淺析小說《時時刻刻》與《達(dá)洛衛(wèi)夫人》的互文 (論文正文).doc

學(xué)科分類號 0502 本科生畢業(yè)論文題目 析小說時時刻刻與達(dá)洛衛(wèi)夫人的互文性 An Analysis of the Intertextuality in The Hours and Mrs. Dalloway 學(xué)生姓名：黃 瑩學(xué)號： 0607405007 系別： 外國語言文學(xué)系 專業(yè)：英 語 指導(dǎo)教師：唐 姿 副教授 起止日期：2009.9-2010.3 2010年03月07日懷化學(xué)院本科畢業(yè)論文誠信聲明作者鄭重聲明：所呈交的本科畢業(yè)論文，是在指導(dǎo)老師的指導(dǎo)下，獨(dú)立進(jìn)行研究所取得的成果，成果不存在知識產(chǎn)權(quán)爭議。除文中已經(jīng)注明引用的內(nèi)容外，論文不含任何其他個人或集體已經(jīng)發(fā)表或撰寫過的成果。對論文的研究做出重要貢獻(xiàn)的個人和集體均已在文中以明確的方式標(biāo)明。本聲明的法律結(jié)果由作者承擔(dān)。本科畢業(yè)論文作者簽名：年 月 日Contents摘 要I關(guān)鍵詞IAbstractIIKey WordsIIIntroduction1I. Brief Reviews of the Literary Theory and Literary Text51.1 About Intertextuality51.1.1 Origin of Intertextuality61.1.2 The Production of Intertextuality and Kristeva81.1.3 Intertextuality in Narrow and Broad sense101.1.4 Different levels of intertextuality121.2 The Hours and Mrs. Dalloway131.2.1 Mrs. Dalloway as Pre-text131.2.2 The Hours as Post-text14II. Comparative Reading Wielded Intertextuality162.1 Intertextual Reinterpretations in Symbols162.1.1 Flower162.1.2 Party212.1.3 Cake and Richmond242.1.4 City252.1.5 Clock272.2 Intertextual Reinterpretations in Characters282.3 Intertextual Reinterpretations of Themes302.3.1 Insanity302.3.2 Homosexuality322.3.4 Suicide and Death332.4 Other Intertextual Reinterpretations in The Hours35III. The Function of Intertextuality in The Hours363.1 The Criticism of Radical Feminism in Intertextual Recreation363.2 The Reinterpretation of Virginia38Conclusion41Biography43Acknowledgements44析小說時時刻刻與達(dá)洛衛(wèi)夫人的互文性摘 要由法國的克里斯蒂娃提出的互文性是當(dāng)代文學(xué)理論和文化研究的核心術(shù)語之一，也是后現(xiàn)代小說的重要標(biāo)簽之一。麥克.康寧漢的后現(xiàn)代小說時時刻刻與意識流小說達(dá)洛衛(wèi)夫人存在著互文性，甚至可以說前者是后者派生出來的文學(xué)作品，而在閱讀前者時，我們又能對后者進(jìn)行重新思考，從而更好地了解和把握兩部作品中不同時代女性的生存狀況和精神狀況。本文第一部分將簡單梳理互文性概念的學(xué)淵系譜并對本文研究的文本進(jìn)行介紹；第二部分將運(yùn)用狹義和廣義的互文性方法對時時刻刻與達(dá)洛衛(wèi)夫人進(jìn)行對比閱讀，通過對互文性具體方式結(jié)合文本分析，指出兩者相互指涉、相互映射的部分；第三部分將討論互文對于后文本時時刻刻的作用。關(guān)鍵詞互文性；克里斯蒂娃；達(dá)洛衛(wèi)夫人；維吉尼亞伍爾夫；時時刻刻An Analysis of the Intertextuality in The Hours and Mrs. DallowayAbstractIntertextuality is a term first introduced by French semiotician Julia Kristeva in the late sixties. Michael Cunninghams novel, The Hours, is treated as the contemporary revision of Virginia Wolfs Mrs. Dalloway. When reading the former novel, we will surely have reconsideration on the later one, so that we can comprehend and understand both the life condition and spiritual status of women in different epochs much better. The thesis is firstly devoted to a mainly discussion about the orientation of and the category in intertextual research. The Hours and Mrs. Dalloway are to be comparative read wielded different forms of intertextuality in the second part. The third part is to argue about the function of intertextuality in The Hours.Key WordsIntertextuality; Kristeva; Mrs. Dalloway; Virginia Wolf; The HoursIIIntroduction Intertextuality is a significant sign of Postmodernism fictions. And it was first coined by the French semiotics and feminism critic Julia Kristeva in her work Word, Dialogue and Novel when she was doing research on Bakhtins theory of double-voiced nature of language. After the coinage of Kristeva, many critics and theorists put forward their own views and perceptions on Intertextuality and intertextuality has been divided into the narrow sense and the wide sense. In the opinion of Sun Xiuli, who wrote the Brief Research of Krestevas Intertextuality in Wide Sense, Kristeva is the reprehensive scholar of intertextuality in wide sense and intertextuality in narrow sense is presented by Genette. Allen G. summarizes the opinions of predecessors in the way of list the followings: intertextuality origins Saussure and Bakhtin and Kristeva raise a production of it; Barthes holds a view of “text unbound” when indentifying intertextuality; Genette and Riffaterre have their structuralist approsches on intertextuality; as situated readers, intertextuality influents Harold Blooms conflictual vision of the intertextual process; intertextualitys influences on Feminism and Postcolonialism, etc.The researches of intertextuality are very hot in China, and over 1100 pieces of theses can be in . Most of them are referential to the purified academic researches toward intertextuality, such as the introductions, summarizing orientations of intertextuality and the category in intertextual research, the comparison between intertextuality in different systems and genres, etc. In the rest part of the theses, searches on intertextuality in advertisement field, in the www Text in network building, etc. and in other forms take occupied a part, on the contrary, intertextual researches on literary works, contrarily, are kinds of rare.The Hours is an excellent postmodernism fiction. Michael Cunningham gives a rehearsal on the masterpiece Mrs. Dalloway and The Hours become a hotspot in American modern literature research. However, most researches are focused on the Stream-of Consciousness technique and Feminism in The Hours, and except of the emphasis of the existence of “footnote” stylish intertextual pastiche to Mrs. Dalloway, rare intertextual researches in other angles have been done.The intertextual researches in these two fictions become popular in China. Lauren Shih-Ming Tangs Virginia Wolf in Intertextuality: An Intertextual Study of Michael Cunninghams The Hours which published in is a previous research thesis, and she analyzes the intertextual pastiche of Stream-of Consciousness technique in The Hours. In 2004, Song Tao and Zhu Jie points out in their thesis: intertextual referential to Mrs. Dalloway exists in The Hours, and the The Hours inherits the style and theme of Mrs. Dalloway through a way of intertextuality, and this inheritance contributes to remolding and expounding to the masterpiece. In the same year, the systemic analyses of pastiche intertextuality are rewritten by Wang LiLi in her thesis.Yuan Suhua points out that the intertextual strategy in The Hours is not only simple pastiche, but also are oversteps and innovations. She also considers The Hours as introspection, criticism, subverting to the radical Feminism in Mrs. Dalloway.But the above these are simply listing the similarities in these two fictions or listing the system of intertextuality. The realistic combination of theory and text rarely exists.Two mature theses are the An Intertextual Study of The Hours of Xie Ye and Mrs. Dalloway and An Intertextual Reading of The Hours of Wang Chen. The former one drives the concrete forms of intertextuality in narrow sense to classify the analyses towards similarities between the two fictions; the later one has intertextual readings aspects such as symbol, theme, writing technique, etc. This thesis synthesizes the predecessorsviews, and innovates in that, the analyses are arranged by follows two thread: one is the intertextual study from symbolic, charactersto thematic, and the second is the concrete forms of intertextuality; in this way, the analyses shows the procedural steps of intertextuality. And the function of intertextuality in The Hours is also in investigation.44I. Brief Reviews of the Literary Theory and Literary TextIntertextuality is one of the kernel terms both in modern literature theory and modern civilization research. Postmodern novel The Hours, which was published in 1988, is the third fiction of the American author, Michael Cunningham, and it won the PEN/Faulkner Award the year it was born, and won the 1999 Pulitzer Prize for Fiction. The Stream-of-Consciousness novel Mrs. Dalloway is a classic fiction was wrote by the famous British female writer and the precursor of feminism, Virginia Wolf. When reading the two works, we can easily notice the conspicuous intertextual relations in them, and we could even say that The Hours is the derived work of Mrs. Dalloway through an intertextual strategy. 1.1 About Intertextuality“Works of literature, after all, are built from systems, codes and traditions established by previous works of literature. The systems, codes and traditions of other art forma and of culture in general are also crucial to the meaning of a work of literature. Texts, whether they are literary or non-literary, are viewed by modern theorist as lacking of independent meaning.”1 In this way, texts become intertexts. Intertextuality is the intertextual relations of texts and the shaping of texts meanings by other texts. It can refer to an authors borrowing and transformation of a prior text or to a readers referencing of one text in reading another. Employed in structuralist, post-structuralist, semiotic, deconstructive, postcolonial, Marxist, feminist and psychoanalytic theories, the term “intertextuality” has, itself, been borrowed and transformed many times since it was coined by poststructuralist Julia Kristeva in 1966. As critic William Irwin says, the term “has come to have almost as many meanings as users, from those faithful to Kristeva original vision to those who simply use it as a stylish way of talking about allusion and influence” Origin of IntertextualityIt can be said that intertextuality has its origin in 20th Century linguistic, particular in the seminal work of Ferdinand de Saussure, a great Swiss linguistic. Saussure created a definition in which a sigh can be imagined as two-sided coin combining a signified (concept) and a signifier (sound-image). This notion stresses that its meaning is non-referential: a sign is not a words reference to a certain object in the world, but the combination between a signifier and a signified. So no sign has a meaning of its own. Signs only possess meaning on account of their combination and association to other signs. In Saussures opinion, signs exit within a system and have meaning through their similarity to and difference from other signs; “Authors of literary works do not just select word from a language system, they select plots, generic features, aspects of characters, images, ways of narrating, even phrases and sentences from previous literary texts and from the literary tradition”3 P11.Mikhail. M. Bakhtin has been styled one of the most important literary theorists of the 20th Century. His work is influential within the fields of literary theory and criticism, in linguistics, philosophy and many other disciplines.The age 1920s sees the beginning for understanding of Bakhtin and his forerunning ideas about intertextuality though at that time the term “intertextuality” didnt see the light. As to the attempt by Saussure linguistics to explain languages as a synchronic system, Bakhtin in Marxism and the Philosophy of Language argues that Saussure linguistics remains something describes as “abstract objectivism” for its lack of attention to social specificity. Bakhtin is more concerned with the social contexts within which words are exchanged. For Bakhtin, the relational nature of the word “stems from the words existence within specific social sites, specific social registers and specific moments of utterance and reception” 3 P11.It is Bakhtin who invites public attention to focus on the term “dialogic” which refers to the idea that “all utterances respond to previous utterances and are always addressed to other potential speakers, rather than occurring independently or in isolation. Language always occurs in specific social situations between specific human agents. Words always contain a dialogic quality, embodying a dialogue between different meanings and applications.”3 P211. Bakhtins emphasis on dialogism and other concepts and his insistence on the social and double-voiced nature of language are opposite to unitary, authoritarian and hierarchical conceptions of life, society and art. This perception can also be seen as origin of the term intertextuality.1.1.2 The Production of Intertextuality and KristevaThe term of Intertextuality was first coined in the late 1960s, by the French semiotics and feminism critic Julia Kristeva in her work Word, Dialogue and Novel. She concluded that “any text is constructed as a mosaic of quotations; any text is the absorption and transformation of another. The notion of intertextuality replaces that of intersubjectivity, and poetic language is read as at least double” 3 .The basic connotation of intertextuality is, “every text is the mirror of other texts, and every text is the assimilation and transformation of other texts. These texts consult, refer, and involve each other, so that they can intertexture an open network with eternal potential. Then this network can on one hand to build a huge and open literary system of the past, the present as well as the future texts, on the other hand to constitute the developing processes of literary semiotics”.4Kristevas Intertextuality theory was mainly inspired by the Russian scholar Bakhtins views and it is who Bakhtin drew the conception of “Intertextualitytext/culture relationships” into the literary critics theory. In Bakhtins Problems of Dostoevskys Poetic, he put forward the term of “Literary Carnival”, and it, actually, had given the expression of an Intertextual sense. Bakhtin also posted the systematic relationships between literary dialogues an extra-literary dialogue.Kristeva had once given a special explanation of the differences between herself and Bakhtin. In one 1961 interview, she pointed out that : “Bakhtin did not use the term intertextualitydefinitely in his dissertation, but it seems that we could deduce this term from Bakhtins view.” 5 P189190 Kristevas purpose was not only giving a faithful and exhaustive introduction of Bakhtin, but also deepening and expanding Bakhtins views. She said: “Firstly, I think, the parts, the sentences, the speeches and the passages of texts are not only the direct or indirect crossover of two voices in dialogue. Id rather say, the passages of texts are the crossing of many voices and many texts interventions. And these plenty of voices and texts interventions are not only involved in the semiotic field, but also the field of syntax and phonetics in language expressing. Then I conceived the multielement of the participations of the phonetics, the syntax and phonetics. I think, compared with Bakhtin, my innovation is, I treat those outside interventions from different levels as syntax and phonetics levels as well as significance level. Im more interested in, which is much unique to me，the mental activities areas showed by the intervention of various texts from different sections. Analysis should not been simply limited in the final participated texts or just affirmed the Origin of those texts appeared in the work. We should considerer that what were referring to is a particular dynamics with a spoken subject. As a result, just because of the existence of intertextuality, the spoken subject does not just turn out be a etymological subject or a identity subject.”5 P1601.1.3 Intertextuality in Narrow and Broad senseIntertextuality includes both the concrete and abstract ways of referring. The concrete referring is the mention of the visible and obvious references between the text itself and another text, or among different texts, while the contents abstract referred are in the outside word: the wider and more metaphysical literature, the social and civilization system, or even the invisible things.The French literary critics Grard Genettes views insists that intertextuality refers to the obvious relationship between one particular literary text and other literary texts. His intertextual views belong to intertextuality in narrow sense. While Kristeva and Roland Barthes as poststructuralists explore intertextuality in a wide sense. Roland Bathes asserts that “meaning derives not from the author but from language intertextuality viewed”10. In Julia Kristevas views, quotations are by no means the direct or pure ones, but are transformed, dislocated, condensed, or edited against the original text; a literary work, then is not simply the product of a single author, but of its relationship to other texts and to the structures of language itself.So intertextuality can be differed into the narrow sense and broad sense. The definition of intertextuality in narrow sense lies in the early structuralism and semiotics, while broad sense intertextuality often embodies in the post- structuralismAnd Kristeva has her own assertions, for example, assertions about text: “a text, in the narrow sense, cannot exists as a hermetic or self-sufficient whole, and so does not function as a closed system. A text can be a text only through two channels. One is the author, who brings other texts he has read into the particular text he is writing. The other channel is the reader, the addressee, who, while reading the text, realizes his own interpretations based on his previous experience of other texts. The “anterior or synchronic” texts the author or the reader brings into the text in question are termed as pre-texts, hypotextsor intertexts.”7Generally speaking, through what we get from Kristevas interview, we can define that, the intertextuality in narrow sense means that intertextual relationships only appear in the situation that the texts can point out the obvious inter-referential connection. Narrow sense intertextuality has its own concrete forms, such as quotation, allusion, pastiche, plagiarism, parody, parallelism, annexation, motif, etc which will be the main tools to guide us to do the comparative reading wielded intertextuality in narrow sense. “intertextuality in a wide sense refers to the inter-referential relations between a text and any knowledge, code, sign, ideographic practice that gives meaning to the text; intertextuality in a wide sense considers non-literary artworks, kinds of knowledge scopes of human beings, ideographic practices, even society, history