes a scene from Herzog’s point of view, in ather wards, from within the stully cab with a broken window handle. Yet the narrator is by no means explicitly quoting Herzog's thoughts and sensations, and we might expect that he, the narrator, will emerge from the text as abr only saurce of information. Remarkably enough, however, by the time we read the words, “But if ft opened dust would pour fn," we take it as a matter of course that their meaning originates in Herzog’ fictive mind. How da we come to accept (ad in fact hardly notice) such a radical, yer unannounced shift in perspective? Clase reading of the pascage will provide an answer modifying rather than contradicting the Platonic distinction between authorial and figural speech. ‘The first three sentences can easily be interpreted 25 exemplifying the Homeric type of “nixed speech: in the frst and the third sentence jp Paint of View tm Picton” Tue Develapmant of x Critical Concept” PMLA, LXX (1955), Norman Friedman expliey associated Socrates! eercarks fon the *ehcee sires” of poetry with the mariern concepts “telling” and “showing,” luidely acanted from Henry James and Percy Lubboele jn recent ction theory. In Verbal Warlds btwenn Actign and Vision,” College Engtsh, SXSE (1971) Puggast a theory of [terary ciscourse within » modified “Platonic! framework, "Saul Bellow, Herzag (New York 195), p. 2. BCOMPARATIVE LITERATURE the narrator speaks himself, and in the second he quotes one of the characters, But tke fourth sentence, “It wouldn't oper,” defies classif- cation in strictly Platonic terms. Observe that the pronoun “it” refers ta the window and wot (as it should according to the rules of grammar) ta the window handle. This inconsistency signals that the fourth ser tence isnot a natural continvation of the preceding authorial statement the words “It wouldn't open’ take their semantic departare from Her 20g's intention to open the window—an intention merely implied by the narrator's statecient “Herzog clutched the broken window handle,” ‘The colloquial contracted form “wouldn't,” rarely used in straight ob- jective tarration, further indicates that in a sense the narrator has Fielded the floor to his character, Yet, Herzog has not become the “speaker.” Were he himself to approximate the conclusion reached in his mind after the frustrated attempt fo open the window, we should read: “It won't open.” By substituting “wouldn't” for Hlerzag’s ““won't." the narrator assimilates figural speech to the past-tense con- texe of authorial narration, thereby providing & smooth tratsition be- tween his own perspective of the events and Herzog’s, which then informs the next sentence completely. Since the narrator knows, s0 t0 speak, that Herzog was unable to apen the window, he could only state what avowld have happened, ifthe window hed opened ; the words “But if it opened dust would pour in” must be Herzog's, who alone ‘ean contemplate what would happen if he could open the window. Aiter this snatch of interior monologue, the narrator seems to resume fanction as the speaker. But docs he really? Standing by itself, the sixth sentence wauld appear, to be sure, an authorial statement. In its context, however, we ted to read the sentence “They were demolishing and raising buildings” as retroactively provided premise for Herzog’s conclusion: “if st opened dust would pour ia." Thus the narrator once again substitutes his own words for Herzog’s mental operations with- ut explicitly telling the reader that he will do so. Although with the fast sentence of our passage the authorial perspective regains its pre- dominance, the figural interfuce has left an important after-effect on ‘ctr minds, While “listening” to the narrator's words about concrete mixing trucks and the smell of wet sand, we still imagine Herzog rather than the narrator or, for instance, the cab driver as the person ‘who experiences the evoked sensory impressions, Tn “Quiest-ce que la lietérature,” Jean-Paul Sartre called reading “directed creation” (création divigée) and argued that the examining magistrate in Dostocwsky's Crime and Puniskwsest would not exist without the bar tred we readers “lend” to Raskolnikov towards him Turning Sartre's TJean- Paul Satire, Siuations 11 (Paris, 1508), p55 4DUAL PERSPECTIVE IN PROSE FICTION argument around, I submit that the broken window handle and the dusty smell of wet sand really “exist” for the reader insofar as he has become aware of Herzog’s fective sensory, emative, and rational ree sponse (o those things. ‘Such awareness naturally occurs while we listen to the words of a ‘Gramatic character on stage or read statemients made by fictional figures, rather than by a detached, omniscient narzator, Seemingly authorial sentences such as “It wouldn't open" effect similar identification with, ‘a character's perspective only hecause they strife us as making better sense if we assume that a mind other than the narrator's is responsible for their meaning. Since the narrator in such cases substitutes his words for a character's speech, thought, or sensory perception, the most adequate term suggested s0 fer for this type of literary discourse seems to me “Substitutionary narration." There is, of course, & good eal ta be said in favor of same of the ather terms emerging from the extensive critical discussion of the subject—sigle indirect Hibre, ver= schleierte Rede, erleble Rede, independent form of indirect diseaurse, ‘ancigentlich divekte Rede, represented speech, Rede ale Talsacke, sono logue intérieur indirect, and narrated monologue Yet most critics advocating one of those rather oarraw terms have focused their atten« tion an some oi the pertinent phenomena far too closely to hecome inter- ‘ested in establishing 2 comprehensive context for all phenomena in question. The best sach context, I believe, is Plato's classification of verbal discourse provided chat we ade a fourth category to the original With varying ranac of desolation and cosnotaion the tem “substionary™ thas been uted by Tots Orr ibis English verian of Sorat Tordan, ae Iniveduction fo Romance Linpwaice (Landany 937), g, 280; by Bernhard Fehe in. us Ena lands geistiges Bestixdon CErasentels, 1948), pp. 265 fe; and by Helmut A. Hate id in # Creat Biblingrephy of the Mew Sisttsties (Chapel II, 1988), ee STs i a selective et ignoring sire translations, sight variants and overs ingenioon coirages, The, frst inSvertialemplayment of the quate teres can be ford i Charles Bally, “Le Style indireet tbe en francais meena.” Germansich- Romswische Monsteschrifs LY (1612); ‘Theater Kelepk, “Zum ‘style indicect liye (Verschelerte Rede’)” ibid, V 910}; Brienne Lore, Die elebse Rede (Fleidelterg, 921); George Q. Cisme, A Grower of the German Langsoge (1904), rewerd and enlarged, (New Var 1922) po. 248 fj Gertrail Leech "Dig Savigentlich diel Rese” Idealinitcke Menphillopies Festschrift tit Kort Gossler (Heidelbere, 122): Otto Jesper, The Philosophy of Gromer (Condon, 1924), foucth ceprint (1935), 59,291 6; Eugen Lerch, “Uraprung und Fedeutira der toa. ‘Eeteten Rede’ (Rede als Tatsethe’).” Germaniice Rom siache Mavetsscardt, XVI (1928) ; Eevard Dujardin, Le Mewslonae ttériew Carts 1931), 93.20 f; Dorrit Coto, “Marrated Merofonue: Definition at a Fictional Stig" Conparation Literature, RVILL (1968). Foe further sition caphiesl sterences see also Michael Grevars, “Old Bailey Speech im d Tale Of Puc Coheed Review of English Literature, VI (1965) and Werner Holt Ieister, Studien sur ertebion Rese bei Thomas Mann sd Robert ius (Eis Hague, 1968) %COMPARATIVE LITERATURE framework, In quasiePlatonie terms this category oright be deseribed as diseourse in which poet and character speak siraultaneously or, rrore precisely, in which the narrator soys in propria persona what one of the characters means. In such discourse, the authorial and the figural perspective need not alternate; rather, their simultaneous presence results in a new, dual mode of vision. My following observations are intencied to contribute to the exploration of the optics, as it were, af this complex perspective From the point of view of grammar, substitutionary narration ‘emerges as an elliptical form of indirect quotation. Instead of saying “The defendant declared unequivocaty that he was innocent,” I may say: "The defendant's declaration was unequivocal ; he was innocent.” Much like diteet quotation (“The defendant. declared: ‘L ant inno- cent!'""), substitutionary narration does not reduce the most important part of the communication—namely, what the defendant said—to the status of a secondary clause introduced by “‘that," a lifeless subordin- ating conjunction.? Nevertheless, it shifts tense and grammatical persoa in the delendant’s declaration according to the rules of indirect dis- course. Thus linguists may well define substitutionary varration 2s a ouixture of disect and indivect speech" or “semi-direct” discaurse.* From the point of view of literary criticism, however, we do heiter to emphasize what separates the senterce, “The deferdant’s declaration ‘was unequivocal; he was innocent,” fram both its direct and indirect counterpart, This separating czaracteristie is the lack of a verbune dicendi such as “said,” “asked,” “replied,” in our case “declared.” In direct as well as indirect discourse, such a verb would indicate that the ensuing words are part of a quotation. In the absence of a vérbume dicendi and a subordinating conjunction, quoted speech assumes the grammatical disguise of 2 narrated fact—hence the adequacy of such terms as “veiled speech" (verschleierte Rede) and “speech as fact" (Rede als Taisache) to the formal characteristics of the sentence: “The defendant's declaration was unequivocal ; he was innocent.” Naturally, the veil of grammar is quickly removed from any instance of “ree indicect” quotation if its meaning, style, and context signal that one mind is responsible for the form and another for the eontent T French indiree: diecowrse alwaye depends on gus), er ap inverrogative word, Ifthe!" se dropped ia Ealish, the derivative tense employed inthe quated pisrase indicates that ‘ne [ater ty hut secondary clause: "The defendant ce {lured he tas inaceent" In German, the suborcinating conjunetion 498 (and the transposed word order eorcamiant with it) need not be ceained it the indicoctiy (quoted uterance betrays its “secnary” nature by appearing in the subjunctive "Der Angeklagte erilarte, er sei unschuldig.” NCEA. Toler, Pevmischte Bettraze suv franeSsischen Grammetit, 2. Ree (Leinrig, 1894), pp, 132 #5 and E. Legrand, Seyseique fraxgeise (Paris, £922). 6DUAL PERSPECTIVE IN PROSE FICTION ‘ofa statement. By the time we read of Madame Bovary: “Elle déclarait adorer les enfants; etait sx consolation, sa joie, sa folie,”* we know that it eanmot be the narrator who tells us that Emena's little child was joy and consolation for her. Rather, reader and narrator share an ironic distance from the woman who tries to appear what she is not—a devoted mother. But through the free indireet mode of quotation the narrator may also empathize with a character's view of the fetional ceality. This is very frequently the ease if figural thought rather than figural speech rendered with the dual focus of substitutionary narration. Let me illustrate this by commenting on passage recently cited hy another student of free indirect discourse. In his Portrait of the Artist as @ Young Mex, James Joyce has his hero Stephen wait at church for confession: ‘The side was shot to suddenly. The penitent came out, He was next, He stood up in terrac and walked blindly ta the bax. ALUst ic had come. He lll in the gle glgcm and raised his eyes cache white crucifix syepended abave him. God could see that be was sarcy. He would tel all his sins, His confession would he Fong, long. Everybody in the ehacel would know then what a sinner he had been, Tet thems lnow. Te was test, But Ged had promises te forgive him if he was sorry. He was soery. ‘The latter half of this text is truly evlebte Rede, experienced speech ‘Young Stephen does not speak the words “T will tell all my sins” but experiences them (or something like thee) as they emerge from his consciousness. Instead of pressing the contents of Stephen's troubled mind into the rigid frame of verbal communication, the naerator renders them obliquely, substituting “‘he" for “T," simple past for present, plu- periect for present perfect, and conditional for future in what would, ‘otherwise be Stephen's silent soliloguy. But this series of substitutions does not result in lack of immediacy. Repetition of emotionally charged vwords (sorry, Jong) and a brief recourse to interior monologue (“Let ‘thera know") reinforce the attentive reader's inclination to understand ‘a seatence like “God could see tat he was sorry" as Stephen's sincere ‘conviction rather than the narrator's objective or ironic statement. In- deed, the narrator's sympathetic substitution of his awn words for Stephen's thoughts and feelings contributes to the esthetic illusion that 9 Gostave Favbert, Modame Bovarg, Govaré cd. (Pars, 1910), 14, Tu hus Style aud the Frosch Noust (Cambridge, 1857), pe 108, Sieghen Uline «ore ‘penis dn this sentence: “Grammabiealy, ‘etait sa consolation, 2 joig, = Tole ‘might be dhe ais owe words, hut the reader knows fem the ctx dat Is Erna, nat Flaubert, wha fs speaking, and that she it ct telling te tt Te Jemes Joyee Portail of the drs os « Young Mas, The Modeen Likrary cin (New York 1928), p. 168. Except fr her fale to recognize the sentence “Let thert koa" 4 Incerior tater than “narrated” mosclogee, Dorit Casts discussion ofthis passage is very illamratina ve cit, mb. 8 1) 2COMPARATIVE LITERATURE, swe arc overhearing the inner voice of an inward-turned, self-tormenting