The French Review 58.5 (1985): 742-743.
GENETTE, GÉRARD. Nouveau discours du récit. Paris: Editions du Seuil, 1983. Pp. 123.
[Reprinted with the permission of The French Review]
Since Gérard Genette devoted his previous critical study,
Palimpseste (Paris: Seuil, 1982), to the forms of "second
degree" narrative, it seems only fitting that this most recent
analysis (abbreviated NDR) should be a palimpsest of one
of his own earlier works, the canonic essay "Discours du
récit" which appeared in Figures III (Paris:
Seuil 1972). Genette's goal is not simply to revise the numerous
narratological concepts suggested in 1972, but also, and especially,
to examine the meta-critical discussion that "Discours du
récit" inspired as well as to determine (meta-meta-
critically!) the value of these subsequent contributions and critiques.
Genette introduces this revision by defending and clarifying the
use of various terms suggested in "Discours du récit,"
such as the triad histoire/récit/narration, diégèse,
récit minimal, and even the term subsequently
developed, narratologie. Genette reviews in astoundingly
elliptical fashion the first three chapters of "Discours
du récit," on narrative temporality. Thus, in NDR,
Genette focuses primarily on the fourth and fifth sections of
his initial study, "Mode" and "Voix": Genette
continues to approve of his choice of mode in "Discours
du récit" (despite ambiguities that subsequently developed)
to designate the "régulation d'information narrative,"
a formula he prefers to représentation since "le
récit ne 'représente' pas une histoire (réelle
ou fictive), . .. ne peut qu'informer, c'est-à-dire
transmettre des significations" (p. 29). In regard to the
sub-category of mode, distance, Genette justifies
maintaining the opposition diégésis/mimésis
which "conduit donc à la répartition événements/paroles'"
(p. 31) and thus to a corresponding opposition, récit
de paroles and récit d’événements.
Genette concludes the examination of mode, first, by considering
the concepts of perspective, developing his suggestion
that for the question "Qui voit?", we substitute "Où
est le foyer de perception?" (to indicate a point of view
that may not be linked to any person), and second, by clarifying
various aspects left obscure in his initial study of focalisation.
Since the chapter on "Voix" in "Discours du
récit" "est sans doute celui qui a provoqué
les discussions pour moi les plus cruciales' (p. 52), the second
half of NDR is devoted to this category. As in the first
half, Genette proceeds through numerous acts of critical fine-tuning
(specifically, regarding nveau narratif, personne, situations
narratives, le narrataire and auteur/lecteur impliqués),
nearly all with reference to recent studies of his theories. Already,
in the discussion of mode, Genette had vigorously defended
himself against erroneous attributions of "les jusqu'auboutistes
du fonctionnalisme," specifically Mieke Bal (pp. 30-33),
and again chastised Bal (pp. 48-52) for her (mis)interpretation
of Genette's conception of focalisation. In the sections
devoted to the discussion of voix, Genette examines, then
accepts, qualifies or rejects the various critiques of his positions;
occasionally, these critical tête-à-têtes produce
significant progress in narratological theory, e.g., the six functions
of nveau narratif (pp. 62-63) developed from John Barth's
"Tales within Tales within Tales" (Antaeus 42,
Autumn 1981), and the twelve-square tableau of situations narratives
developed from studies by Franz Stanzel, Dorrit Cohn, and Jaap
Lintvelt. However, the second half of NDR clearly reveals
to what extent the numerous distinctions and justifications are
of scant interest to the casual reader, no matter how well informed.
But, in fact, this is the premise of the entire book, stated clearly
by its author at the outset: "l’honnêteté
m'oblige à préciser ... que ce livre ne s'adresse
qu'aux lecteurs de Figures III. Si vous n'en êtes
pas et que vous soyez innocemment parvenus jusqu'ici, vous savez
ce qu'il vous reste à faire" (p. 8). Thus, while any
reader will be charmed by Genette's self-deprecating wit, this
thin volume, dense in terminological and conceptual distinctions,
is truly destined only for researchers already doing hard time
in the prison house of narratology.
Charles J. Stivale
Wayne State University