Before beginning the post, I had to go back and define the literary terms I was working with. As 'stream of consciousness', ' direct/indirect interior monologue', and 'soliloquy' are all very similar terms, I created a flowchart to help me deal with the differences. It starts with the assumption that the narrative is a direct expression of the character's thoughts, feelings, and impressions.
It's not perfect but it helped distinguish these concepts. :)
In our class discussions of these narrative techniques, a common sentiment was that Mahfouz used all these techniques is his writing. This constant shift can be seen in the first chapter alone. The first sentence up to 'treachery would pay for what it had done' is an example of indirect interior monologue, where Said views the world and his intentions as a third party while adding his own bias to it. The italicized lines following this create a soliloquy, as Said has Nabawiyya and Ilish in mind when speaking it. With the passage 'She had been out of his thoughts...but almost forgotten?', Mahfouz reverts back to an indirect interior monologue. Said presents his bias by characterizing himself as the 'winner'. As we progress, the protagonist addresses himself, Ilish, and Sana in turn - forming another soliloquy. Finally, the lines:
'Confused cries seem to seep from the curbside garbage. (I swear I hate you all). Houses of temptation, their windows beckoning even when eyeless, walls scowling where plaster has fallen. And that strange lane, al-Sayrafi Lane, which brings back dark memories. Where the thief stole, then vanished, whisked away. (Woe to the traitors.) Where police who'd staked out the area had slithered in to surround you'
are one of the first instances of stream of consciousness technique. This pattern continues throughout the novel, with Mahfouz oscillating between different narrative styles at unpredictable intervals. In the first chapter alone, we have already witnessed the complexity of the novel with its spontaneous variations of writing styles. The reader is kept on their feet as the work requires their critical consideration of who Said is speaking to, when the events he's describing take place, and his feelings about them (amongst other things). Aside from engaging the reader, this complexity also presents a more holistic impression of Said's motivations. This is achieved through his gradual revelation of his circumstances. His hatred for Ilish and Nabawiyya is revealed first, and only later in the chapter do we understand the reasons for it. This allows the reader to indirectly characterize Said as an emotional character, motivated more by his feelings than by logic (i.e. it's not a case of 'they did something to me, therefore I must seek revenge', it's more about the actual feeling of exacting revenge).
One of the reasons for Mahfouz's success with this novel is the balance he strikes between Said's thoughts and realism. This combination makes Said's narrative more inviting and comprehensible, unlike other examples of stream of consciousness technique (e.g. Samuel Backett's in Molloy, where he ignores many grammar and tense rules). This is a stylistic choice largely guided by Mahfouz's purpose, which was essentially to criticize Nasser's post-Revolution regime without making it seem like he was doing so. Thus, he creates a counter narrative detailing the struggle of Egypt's working class against the intellectuals. The telling of a story that is easy to follow is crucial in allowing more laymen to identify with the novel and find their voice in it - thus fulfilling Mahfouz's purpose.
Bonus: I thought the similarities between Things Fall Apart and The Thief and The Dogs as counter-narratives were very interesting. This was especially in how they used elements of the culture they were writing against - for example, Achebe writes in English instead of Igbo. Their narrative structure is also similar in its chronological structure, as elements of we Said and Okonkwo's lives are revealed to us gradually and through the occurrence of other plot events. Despite this, a major difference lies in their respective writing techniques. Achebe focuses very little on Okonkwo's thoughts and narrates in a mostly unbiased third person style. By doing so, he can explore the thoughts and feeling of multiple characters - including Obierika, Ekwefi, and the Reverend James Smith - albeit briefly. Mahfouz, on the other hand, reserves this narrative style almost solely for Said.
No comments:
Post a Comment