聪明文档网

    聪明文档网

    最新最全的文档下载
    当前位置： 首页> AS拜厄特《占有》中的互文性解读

    AS拜厄特《占有》中的互文性解读

    时间：    下载该word文档
    上海交通大学硕士学位论文
    A.S.拜厄特《占有》中的互文性解读
    姓名：王德美申请学位级别：硕士专业：英语语言文学指导教师：何伟文
    20091201

    摘要

    互文性理论是建立在20世纪欧洲一系列文学理论如索绪尔的语言学、俄国的形式主义、结构主义、解构主义、心理学分析以及马克思主义等基础上而发展起来的现代文学理论。克里斯蒂娃在二十世纪六十年代创造性地提出了“互文性”一词，经过克里斯蒂娃本人及罗兰·巴特和其他众多理论家的发展与完善，互文性理论逐渐成为现代批评和创作理论中不可缺少的一员。在其发展完善过程中，显然有过一些细小的分歧，并且不同的理论家曾就其所涉范围进行了不同的分类，但总体上，理论家们一致认为在互文性理论下，任何文本都不是一个孤立的存在，任何文本一定程度上都是互文本。因此，对某一文本的解读就不再限于这一单个文本，而是可以借助于其它文本或资料作为参考。由此作者的权威性降低，读者利用自己的知识背景建立起一张互文之网来进行自己创造性地解读。

    1990年英国作家A.S.拜厄特出版了《占有》，它为作者赢得了英国最高文学奖项布克奖；此后她的作品也越来越受到关注，她本人也成为举世公认的小说家和评论家。受家庭文学氛围的影响,拜厄特自幼便酷爱读书并博览群书，加之她所受的大学教育，使她成长为一名学识渊博的学者。结合自己对艺术创作的思考以及自己渊博的知识，拜厄特创作出了众多脍炙人口的作品，每部作品犹如一张互文之网，涵盖着她阅读、思考和看见的一切。本论文试图通过分析《占有》中的互文现象以帮助读者更好地理解拜厄特及其作品。

    本论文共分五章。第一章主要介绍拜厄特的生平和作品、《占有》的主要内容、国内外对《占有》的学术研究成果和本论文的中心主题及研究方法。第二章主要叙述互文性理论的形成发展、核心内容和对于该理论的运用。第三章和第四章是本论文的主要部分，涉及对《占有》的互文性解读。第三章主要运用互文性理论中某一具体文本与其他材料或文本形成的互文性，即：《占有》中书信和日记等体裁与18世纪中后期和19世纪早期书信体小说形成的互文关系以及通过分析作者对浪漫小说、侦探小说的颠覆和对教育成长小说的改写来分析《占有》与
    iv

    这三种体裁形成的互文性；第四章则主要从内互文性—《占有》这部作品内部作者的自我引用和不同角色的相似重复方面来分析其互文性。第五章为结语部分，进一步综述了拜厄特《占有》中的外互文性和内互文性及其意义。
    通过分析《占有》的内、外互文性，我们可以进一步体会到拜厄特广博的知识及其艺术创作的魅力；同时让我们深信现在不是对过去的简单重复，更是一种超越。
    关键词：拜厄特，《占有》，互文性



    v


    ABSTRACT

    BasedonaseriesofintellectualmovementstakingplaceinEuropesuchasSaussure’sLinguistics,RussianFormalism,Structuralism,Deconstruction,Psychoanalysis,andMarxism,moderntheoryofintertextualityhasgaineditsprominenceandbecomeanimportanttheorysincethe1960swiththeadvocationandpromotionofJuliaKristeva,RolandBarthesandsomeotherscholars.Withtimegoingon,thoughthetheoryundergoesseveralperiodsofdevelopmentanddifferenttheoristsmaynamethetermdifferentlyorprefertostudyintertextualityfromdifferentperspectives,yetonthewholeitnevergoestoofarfromitscorethatnotextexistsinisolationandanytextcanbeanintertext.Therefore,theinterpretationofatextisnolongerlimitedtoonesingletextandothertexts,sourcesormaterialscanbeusedasreference.Inthisway,theauthorityoftheauthorisreducedandreadersareofferedmoreoriginalitytoappreciatethetextwithinthenetworkofintertextualitybasedontheirknowledgebackground.
    Possession(1990,writtenbyEnglishwriterA.S.Byatt(1936—,wonherthehighestliteraryprizeinEngland—theBookerPrize.TogetherwithothernovelssuchasTheShadowoftheSun,TheVirginintheGarden,AngelsandInsects,shortstorycollectionofTheMatisseStoriesandcriticalworkssuchasIrisMurdoch:ACriticalStudyandsoon,Byattearnedaninternationalfameasanoutstandingnovelist,shortstorywriterandinfluentialcritic.Theliteraryatmosphereofherfamilyandtheeducationshereceivedenabledhertohaveagoodcommandofavarietyofknowledgesuchasliterature,biologyandphilosophy.Bycombiningherwideknowledgewithherconcernforhistoryandreality,herself-reflexivenessofart,suchashowtoexpressherideasofrealitythroughherimages,ByattcreatesanentwinednetfullofintertextualityinherworksasKatherineCoyneKellyasserts,herworkbeing“thevastintertextualwebthatincludeseverythingthatshereadsandthinksandsees”(Kelly116.Possessionisnoexception.ThisthesisattemptstoanalyzetheintertextualphenomenaofherworkPossession,offeringreadersfreshwaystobetter
    ii

    understandByattandherwork.
    Thethesiswillbedividedintofivechapters.ThefirstchapterisabriefintroductionoftheauthorA.S.Byattandherworks,Possession’smainideaandresearcheseverdone,thethemeofthethesisandthemethodologyadoptedinit.Thesecondchapterwillmainlyfocusonthetheoryofintertextuality,itsdevelopmentandhowitwillbeputintopracticeinanalyzingtheintertextualityofPossessiontheoretically.ThethirdandfourthchapterswillberespectivelydevotedtotheconcreteanalysesofintertextualityofPossession.ChapterthreemainlydealswiththeintertextualityofPossessionwithsourcesormaterialsoutsideitfromtwoaspects:theintertextualityofPossessionwithepistolarynovelsinthe18thand19thcenturyandByatt’ssubversionofRomanceandDetectivestoriesandrevisionofBildungsroman.Chapterfourchieflyconcernsself-referenceandrepetition,akindofintertextualitywithinPossessionitself.ChapterfivesummarizestheessenceoftheintertextualitypresentedinPossessionwithsourcesoutsideandinsideit.
    ThroughthestudyofintertextualphenomenainPossession,weareabletoappreciateByatt’sprofoundknowledgeandhercharmofartisticcreation.Meanwhile,ittellsusthatthepresentisnotasimplerepetitionofthepast;insteaditismoreofabreakthrough.
    KeyWords:Byatt,Possession,intertextuality

    iii


    上海交通大学学位论文原创性声明

    本人郑重声明：所呈交的学位论文，是本人在导师的指导下，独立进行研究工作所取得的成果。除文中已经注明引用的内容外，本论文不包含任何其他个人或集体已经发表或撰写过的作品成果。对本文的研究做出重要贡献的个人和集体，均已在文中以明确方式标明。本人完全意识到本声明的法律结果由本人承担。

    学位论文作者签名：王德美
    日期：年月日


    上海交通大学学位论文版权使用授权书

    本学位论文作者完全了解学校有关保留、使用学位论文的规定，同意学校保留并向国家有关部门或机构送交论文的复印件和电子版，允许论文被查阅和借阅。本人授权上海交通大学可以将本学位论文的全部或部分内容编入有关数据库进行检索，可以采用影印、缩印或扫描等复制手段保存和汇编本学位论文。
    保密□，在年解密后适用本授权书。
    本学位论文属于
    不保密□。√（请在以上方框内打“√”）
    学位论文作者签名：王德美指导教师签名：何伟文
    日期：年月日日期：年月日

    ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

    ThisthesiscouldnothavebeenfinishedwithoutsincereencouragementandgeneroussupportofmanypeopleduringthecourseofmystudyfortheM.A.degree.
    Firstofall,Iwouldliketoextendmyheartythankstomyadviser,ProfessorHeWeiwen,whohasguidedmewithacademicexpertise,criticalinsightsandmentorkindnessthrougheachstageofmystudyandinitiatedmeintomyresearchonA.S.Byatt.Occupiedassheis,MissHemanagestoprovidemewithdetailedsuggestionstopolishthethesis.Withoutherclosesupervisionandencouragement,Icouldnothaveworkedoutthisthesis.
    IwanttoshowmygratitudetoProfessorHuQuansheng,ProfessorHuKaibao,ProfessorZuoXiaolan,ProfessorWeiXiaofei,ProfessorSuoYuhuan,ProfessorShenYan,ProfessorShiMin,andProfessorTongJianping,fromwhoseinspiringlecturesIbenefitedalot,andwithoutwhosedirectionsinvariousaspectsofmyliterarystudies,Iwouldnothavefinishedmypostgraduatestudiesandthisthesis.
    Lastbutnotleast,Igivemywarmestthankstomyfamilyandfriendswhohaveofferedmeloveandcareduringalltheseyearsofmystudy.


    i

    ChapterOneIntroduction
    1.1A.S.ByattandHerWorks

    AntoniaSusanByattisoneofthemostoutstandingnovelists,shortstorywritersandinfluentialcriticsbothhomeandabroad.AsisnotedbyOlgaKenyon,Byattis“oneofthemostimaginativeandintelligentwritersofEnglishtoday”(Kenyon51.
    BornAntoniaSusanDrabbleon24August1936,SheffieldEngland,sheistheeldestdaughteroffourchildreninacleverandcompetitivehousehold,whichsharesmanysimilaritieswiththeBrontefamilyofthe19thcentury.BothAntonia’sparentsweregraduatesfromCambridgeandhermother,KathleenDrabble,wasascholarofBrowning.TheDrabblestookmuchinterestinreading,whichbenefitedthechildrenverymuch.Antoniawasnoexception.Asagirlshewasbookishandhadawide-rangingreadinglist:notonlyliterarybooksofdifferentkindssuchasHenryJames,GeorgeEliot,EmilyDickinsonaswellasRobertBrowningandsomeotherones,butalsothoseconcerningbiology,historyandphilosophy.Thisexplainswhylaterherwritingislikeanentwinednetfullofallkindsofquotationsandallusionsandwhyherfictionislabeledashybridgenres.
    AntoniaattendedtheQuakerboarding-school—MountSchoolatYorkandaftergraduation,shewasofferedscholarshipstoNewnhamCollege,Cambridge.Afterfouryear’shardwork,shestoodoutandreceivedherB.A.degreewithfirst-classhonors.Later,shesailedtoU.S.AandstudiedasapostgraduateatBrynMawrCollegeinPennsylvaniaonanEnglish-SpeakingUnionScholarshipforoneyearandthencamebacktoEnglandtoworkonadoctorateintheseventeenthcenturyliteratureatSomervilleCollege,Oxford.SheoncetaughtatLondonUniversityCollegefor11yearsuntilsheturnedtofull-timewritingin1983.
    Intheprocessofgrowingupandreceivingeducation,Antonia’smother,aworkingclassgirlmakingherwaytoCambridge,exertedagreatinfluenceonher.

    1

    WhenAntoniareachedheradolescence,hermotherwasinmostacutedissatisfactionforbeingtrappedindomesticworkasahousewifeandhavingtogiveupheracademiclife,whichmadeAntoniafindherescapeinliteratureinCambridgeandalsohadalifelongeffectontheformationofAntonia’sopinionoftherelationshipbetweendomesticlifeandwoman’sinterestandcareer.ItwasduringthisperiodatCambridgethatAntoniabegantopickupwritingherfirstnovelTheShadowoftheSun.Moreimportant,theclashoftakingcareofdomesticlifeofthewholefamilyandleadinganacademiclifeforawomaninhermother’scasebecomesAntonia’sunvaryingconcerninherwritingandshecreatedaseriesofwomanimagestrappedinsuchadilemma,suchasWinnifredfromthePottersinTheVirginintheGardenandStillLife.
    Alittlesimilartohermother,hermarriagewithIanByattin1959madeAntoniaputanearlyendtoherstudyatSomervilleCollege,Oxford.Shehadtoquitwithoutcompletingherdoctordegreebecauseherscholarshipgrantwaswithdrawn,aswasalwaysthecaseforwomenstudentsathertime.Thisoccurrence,herearlierexperienceofstrugglinginCambridgewherementookanupperhandandlaterherstrivingtocomposeherownstyleofworksinaman-dominatedworld,withhermother’scaseincluded,alltheseledAntoniatoembraceanoutlookoffeminist,whichisilluminatedinthecharacterscreatedinherfiction,suchasLaMotteandMaudinPossession.LikeIrisMurdoch,thefamousEnglishauthorandphilosopher,whowasobsessedwithprobingintotherelationshipbetweenartandrealityandwhomByattshowsmuchinterestinandfinishedtwocriticworksconcerningMurdoch’s,DegreesofFreedom:TheEarlyNovelsofIrisMurdochandIrisMurdoch:ACriticalStudy,Byattherselffollowssuitandextendsherexplorationoftherelationshipofartandrealityintoherownworks.Incorrigiblyhernarratorsandmanyofhercharactersareliteraryscholarsorlearners,relatingexperiencetowhathappenedtopeopleinbooks.Consequently,intertextualityinherfictionworksorganically:herprobingoftheprocessesofnarrativeilluminates,andisinseparable,fromthestoriesshetells.
    Herfirstnovel,TheShadowoftheSun,whichwasfirststartedasearlyasduringherstayatCambridgeandfallsintothepatternofafemaleBildungsromanwiththe

    2

    titlesuggestingthetensionbetweenthedominantfatherandthedaughterasthatbetweenthesunanditsshadow,waspublishedin1964.Itmainlycoversthedaughter’sjourneyofmindandexperienceofgrowthinthespanoftwoyears:fromgraduationfromhighschooltoherfirsttwoyears’stayatCambridge.ThenovelstartsByatt’slifelongsubjectofwomenconcerns.TheGamepublishedin1967istypicalofhersubjects,astudyoftherelationshipbetweentwosisters,twocreativewriters.TheVirginintheGardencominginprintin1978isabookofaquartet,mainlyaboutthemembersofaYorkshirefamily.ThestoryispickedupinStillLife(1985,whichbringshertheSilverPenAward,andBabelTowerfinishedin1996.ThefourthnovelinthequartetisAWhistlingWoman(2002.Thequartetprovidesapanoramaofthemid-20th-centuryBritainanddescribesFrederica'slifeasayoungfemaleintellectual—studyingatCambridgeatatimewhenwomenwereheavilyoutnumberedbymenatthatUniversity.Later,shegotdivorcedandmadeanewlifeinLondonwithheryoungson.LikeBabelTower,AWhistlingWomancoversthe1960sandexplorestheutopianandrevolutionarydreamsofthetime.TheMatisseStories(1993,featuredthreestories,eachelaboratingonapaintingbyHenriMatissethatinspiredByatt,andeachtellingthetaleofaninitiallysmallercrisisthatshowsthelong-presentunravelingintheprotagonists’lives.
    Possession,herbest-knownnovel,whichparallelstheemergingrelationshipoftwocontemporaryacademicswiththepastoftwo(fictional19thcenturypoetsintowhomtheyareresearching,wonhertheBookerPrizein1990.
    Twoyearslater,shepublishedAngelsandInsectsconsistingoftwonovellas.ThetalemainlyinvolvesapennilessnaturalistWilliamreturningfromtenyears’researchintheBrazilianjungleandtwoladies:theeldestdaughterofWilliam’spatronandlaterhiswifewhoisdelicateandvulnerablejustlikethemothsandbutterflieshepursuedinthejungle,andtheyounggovernesswhoisclearlyWilliam'smatchinspirit,intelligence,anderudition.InthecourseofstudyingthelifeofananthillnamedRedFordwiththehouseholdgoverness,Williamdiscoverstheendlesslayersofinterpretationthathidetruthsbehindwhathehastakenforgrantedaboutfaith,science,England,gender,andfamily.Likeherotherfiction,oneofByatt’sconcernsis

    3

    stillaboutwomen.ByattmetaphorizedtheanthillintoaVictorianmansion.InthecentreofthemansionlivesthestrongandstatelyQueenant,whoselife-longbusinessistobearbabyants.Tosomedegree,theeldestdaughterofthepatron,islikeanunassailableQueenant.Inthisway,Byattpresentspeopleathought-provokingquestion:istheQueenantthesovereignauthorityoranenslavedservant?Throughhercomplexnarrative,combiningpersonalintriguewithintellectualandsocialferment,thefictionpresentsreaderswithmanyoftheera'smajortransformations:thegradualunfoldingofthemysteriousnaturewiththedevelopmentofscience;thechallengepresentedtoreligiousfaithbythetheoryofDarwin’sevolution;therapidascendanceofmenandwomenoftalent,initiative,andintegrity;andthecorrespondingdeclineofadecadentaristocracy.
    Sincethepublicationofthesetwoeminentbooksofthe1990s,Byatthasbeenacclaimedworld-wideandarrivesatthepeakofhercareerasanovelist.
    1.2ABriefIntroductionofPossession

    Thisintelligent,literary,andambitiousthrillerwilltakeitsplacealongsideTheNameoftheRoseandWaterlandasUmbertoEco'sscholarlymonkandGrahamSwift'shistoryteacherarejoinedbyanotherunconventionaltypeof“naturaldetective”,theliterarycritic...[Byatt]combinesthedriveofthethrillerwiththemeasuredexplorationofhumannaturemorenormallyassociatedwiththenineteenth-centurynovel,andthroughoutshethreadsthepoetryandpassionof“romance”.
    —TheTimes(London(ByattB

    Possession:ARomance,isabigbookwithinallmorethan500pagesof28chaptersandapostscript,winningtheprestigiousBookerPrizeforFictionaswellastheIrishTimes/AerLingusInternationalFictionPrize.LikeUmbertoEco'stheNameofRose(IlNomeDellaRosaandGrahamSwift'sWaterland,eversinceitwaspublished,Possessionhasbeenlabeledaspostmodernsinceinthisintelligent,literary,

    4

    andambitiousmasterwork,onecanfindalmosteverythingsuchasromanticquest,scholarlytreachery,epistolarystyles,Bildungsroman,detectiveelements,myths,fairytales,references,imagesandsymbolsandevenliterarycriticism.Itbeginswiththesentence“Thebookwasthickandblackandcoveredwithdust”(Byatt3.Itistrue.Possessionisabookaboutbooks,aboutthestudyandloveofliteratureandtheintricateobsessionwiththelivesofliteraryfiguressharedbyacademics,historians,andtherandomlycuriouspublic:mainlytwocontemporaryscholarsuncoverthestoryoftwo19thcenturypoets.ObscurescholarRolandMichell,whiledoingresearchesinLondonLibrary,discovershandwrittendraftsofaletterbytheeminentVictorianpoetRandolphHenryAshtoanunidentifiedlady.ThisdrawshisattentionandleadshimtosuspectthatthemarriedAshhadahithertounknownromance.Overcomebythepassiontopossessthem,heslipsawaythedocumentssecretly-anunprofessionalact-andbeginstoinvestigatethematter.ThetrailleadshimtoChristabelLaMotte,aminorpoetessandacontemporaryofAsh.Evidentlytheymeteachotherataliteraryparty.FurtherRolandisledtoDr.MaudBailey,amodernLaMottescholaranddistantrelativeofLaMotte'sfamily,whoisdrawnintohelpingRolandwithunfoldingmystery.TheyareoverwhelmedwithuncoveringthetruthandfindoutmorelettersandevidenceofanaffairbetweenAshandLaMotte;meanwhile,intracingAshandLaMotte,theirownpersonalromanticlivesdevelopandbecomeentwinedinanechoofAshandLaMotte,whosestoryistoldinparalleltotheirs.
    Thenewsofthisaffairwillcertainlycauseabigshakeinacademiccircles—“Itmightchangethefaceofscholarship”(Byatt23.So,colleaguesofRolandandMaudareinandbecomecompetitorsintheracetodiscoverthetruthfordifferentmotives.Andthetruthturnsoutso:Ash'smarriagewasbarrenandunconsummated,althoughhelovedandremaineddevotedtohiswife.HehadashortloveaffairfullofpassionswithLaMotte,whichresultedinthesuicideofLaMotte'sbestfriendBlancheandthesecretbirthofanillegitimatechild,MayBailey.LaMottesoughttoconcealherexistencefromAsh,whoactuallydidcomeacrossheroncethoughMayknewnothingabouthim.Onawindymorning,alltheinterestedpartiescometogetherinadramaticsceneatAsh'sgrave,wheredocumentsburiedwiththeAshcouplearebelievedto

    5

    holdthefinalkeytothemystery.Readingthem,itturnsoutthatinsteadofbeingrelatedtoLaMotte'ssister,asshehasalwaysbelieved;MaudisinfactdirectlydescendedfromLaMotteandAsh'sillegitimatedaughterMay,whowasraisedbyLaMotte'ssisterSophieandpassedoffasherownchild,andthereforesheisheirtotheircorrespondence.Roland,setfreefromobscurityandadead-endrelationship,managestolivedownthepotentialprofessionalsuicideofthetheftoftheoriginaldocuments,andseesanacademiccareeropenupbeforehim.Maud,whohasbeenspendingheradultlifeconfused,frigidanduntouchable,findsherhumansideandseespossiblefuturehappinesswithRoland.AndthesadstoryofAshandLaMotte,separatedbythemoresofthedayandcondemnedtosecrecyandseparation,isresolvedatlastthroughRolandandMaud.
    1.3LiteratureReviewofPossession

    Shortlyafterthepublication,thebookcausessuchabigstirintheEnglish-speakingworldandsequentially,allkindsofpraisesandcommentscomeoneafteranother.A.S.ByattisawardedwithBookerPrize,thehighestliteraryawardinEnglishLiterature.Themediaandcriticsthrongtosinghighpraiseoftheauthorandthebook.
    TheSundayTimes(Londonsays,“Inthisbook,[Byatt's]clever,discursivetalentatlastfindsitsform.BurstingloosefromthemoreorlessnaturalisticmodeofitspredecessorsintowhatanepigraphfromHawthornecallsthe'latitude'oftheromance,thiscerebralextravaganzaofastoryzigzagswithunembarrassedzestacrossanimaginativeterrainbristlingwithsymbolismandsymmetries,shimmeringwithmythandlegend,andhauntedeverywherebypresencesofthepast....Possessioniseloquentabouttheintensepleasuresofreading.And,withsumptuousartistry,itprovidesafeastofthem”(ByattB,whileTimesLiterarySupplementapplauds,“Possessionissuretogetplentyofpraise,asitdeserves;ithasearnedtherighttobe

    6

    judgedbyhighstandards...Possessionbidsfairtobelookedbackuponasoneofthemostmemorablenovelsofthe1990s”(Ibid.
    Thoughthenovelhasbeenpublishedforalmosttwodecades,attemptstointerpretitfromdifferentperspectiveshaveneverbeenstoppedbutevenbeenproliferated.
    FrenchscholarLueileDesblanehenotesPossession’sunderlyingconcernwiththenatureofPossession，commentingthatthenovel“windsitsthemethroughthevariationofdependencyinlove,repressionofpassion,professionalrivalry,supernaturalpowersandtheobsessionofbiographersandacademicwriterswiththeobjectoftheirstudy”(Desblanche89-95.DutchScholarChristienFranken’sstudyfocusesonthewayByattexploitsthecreativepossibilityoffemalemythsinrepresentingfemaleartisticsubjectivityinByatt’snovels,TheSunofShadow,theGameandPossession.Inherstudy,Frankenshowsherinterestintheidentificationandinterpretationofthesefemalemythsandoffersherdifferent“reading”ofthenovels(Franken164.JaneCampbellembarksonByatt’sstudyofwomen’sexperience,physical,mentalandemotional.ShewritesinherintroductiontoherA.S.ByattandTheHeliotropicImagination:

    “Byatt’sdescriptionofherworkas‘heliotropic’(Byatt1993b:14,turningtothesunofcreativity,holdstrueintwosenses:sheexploresanddevelopsherownrelationtothesun,andsheshowsherwomencharactersexperiencingadventuresofthemindandfeelingthatbringthemintothesun’slight.(TheimageoftheheliotropehasanevenmorepersonalrelevanceforByatt:shesuffersfromSAD,seasonalaffectivedisorder,anddoesmuchofherwritinginthesummersintheCevennesinFrance.InthisbookIhopetoaddressbothaspectsandtoshowhow,infictionpublishedoveraspanofthirty-eightyears,Byatthasconstantlydeepenedherthinkingabouthercraftandextendedherrangeofknowledgeandpractice;usingavarietyofforms,shehasworkedtoencompassmoreandmoreofreality.
    Whiledoingso,shehaskeptwomen’slives,pastandpresent,atthecenterofherattention”.(Campbell2

    7

    SybilS.SteinbergfromU.S.remarksthatPossessionis“acompulsivelyreadablestoryaboutaclandestineloveaffairbetweentwoVictorianwritersAshandLaMotteandthetwomodern-dayacademicsRolandandMaudwhounearththeirsecret”.And“itisanintellectualrompthatdoublesasadetectivestoryandaromance,Byatt’snewnovelfindsherasimaginative,wittyandprovocativeasever”(Steinberg70.MarkM.Hennelly,JR.focusesonthetextualpleasureproducedbythenovel’srepeatingpatterninhisjournalarticle—“‘RepeatingPatterns’andTextualPleasures:Reading(inA.S.Byatt’sPossession:ARomance”.Hearguesthat“Possession,infact,teasesitsreaderwithsuch‘repeatingpatterns’ofmajorandminormotifs,which,inturn,producesavarietyoftextualpleasures”(Hennelly442.JenifferM.Jeffersadoptstheperspectiveofsymbolisminheressay“TheWhiteBedofDesireinA.S.Byatt'sPossession”toanalyzethesymbolicmeaningsofthewhitecolor.NancyChinn,exploresthearchetypeofthenovel’sprotagonistChristabelLaMotteinheressay“‘IAmMyOwnRiddle’—A.S.Byatt’sChristabelLaMotte:EmilyDickinsonandMelusina”.InPossession,LaMotte,likeEmilyDickinson,livesinsolitudeandseclusionmostofherlifetimeandsomeofherpoemsshare,moreorless,thecharacteristicsofDickinson’s.FromtheroleofMother,LaMotteismorelikeMelusina,justassheconfidedinthelastlettertoAsh“IhavebeenMelusinathesethirtyyears”(Byatt544.So,NancyChinnassertsthatLaMotteisactuallythecombinationoftheimageandessenceofAmericanpoetessEmilyDickinsonandthefairyMelusina.
    WhenJessicaLeader,inher“A.S.Byatt’sPossession—PostmodernorPost-Postmodern?”writesthat,“Whenconsideringthestory-tellingstyleofPossessioninlightofOscarandLucindaandWaterland,itbecomesimmediatelyevidentthatByattemploysfewofthetropesthatfallundertheheadingofpostmodern”,intertextualityofPossessionwithOscarandLucindaandWaterlandhasbeenimpliedthoughthisisnotthefocusofLeader’sessay.ActuallytherearecriticswhohavemadestudiesofPossessionintermsofintertextuality.Inherthesis“Readingbetweenthelines:IntertextualityandtheFreedomofInterpretationinA.S.Baytt’sPossession:aRomanceandUmbertoEco’sIlNomeDellaRosa”,Juliet

    8

    NusbaumfromHaverfordCollegeelaboratesontheintertextualitybetweenPossessionandIlNomeDellaRosa(TheNameofRosefromfiveaspects:thebackgroundandpretexts,folktalesinthenovels,scholarsandembeddedintertextuality,interpretationandeventuallyfindingthetruth,andinterpretationandfreedomofchoice.LauraKilbrideinheressayprovidesreadersanintertextualappreciationofthepoem“OurLady-bearing-Pain”writtenbyLaMotteinconjunctionwithAmericanpoetEmilyDickinson’s“IfeltaFuneral,inmyBrain”
    Incomparisonwiththeresearchesintermsofquantityandlengthoftime,thereisalongwaytogoforChinesescholars.ThestudyofByattandPossessiondidnotcommenceuntilthelate1990sandnotmanyscholarspayenoughcomplimentstoit.
    JiangXianwenofMidsouthTechonologicalInstitutecontributesanessay“OnA.S.Byatt’sFeministThought”andaChineseprefacetotheversionofPossessionpublishedbyForeignLanguageTeachingandResearchPress,exploringByatt’sfeministthoughtsreflectedinthenovelandthethemeofit.ChengQianofHunanNormalUniversitywritesseveralthesestoanalyzePossessionfromvariousperspectives.In“HistoricalNarrationofthetrueFemaleLife—AFeministReadingofByatt’sPossession”,afemaleperspectiveisadoptedtoexpoundByatt’sfeminismpresentedinthenovel.Inaddition,ProfessorChenganalyzesthecharacterarchetype,thestructurearchetypeandthehistoricalnarrativestrategiesinPossessioninherotherthesessuchas“Historicalcirculation—A.S.Byatt’sPlotandStructureArchetype”.WangYan,anassociateprofessorfromLiaoningUniversityinherthesis“Possession—AClassicExampleofDifferentStylesandGenres”takesreaderstoappreciateA.S.Byatt’sgeniusforintegratingdifferentstylesandgenres,especiallythecombinationofpopularliteratureandtraditionalliterature.
    ItisnicethatresearchesonByattandherworksareflourishingnowinChina;however,fewofthemgiveenoughprominencetooneofthefeaturesofPossession,intertextuality.OnlyHeHongyingfromGuangxiNormalUniversitycontributesamasterthesisrelevanttotheintertextualphenomenaofPossession.Inherthesis,shedistinguishesintertextualityintotwosorts:macroandmicro.TheformerconcernsfourseparatemythicstoriesofProserpina,Melusina,theCityofIsandVampirism

    9

    whilethelatterisabouttherewritingoffairytale:theGlassCoffin.
    ItremainsclearthatHeHongyingcoversjustpartofintertextualityinPossession,whichisfarfromsatisfactory.Inthenovel,Byattmixesthinlyveiledreferencestosomehistoricalfigures,literarystyles,andgenresinherPossession,makesuseoffairytales,epics,myths,poemsandsomeotherculturalsourcesandrewriteschildrenstories,generatinganentrancingnovelfullofintertextuality.Therefore,thisthesis,stillintermsofintertextuality,yetintendstomakeupforthoseundetectedbyothercriticalessaysorthesis,withthehopeofhelpingthereadershipgainabetterunderstandingofByatt’sPossessionandfullyappreciatinghernarrativetechniques.
    1.4Theme

    ItisalmostuniversallyacknowledgedbyboththegeneralpublicandtheacademiathatByatt’sPossessionislikeanetworkofintertextuality,andthatPossessionmightbebestenjoyedandunderstoodinconjunctionwithothertexts.Thepointis,however,thattheythinkmuchoftheintertextualtiesbetweenPossessionandothertexts,suchasJessicaLeader’sindicatedintextualitywithOscarandLucindaandWaterland,LauraKilbride’swithEmilyDickinson’spoems,JulietNusbaum’swithEco’sIlNomeDellaRosa(TheNameofRose,andevenHeHongying’s,whichonlyfocusesontheintertextualityoffourembeddedfolktalesandthefairytaleforchildrenwiththeiroriginalsources;obviouslyitisnotenoughtoreflectthefeaturesofPossessioninintertextuality.
    BasedonpreviousresearchesonPossession,especiallythoseconcerningtheintertextualphenomenamentionedabove,thisthesisattemptstomakeamorecomprehensiveandsystematicstudyofitfromtheperspectiveofintertextuality,withtheintentiontoofferreadersrefreshingwaystoreadByattandherworksandappreciateherlongstandingartisticcharm.
    Ontheonehand,thisthesiswilltrytorefreshinglydeepenthestudyofintertexulaitywithothersourcesfromthesetwoaspects:theinfluenceofepistolary
    10

    styleoftheeighteenthandnineteenthcenturyonthejournalentriesandlettersinPossession;thesubversionofwell-establishedgenresinPossession:RomanceandDetectivestories,andtherevisionofBildungsroman.
    Ontheotherhand,self-referenceorintertextualitywithinthetextitselfwillbeanotherfocusofthethesis.Asawriterofself-reflexiveness,Byattinherfictionexplorestherelationofthepastandthepresent,showingherpreoccupationwiththesymbolic(thepastandthereal(thepresentbypresentingreadersatwo-foldstorysetintwodifferenttimes.Movingbetweenthepastandthepresent,readerscaneasilygettofindthatknowledgeofthepast,iscrucialtounderstandingthefullcontextofthepresent;thatistosay,the19thstoryline,includingthefairytaleofMelusinacreatedbytheheroineofthe19thstoryLaMotte,togetherwiththe20thcenturyoneformsakindofintertextuality.
    Consequently,thethesisisdividedintofivechapters.ThefirstchapterisabriefintroductionoftheauthorA.S.Byattandherworks,Possession’smainideaandresearcheseverdone,thethemeofthethesisandthemethodologyadoptedinthethesis.ThesecondonewillmainlyfocusonthetheoryofIntertextuality,itsdevelopmentandhowitwillbeputintopracticeinanalyzingtheintertextualityofPossessiontheoretically.ThethirdandfourthchapterswillberespectivelydevotedtotheconcreteanalysesofintertextualityinPossession.Chapterfivewillcometotheconclusion.

    1.5Methodology

    Thethesisisbasedonthepostmoderntheoryofintertextuality.Afterreadingagreatnumberoftheoreticalmaterialsfromdifferenttheoristsandprofessorsintherelevantfields,theauthorgetsamainideaofthetheoryofintertexuality,andthenputsthetheoryintopracticebyanalyzingthetext,Possessionbearingthetheoryinmind.InthecourseofreadingandanalyzingPossession,theauthorfindsoutthesectionswhichbearintertextualitywithothertextsorsources(thoseoutsideofthis
    11

    textPossessionwhethertheyareconcretetexts,well-establishedcultureandtraditionorevensomeuntraceablesignsandintertextualitywithinPossessionitself.Ofcourse,allthesemustbebasedonawide-rangingknowledge.

    12

    ChapterTwoTheoryofIntertextuality
    2.1TheoryofIntertextuality

    ModernintertextualityisbasedonaseriesofintellectualmovementstakingplaceinEuropesuchasSaussure’sLinguistics,RussianFormalism,Structuralism,Deconstruction,Psychoanalysis,andMarxism.MostoftheadvocatorsareFrenchorAmericanscholars,suchasJuriaKristeva,RolandBarthes,GerardGenette,MichaelRiffateree,T.S.Eliot,HaroldBloomandsoon.CertainlyitisimpossiblenottomentionM.M.Bakhtinwhenitcomestointertextuality,sinceheisthefirstscholarintroducingtheideaofintertextualitytoliterarytheories.
    Bakhtin’sinfluenceonandenlightenmenttointertextualityweremainlyembodiedinhisseminalworkProblemsofDostoyevsky’sArt(orProblemsofDostoyevsky’sPoetics,inwhichheintroduced3importantconcepts.Thatis,theconceptofindividual’sunfinalizability,theideaoftherelationshipbetweentheselfandothers,orothergroupsandpolyphonyinDostoyevsky’sworks.Throughthesethreeconcepts,Bakhtinstepbystepbuilthisideaofintertextuality,thoughhedidnotnameitso.Bytheideaofunfinalizableself,Bakhtinintendedtoemphasizethatindividualpeoplecouldnotbefinalized,completelyunderstood,knownorlabeledsincetherewaspossibilitythateverypersonwaschangingorinaprocessofchange,whichwasaccountedforbyhisideaofrelationshipbetweentheselfandothers,orothergroups.“Everypersonisinfluencedbyothersinaninescapablyintertwinedway,andconsequentlynovoicecanbesaidtobeisolated”(http://www.artandpopularculture.com/Mikhail_Bakhtin.Clearly,Bakhtingreatlyrespectedother’sinfluenceontheself,“notmerelyintermsofhowapersoncomestobe,butalsoinhowapersonthinksandhowapersonseeshimselforherselftruthfully”(Ibid.HefurtherprovedhisideasbyanalyzingDostoyevsky’sworksandfindingoutthemultiplevoice—polyphony.EachcharacterinDostoevsky'swork
    13

    representsavoicethatspeaksforanindividualself,distinctfromothers.Thisideaofpolyphonyisrelatedtotheconceptsofunfinalizabilityandself-and-others,sinceitistheunfinalizabilityofindividualsthatcreatestruepolyphony.Later,heenrichedhistheorybyaddingtheideaofcarnival.AccordingtoBakhtin,carnivalisthecontextinwhichdistinctindividualvoicesareheard,flourishandinteracttogether.Thecarnivalcreatesthe"threshold"situationswhereregularconventionsarebrokenorreversedandgenuinedialoguebecomespossible.ThenotionofacarnivalisBakhtin'swayofdescribingDostoevsky'spolyphonicstyle:eachindividualcharacterisstronglydefined,andatthesametimethereaderwitnessesthecriticalinfluenceofeachcharacterupontheother.Thatistosay,thevoicesofothersareheardbyeachindividual,andeachinescapablyshapesthecharacteroftheother.Soitiswithlanguageinhisopinion.Tohim,“‘Languagefortheindividualconsciousnessliesontheborderlinebetweenoneselfandtheother.Thewordinlanguageishalfsomeoneelse’s.Thewordbecomesone’sownthroughanactofappropriation”(qtd.FromAllen36.Thatistosay,atextisneverwhollyone’sownandtracesofotherwordsandusescanbefoundinatext.Therefore,atextofacertainauthorcouldnotbecompletedonlyandwhollybytheauthorhimselforherselfandthemeaningorthetruthofatextcannotbefixed;instead,itliesin“anumberofmutuallyaddressed,albeitcontradictoryandlogicallyinconsistent,statements.Truthneedsamultitudeofcarryingvoices”(http://www.artandpopularculture.com/Mikhail_Bakhtin.Inthisway,Bakhtinnotonlyintroducestheideaofintertextuality,butalsoestablishesthecharacteristicsofintertextuality:dynamicsandopenness.
    ItisKristevawhofirstmadethetermintertextualityknowntotheFrenchscholarsinherearlyworksofthemiddletolate1960s.Inessayslike“TheBoundedText”(Kristeva36-63and“Word,Dialogue,Novel”(64-91,KristevaintroducedtheworksofBakhtintotheFrench-speakingworld.Toexpoundsomeofhisconcepts,Kristevacoinedthetermintertextuality.ShesharedandhighlightedBakhtin’svisionoflanguageinthetermintertextuality.AccordingtoKristeva,“text”isakindof“criticism”or“metalanguage”,inwhich,inordertohavetheirownsay,thesubjectsanalyzepreviousandcontemporaryworks,verifyingsomewhiledefyingsomeothers;
    14

    tobeexact,intertextualityisacomplexprocessofdevelopingtheusefulanddiscardingtheuseless,ora“negativite”processofdestroyingthepreviousandcreatingthenewtexts(Cheng74.Inthisway,thesubjectsarethrownintotheenormousnetofintertextuality,orrather,thesubjectsareinendlessconversationwithtextsofothers,past,presentandfuture.Kristevanotonlycoinedthetermintertextualityandmadeitknowntothecriticalworld,butfurtherdevelopeditbyofferingexactintertextualrelationshipswhichincludeanagram,allusion,adaptation,translation,parody,pastiche,imitation,andotherkindoftransformation(Baldick112.ToKristeva,textscanbedividedintotwokinds:geno-texteandpheno-texte.Ingeno-texte,speakersdestroytheexistentideology,axiologyand“tissueoflanguage”andformtheirownwhilepheno-texteismoreconcernedwiththegrammarandsurfacestructureofit(Cheng74.
    RolandBartheshaddifferentwaysofclassification.InhisworkS/Z,hedefinedtextsasmultidisciplinaryandmulti-subjective,whichsharedthecoreofintertextualitycoinedbyKristevathoughbothofthemmayemphasizedifferently.Barthespaidmoreattentiontoaudiencethantexts,especiallythefunctionsofsubjectsinthe“signifyingpractice”.Consequently,heclassifiedtextsintoreaderlytextsandwriterlytexts.Asforthereaderlyones,hebelievedtheymadenorequirementofthereaderto“write”or“produce”hisorherownmeanings.Thereadermaypassivelylocate“ready-made”meanings.Barthesheldthatthesesortsoftextswerecontrolledbytheprincipleofnon-contradiction.Thatis,theydonotdisturbthe“commonsense”ofwell-rootedculture.Withinthiscategory,thereisaspectrumof“repleteliterature”,whichcomprises“anyclassic(readerlytexts”thatwork“likeacupboardwheremeaningsareshelved,stacked,[and]safeguarded”(Barthes200.Therefore,Barthespointedoutthattherewerecertainrulesandmodestocreate,readorunderstandthemandtheyarehalf-closed,whilethewriterlytextsaspiretothepropergoalofliteratureandcriticism:“...tomakethereadernolongeraconsumerbutaproducerofthetext”(Barthes4.Writerlytextsandwaysofreadingconstitute,inshort,anactiveratherthanpassivewayofinteractingwithacultureanditstexts.Acultureanditstexts,Bartheswrites,shouldneverbeacceptedintheirgivenformsandtraditions.As
    15

    opposedtothe“readerlytexts”as“product,”the“writerlytextisourselveswriting,beforetheinfiniteplayoftheworldistraversed,intersected,stopped,plasticizedbysomesingularsystem(Ideology,Genus,Criticismwhichreducesthepluralityofentrances,theopeningofnetworks,theinfinityoflanguages”(Barthes5.ThusreadinginBarthes’eyesbecomes“notaparasiticalact,thereactivecomplementofawriting,”butrathera“formofwork”(Barthes10.Thatis,existentdecodingdoesnotworkwellanylongerinreadingthesewriterlytextsandtheyaremoreopeninsteadofclosedorhalf-closed.Therefore,subjects,whetherauthors,readersorcritics,intheopinionofBarthes,especiallyreadersandcritics,takeanactivepartinre-creatingthemeaningoftextsandinevitablytheyhavetotakeothermaterialsorsourcesintoaccount,thatis,intertextuality.Bathesevengoestoalittleextremethatanytextisanintertext,andothertextsrelatedwithpreviousorcurrentsocialculturecanbetracedinit.ThemostimportantcontributiontointertextualityforBarthesishiswriterlytext,arepresentationofintertextuality,inwhichnoexistentdecodingcanbeused;instead,thingsintraceablebutestablishedbyusage,unconsciouscitationandevenreferencematerialswithoutannotationallcanbeakindofintertextuality.
    Barthesdevelopedtheterm“Intertextuality”andmadeitmorepopularandacceptableamongFrenchscholars.Theyaccept,interpretormodifytheterm.GérardGenetteisoneofthem.InhisIntroductionàl'architextein1979,Genettedirectedintertextualitydifferently;thatis,heinterpretedintertextualityfromastructuralisticperspective,“assert[ing]thattheobjectofpoeticsisnotthetext,butthearchitext—thetranscendentcategories(literarygentres,modesofenunciation,andtypesofdiscourse,amongotherstowhicheachindividualtextbelongs”(http://www.wordsend.org/2003/12/page/2/.InhisPalimpsestes:Lalittératureauseconddegréin1982,heusedthenewterm“transtextuality”ratherthancommonlyacceptedtermintertextualitytoexpoundhisideaofintertextuality.Basicallyhesharedthecorethatliteraturewasintertextual,orinhisownterm“transtextual”.Butheoffereddifferentandmoredetailedclassificationsortypes.Inalltherearefive:paratextuality(relatestoalltheelementswhichstandonthe“threshold”ofatextsuchaspreface,postscript,illustrationsandsoon,metatextuality(unitesagiventextto
    16

    anotherofwhichitspeakswithoutnecessarilycitingit,sometimesevenwithoutnamingit,architextuality(allsetsofhierarchyofgenresinthefieldofliteratureinordertofullyandwhollyunderstandatextanditsintertexts,intertextuality(nolongerconcernedwiththesemioticprocessofculturalandtextualsignification,whilereducedtoissuesofquotation,plagiarismandallusion,hypertextuality(referstoanyrelationshipbetweenatextBwhichGenettenames“hypertext”andanearliertextAnamed“hypotext”byhim,inwhichtextBisgraftedbasedontextAandofcoursesuchagraftiscompletelydifferentfromcommentary.InGenette’stheory,“intertextuality”becomesabranchof“transtextuality”andisreducedtoonlyquotation,plagiarismandallusion,whichbearsanarrowersensethanKristevaandBarthes’(qtd.fromDeng6.Ithasmoretodowiththecontentsofatextwithrelevantintertexts.Theotherfouroneseitherconcerntheintertextualityofcontentorform,orbothandobviouslytheyarenotseparateandalone.
    Fromhisfivesubterms,especiallyfromparatextuality,itcanbefoundoutthatGenettedesignedtore-establishthesignificanceandimportanceoftheauthor’swritingintentionwhilebothKristevaandBarthesreducedtheauthorityofthewriterandthelatterevenclaimedthedeathofauthorsin1968.ThoughGenetteadoptedanothertermandintroducedadifferentdefinitionof“intertextuality”fromKristevaandBarthes’,theyallaffirmedtheintertextualitybetweenoramongtextsandtheopennessoftheintertextuality.
    Inthelate1970sandearly1980s,anotherscholar,French-AmericanMichaelRiffaterredevelopedhisowntheoryconcerningintertextuality.DifferentfromKristeva,BarthesandevenGenette,inhisSemioticsofPoetrypublishedin1978andotheressays,Riffaterredefinedintertextualityasamodalityofperception，anactofdecodingtextsinthelightofothertexts.What’smore,Riffaterrebelievedthatanytextanditsintertextwerethevariantsofthesamematrixinbothstructuralandsemanticlevels.
    AccordingtoMichaelRiffaterre,theprocessofcommunicationthatunfoldsbetweenatextanditsreaderisnotthesameasthatinvolvedinso-callednormalcommunication.Thereader'sencounterwiththeliterarytextisanexperienceof
    17

    somethingunique,forwhichthemaincorollaryisitsstyle.Thestylebecomesevidenttothereaderthroughthepresenceinthetextofungrammaticalities,thoseincongruouselementsthatdisruptthetextualgrammar.Oneofthecharacteristicsofungrammaticalityisthatitmustbeperceptible;ifitharborsahiddenmeaning,thetextwillgiveformalindicestothereader,whowillfurnishthekeytointerpretation.Theseindicesexhibittwofeatures,orproperties:adeicticfeature,perceivedasadistortionofmimesis,“encodedinsuchawaythat,first,itrevealsthatitishidingsomething”(Riffaterre1983:12andahermeneuticfeature:thesortofdistortionofmimesisthat“indicateshowwecanfindthatsomething”(Ibid.Byrecognizingtheindicesofungrammaticality,thereaderisforcedtohurdlethelinearityofmimesis.Graspingtherelationshipsbetweentheelementsthataredistributedalongtheaxisofmimesisispartofthepraxisoftransformationthatcreatessignificance,andthisismadepossiblebyinstancesofungrammaticality.Togainaccesstosignificance,readersmustbeawareofthevariousungrammaticalitiesencounteredinthetext,andattempttodiscernsomestructurethattheyhaveincommon.Thisisaccomplishedwithadynamicgestureknownasretroactivereading,Riffaterre’ssecondstageofreading,“Asheprogressesthroughthetext,thereaderrememberswhathehasjustreadandmodifieshisunderstandingofitinthelightofwhatheisnowdecoding”(Riffaterre1978:5.ObviouslyRiffaterrecentersmoreontheinter-spacebetweentextsandreadersratherthanontextsalone.Thatis,hepaysmoreattentiontohowreadersreadandinterpretatextintheintertextualcontexts.Consequently,forRiffaterre,readingbecomesadynamicprocessandtakesplaceontwosuccessivelevelsorperiods.Thefirstisthemimeticstageinwhichreaderstrytorelatetextualsignstoexternalreferentsandittendstoproceedinalinearfashion.Thesignificanceofatextcanneverbegotinthisperiod.Thesecondstage,retroactivereadinggoesontouncovertheunderlyingsemioticunitsandstructuresproducingthetext’snon-referentialmeanings.Onthisstage,readershavetorefertomorethanoneothertexttounderstandandinterpretthetext.
    Therefore,Riffaterre’sintertextuality,basedonhistheoryofungrammaticality,hastodowithbothformsandcontentsoftexts.
    18

    Besidesthesescholarsandtheorists,therearemanyotherswhodevelopandmaketheircontributionstointertextuality.T.S.Eliot,HaroldBloom,HillisMiller,andJonathanCullerareafewofthem.T.S.EliotinhisTraditionandtheIndividualTalentin1919proposedthe“impersonal”theorytoemphasizetheinheritanceofthepredecessors,whichcanberegardedasthefirstvoiceconcerningintertexualitythoughthetermdidnotcomeintobeingthen.HeputitintopracticeinhismasterpiecetheWasteLand.HaroldBloominhisTheAnxietyofInfluence,PoetryandRepressionpurportedthatanypoemwasaninterpoem,andapoemwasnotcreatedbutrecreated.Thecreationofapoemwasnotonlyconcernedwiththeinheritanceofthepredecessors,butalsoafightagainstandsurpassingofthepredecessors.HillisMillerinhisFictionandRepetition:SevenEnglishNovelsputforwardthetheoryofrepetitionandrecurrence,whichheclassifiedintothreegroups:therepetitionofdetailedpointswithinatextsuchaswordchoicesandrhetorics;recurrencesofanoccurrenceorsituationwithinatextandthethird,therepetitionofonetextwithothertextsintheme,motive,character,occurrenceandsituation.ToMiller,intertextualityisavarietyofrepetitions(Huang21.JonathanCullerofferedacomprehensivesummaryofintertextuality.Hedesignatedthatreadershadtorefertothesefivetypesoftextswhiletakingatextaspartofliterature:thereal,CulturalVraisemblance,modelsofgenre,theconventionallynatural,andthefifthisparodyandirony.CullerintegratedlyassertedhisclassificationofintertextualityinhisThePursuitofSign:semiotics,literature,deconstruction,andgavemoreprominencetothemacrosideoftheterminologywhichhappenstosharetheviewofKristevaandRolandBarthes:itisakindofrelationofatextwithdiscursiveculture,signifyingpracticeinvariouslanguagesandwithotherpossibletextshelpingconveyculturalthingsunderwhichthetextworks.Hewrote:

    “intertextualityhasadoublefocus.Ontheonehand,itcallsourattentiontotheimportanceofpriortexts,insistingtheautonomyoftextsismisleadingnotionandthataworkhasthemeaningonlybecausecertainthingshavepreviouslybeenwritten.Yetinsofarasitfocusesonintelligibilityonmeaning.Intertextualityleadsustoconsiderpriortextsas
    19

    contributionstoacodewhichmakespossiblethevariouseffectsofsignification.Intertextualitythusbecomeslessanameforawork’srelationtoparticularpriortextsthanadesignationofitsparticipationinthediscursivespaceofaculturetherelationshipbetweenatextandthevariouslanguagesofsignifyingpracticesofacultureanditsrelationtothosetextswhicharticulateforitthepossibilitiesofthatculture.Thestudyofintertextualityisthusnottheinvestigationofsourcesandinfluencesastraditionallyconceived.Itcastsitsnetwidertoincludeanonymousdiscursivepractices.Codeswhoseoriginsarelost,thatmakepossiblethesignifyingpracticesoflatertexts”.
    (Culler103-104
    Here,Culler’sintertextualityembracedawidersense,notonlyreferringtotherelationshipbetweenliterarytexts,butalsothatinthefieldofculturewhichmaybeuntraceable.
    Incontrastwiththedevelopmentofintertexualityinthewesterncountries,researchesrelatedtoitinChinastartabitlate;besides,thereisnoauthoritativeworkexceptafewessaysbysuchscholarsasHuangNianranandChengXilin.ProfessorChengfromSichuanUniversitysummarizedfivetypesofintertexualityinthelightofwesterntheoryofintertextuality:quotation,whateverquotedfrompriortextswiththesignalsofquotationmarks;allusionandarchetype,originatedfromBible,mythology,fairytale,folklore,historystories,religionandclassicworksandsoon;collage,transforming,orevenmisconstruingatextandthenmakingitpartofanewtext;ironicparodyanduntraceablecodes(Cheng77.OtherChinesescholars,withlittledifference,providedintroductionsoroverviewsofintertextualityandmostofthemheldthatintertextualityfellintotwokinds:MacrointertextualityandMicrointertextuality.ProfessorHuangisoneofthem(Huang22.Inhisopinion,therelationshipbetweenanyknowledge,codes,signifyingpracticeandevensomethinguntraceableandatextcanbeakindofintertextuality;theknowledge,codes,signifyingpracticeandtheuntraceablemakeanentwinednet.Orrather,anytextcanbeanintertext.Asforthemicrointertextuality,itreferstotherelationshipbetweenatextandothertexts,whereinelementsinthistextprovetooriginatefromothertexts.
    20

    Ashasbeenstatedaboutthetheoryofintertextuality,beitmicroormacrointertextuality,Kristeva’sgeno-texteandpheno-texte,Barthes’writerlyandreaderlytexts,Genette’sfivetypesofintertextualityorRiffaterre’sorotherscholars’intertextuality，itseemstobegenerallyacceptedthatintertexualityisakindofrelationshipbetweenatextand“other”textsorsources:eithercompletelyothertextsorsources,orwithinthetextitselfbutwithdifferentparts,tobeexact,akindofself-referenceorrepetition.ThisthesiswouldliketoanalyzetheintertextualphenomenainPossessionfromthesetwoaspects:theintertexualitywithsourcesoutsidePossessionandwithinitself.
    2.2ExamplesofIntertextuality

    Asamatteroffact,beforetheterm“intertextuality”wascoinedbyJuriaKristevaandbeforeitworksasaliterarytheory,theideaofintertextualityhasbeenexistingandputintouseunconsciouslybothbycriticscommentingorwriterscomposingliteraryworks.
    M.M.Bakhtin’scriticalworkProblemsofDostoyevsky’sArt(orProblemsofDostoyevsky’sPoeticsisanexampleofuseofintertextulitythoughthetermwasnotcoinedatthattime.Ashasbeenanalyzedatthebeginningofthischapter,itisundertheenlightenmentandinspirationofhimthatKristevacoinedthetermandputforwardthetheory.Withthedevelopmentandperfectionofthetheory,ithasbeenwidelyadoptedtomakeacriticalreadingofliteraryworksnowadays.Forexample,YuanxifromChongqingUniversityanalyzedtheintertextualityofTheBallodofSadCaféandWanChenfromDalianUniversityofTechnologyoffers“AnIntertextualReadingofThehours”.
    Incomposingliteraryworks,thereareagreatnumberofexamplesusingintertextuality.Forinstance,JamesJoyce’sUlysses,JohnSteinbeck’sEastofEden,T.S.Eliot’sTheWasteLand,UmbertoEco’sIINomeDellaRosaandsoon.TakeEliot’sTheWasteLand;LindaHutcheon,afamousscholardoingresearchoftherelationship
    21

    betweenpostmodernismandintertextualityanditspractice,onceremarkedontheintertextualityofTheWasteLand,“WhenEliotrecalledDanteorVirgilinTheWasteLand,onesensedakindofwishfulcalltocontinuitybeneaththefragmentedechoing.Itispreciselythisthatiscontestedinpostmodernparodywhereitisoftenironicdiscontinuitythatisrevealedattheheartofcontinuity,differenceattheheartofsimilarit”(Hutcheon11.
    Aftertheanalysisofthetheoryofintertextualityanditspracticeincommentandcompositionofliteraryworks,thefollowingwillattempttofindouttheintertextualityPossessionbearswithsourcesbothoutsideandinsideit.



    22

    ChapterThree
    IntertextualitywithSourcesoutsidePossession

    IthasbeenmentionedabovethatthenovelPossessionislikeanetfullofintertexualelements:itincorporatesmanydifferentgenres,stylesanddevices:romance,detectivestories,bildungsroman,diaries,lettersandpoetry,inadditiontoitsthird-personnarration.Thefollowingchapterwillbepresentedfromthesetworespects:theintertextualityofjournalentriesbyAsh’swifeandLaMotte’scousinandcorrespondencesbetweenAshandLaMottewithepistolarynovelsofthe18thand19thcentury;thesubversionofRomance,DetectivestoriesandrevisionofBildungsromaninPossession.

    3.1IntertextualityofPossessionintheFormofEpistolaryNovels

    Asatraditionalgenregainingprominenceinthe18thand19thcentury,epistolarynovelshaveitsownadvantagesoverothergenresinadvancingtheplotwithdramaticimmediacyandofferingreadersintimateinsightintocharacter’sthoughtsandfeelingswithrelianceonsubjectivepointofview.InPossession,correspondencesbetweenLaMotteandAsh,andjournalentrieseitherbyAsh’swifeEllenorLaMotte’scousinSabinedeKercoz,formakindofintertextualitywiththeepistolarynovels,whichremindreadersofthecharacteristicsofsuchagenreinpromotingthedevelopmentoftheplotwithimmediacyandintroducinganinsightintocharacter’sinnermind.Inmostcasesinthenovel,oneofthemainmeanstogetconnectedwiththeVictorianstoryisthroughthelensofmoderncharactersreadingthelettersandjournalentriesofthelastcentury,whichissurelyofgreathelpinintroductionandadvancementofthewholeplot.Forexample,themostcruciallettertoananonymouswomanreceiverbyAshintheverybeginningofPossessionopensthewholeresearchandleadstothe
    23

    storyofthelastcentury.Atthesametime,readingthecorrespondencesandthejournalentries,readerarebroughttotheirtimesandseemtobeexperiencingtheirperplexity,excitementandenthusiasm.Abreakthroughismadetoexaminetheinnermindofthecharacters.
    ThefollowingwilldisplaytheintertextualityofthelettersandjournalentriesinPossessionwiththeepistolarynovelsinthe18thand19thcentury,whichisrepresentedinByatt’sgooduseofepistolarynovels’advancingtheplotwithimmediacyandofferinginsighttotheinnermindofcharacters.
    3.1.1EpistolaryNovelsintheLate18thandEarly19thCentury
    Epistolaryfictionhaslongexistedinthewesternliteratureandculture,whichcanatleastdatebacktoancientRomantimes.Horacehadcomposedversesusingepistolarystyles,whichwascalled“verseepistle”andlatermenofletterstendtoimitatehisstyleinversecompositionorletterwriting.Itisakindofforminwhichmostoralloftheplotisadvancedbythelettersorjournalentriesofoneormoreofitscharacters,andwhichmarksthebeginningofthenovelasaliteraryform.
    ThefirsttrueepistolarynovelisLove-LettersbetweenaNoblemanandHisSisterbyAphraBehnwritteninthe17thcentury.However,itisuntilthemid-18thcenturythatepistolarynovelasadistinctgenrefirstgainedprominenceinBritain.In1740,SamuelRichardsonfinishedhisPamela,orVirtueRewarded,whichhaslongbeenregardedasthefirstexampleofmatureepistolarynovelandhasexertedfar-reachinginfluenceonRichardson’scontemporarywritersandthefollowingones.In1748,RichardsonhadhissecondepistolarynovelClarissa,or,TheHistoryofaYoungLadypublished.SoonJean-JacquesRousseauandJohannWolfgangvonGoethepublishedtheirepistolarynovelsrespectively:TheNewHeloiseandTheSorrowsofYoungWerther,whichhelpedtopromotethenewgenreoffictiontoitsboom.Parodiesofnovelsoflettersemergedupinthelate18thcenturyandearly19thcentury.
    Thoughthisformofepistolarynovelfelloutoffavorwiththecomingofthe19th
    24

    century,effortstorevivetheepistolarynovelcontinued,andseveralextremelyoutstandingwritersshowedtheirexcellentskillsintheform.Amongthese,themysteryworksofWilkieCollins,especiallyinTheWomaninWhiteandTheMoonstone,useletters,reports,transcriptionsanddiaryentriestoconveymultipleviewpointsandadvancetheplot.BramStoker’sDraculaisalsoconsideredanepistolarynovelthatisveryeffectiveandcontinuestocapturetheimaginationofmodernaudiences.
    Inthe20thcentury,AliceWalker,thefamousblackwomanwriterdidmuchcredittoepistolarynovelwritinginhermodernepicTheColorPurple.StephenKing’sfirstwell-knownnovelCarriealsocombinesepistolaryelements.WiththepopularityoftheInternet,email,anothervariantofletters,hasbecomepartof“letter”writingsandsuchatrendwillnaturallyandundoubtedlycontinuenowandinthefuture.
    Inepistolarynovels,mostoralloftheplotsareadvancedbythelettersorjournalentriesofoneormoreofitscharacters.Withitsrelianceonsubjectivepointsofview,theepistolarynovelbyitsverynatureoffersintimateinsightintocharacters'thoughtsandfeelingswithoutinterferencefromtheauthor,andadvancestheplotwithdramaticimmediacy.Consequently,anepistolarynovelisnotlackofmonologues,throughwhichtheinteriormindofthecharacter“I”ispresentedtoreadersbasedonthevery“private”natureofletters.Meanwhile,throughthesemonologuesofthecharacter,thepsychologyofthecharacterisclearlyandopenlydescribedandexplored,whichisofgreathelptoanalyzeandunderstandthecharacteristicsofthecharacterandgetthecoreoftheworks.
    Inaddition,immediacyisanothercharacteristicofletterfiction.Thecharacter,orthewriterofthelettersinanepistolarynovel,usuallyputsdownandthenexchangeswiththereceiver(softheletterswhatwashappeningorevenishappening.Theexactfeelingsorreactionsofthewriteroftheletterswouldbefeltbythereceiverasifinaction.Inordertomakeitmorelife-like,authorsofepistolarynovelstendtoadoptjournalentries.Onthisoccasion,readersorreceiver(soflettersarebroughttothelifeofthewriters’dailylifeandexperiencewhatthewriterexperiences.
    25

    Thirdly,thoughthereisnolackofmonologuesinletters,yetsincelettersarewhatrelatestoatleasttwopeople,thewriterandreceiver(s,thereisnoneedtodenythatletterfictionsarenotshortofdialoguesbetweenthewriterandreceiver(s,whichcanbefoundinthoseepistolarynovelssuchasRichardson’sPamelaandClarissa,Goethe’sTheSorrowsofYoungWerther,AliceWalker’sTheColorPurpleandsoon,especiallyWalker’s.AllthecontentsofTheColorPurplearebasedonthecorrespondencesofCeliewithGodandlaterwithheryoungersisterNettie.Justfromthecorrespondencesbetweenthewriterandreceiver(sorthepotentialreceiver(s,readersseemtobebroughttotheveryfrontofthehappenings,learninghoweverythingisadvancedandgoeson.What’smore,sometimestheremayexistabreak-offwhilethewriterofthelettersiswriting,whichwillsurelybringinasuspenseanddrawmorecuriosityofreaders.Asakindofnovel,inordertomaketheplotofthenoveladvancenaturallyandsubsequently,authorsoftheepistolarynovelstakeinmanyotherformsofwritingsuchasdiaryentries,notes,reports,epigraphs,excursusandsoon,whichshowsthecompatibilityofepistolarynovels.Throughdiaryentries,whichcanbearecordofone’smostinnersoul,thewriterofadiaryputsdownwhateverhappensinoraroundhis/herlife.Onthispoint,diaryismoretruthfulandclosetoreality.Thewriterofanepistolarynovelintendstomakeuseofthediarytodisclosethetruthhardtoreachthroughothermeans,whichisquiteessentialinpromotingthedevelopmentoftheplotandmakethenovelaconsequentwhole.
    Allinall,epistolarynovelsenjoyedgreatpopularityinthelaterhalfof18thcenturyandearly19thcentury,usheringinthefirstboomofnovelcompositioninthehistory.

    3.1.2IntertextualityofPossessionwithEpistolaryNovels
    ByattmakesgooduseofepistolarynovelsinherPossession.Firstly,lettersinPossessionbecomeoneoftheimportantmeanstointroduceandpromotethedevelopmentoftheplotwithdramaticimmediacy.
    ByattbeginsherworkwithRoland’sdiscoveryofhandwrittendraftsofaletter
    26

    bytheprestigious(fictionalVictorianpoetRandolphHenryAsh.Thisway,letterwritingisintroducedinthenovel.Inaddition,theletterof“theunachieveddialoguewiththeunidentifiedwoman”(Byatt9causesRoland’sgreatcuriosity:

    “Hadthecorrespondencecontinued?Ifithad,wherewasit,whatjewelsofinformationaboutAsh's'ignored,arcane,deviouslyperspicuousmeanings'mightnotberevealedbyit?Scholarshipmighthavetoreassessallsortsofcertainties.Ontheotherhand,hadthecorrespondenceeverinfactstarted?OrhadAshfinallyflounderedinhisinabilitytoexpresshissenseofurgency?”
    (Byatt10
    Consequently,thetraceofwhathadhappenedbetweenthis19thcenturypoetAshandtheunidentifiedwomanbegins.ThisletterplaystheroleofintroducingthestoryofAshandtheunknownwomanwhoturnsouttobeLaMotteintheend.
    Afteraseriesofresearchesandnon-stoprunningabout,RolandandMaudhaveaccesstotheTurretinSealCourt,whereLaMottespenttheremainderofherlife.InLaMotte’sdolly,alltogethermorethan30letterswrittenfrom1856to1859betweenAshandherselfarefoundout.TheloveaffairofAshandLaMottecomestolight.
    Alltheseseemnotenough.Withthediscoveryofotherletters,suchasthediariesbyLaMotte’scousinSabinedeKercozwhichcoverLaMotte’svisittoBrittanyandexplainsherabsencefrom1859to1860,LaMottetoMrsAshinChapter25,AshtoLaMotteinquestoftheirchildwhichisburntbyEllenAsh,andthemostimportantone,thesealedonetoAshonthedeathbedbyLaMotte,whichisfoundinthetomboftheAshcouple,theyareindispensabletothedevelopmentoftheplot.Forexample,inthecourseoftrailing,afterMaudandRolandarecertainthatAshandLaMottedocorrespondwitheachotherandevenmeet,they,Rolandinparticular,begintodoubtwhethertheytraveltogetheronAsh’snaturalhistoryexpeditiontoNorthYorkshireinJune1859.Withsuchdoubts,theykeepexploring,whichadvancesthedevelopmentofmodernlineandalsotheparallel19thline.However,soontheresearchseemstoreachanimpasse,thatis,whereisLaMotteduringthesecondhalfof1859andthe
    27

    firsthalfof1860?Itisletteragainthathelps.AmodernscholarDrLeMinierfromFrancesendsalettertoLeonora,whichmentionsthat“intheautumnof1859LaMotteappearstohavevisitedherfamilyinFouesnant”(Byatt340.Consequently,RolandandMaudfollowtheaddressoftheletterfromDrLeMinierandtheyaccesstoallthediariesofLaMotte’scousinSabinewhichcoverstheabsenceofLaMottearound1859and1860.Fromthediary,RolandandMaudgettoknowthereisachildbutasthewriterofthediarywroteinherMay8thdiaryinChapter19,“Whereisthechild?Weareallinanagonyofcuriosity,whichshehascleverly,ordesperatelyturnedagainstus,makingitseemakindofsin,prohibitingallnormalsolicitudeandquestioning.Isitliveordead?Boyorgirl?Whatdoesshemeantodo?”(Byatt408.Soitisariddleandnooneseemstoknow.Thesequeriesdrawreaders’attentiontoreadforward,attemptingtofindoutthetruth.ThediscoveryofthesealedletterfromLaMottetoAshinthelastChapterofferstheanswer.Thesecretsareuncoveredandtheresearchworkisdone.
    Inthiscourse,Byattmasterfullyexploitsepistolarynovelsandjournalentriestofulfilltheadvancementoftheplots.Meanwhile,Byattwellembodiesandfollowstheimmediacyofletterswhiledealingwiththe19thcenturystory.TaketheChapter10,theonlychapterconsistingofcorrespondencebetweenAshandLaMotte,forexample.Readingtheirletters,readersseemtobeenjoyingthesoliloquyoftheirownordialoguesofthebothonthestagewiththeirimaginationsincethewritersoflettersusuallyputdownandthenexchangewiththereceiver(softheletterswhatwashappeningorevenishappening.Theexactfeelingsorreactionsofthewriteroftheletterswouldbefeltbythereceiver(sasifitisinaction.Adetailedexample:inthefourthreturninglettertoAshbyLaMotte,“Iamcalled.Icannotwritemore.Imustmakehastetosealthis—whichIfearisaPlaintiveScreed—aConvalescentMuttering—Iamcalledagain---Imustclose.Believemeyoursmosttruly”(Byatt192.LaMotte’shurry,inconvenienceandhelplessnesstocontinuetheletter,allarevividlyconveyedtoAshandreaders,whichmakeAshandreadersoftodayfeelliketheyareexperiencingwhatLaMotteexperiences.
    Secondly,ashasbeenstatedbefore,withitsrelianceonsubjectivepointsofview,
    28

    theepistolarynovelbyitsverynatureoffersintimateinsightintocharacters'thoughtsandfeelingswithoutinterferencefromtheauthor.
    InPossession,Byattdoesofferreadersintimateinsightintocharacters’thoughtsandfeelingswithoutinterferencethroughtheuseoflettersandjournalentries.InoneofLaMotte’sletterstoAshinChapter8,thoughtheletterisclearlyaddressedtoAsh,itismorelikeamonologueofthanadialogue:

    “HereisaRiddle,Sir,anoldRiddle,aneasyRiddle—hardlyworthyourthinking
    about—afragileRiddle,inwhiteandGoldwithlifeinthemiddleofit.Thereisagold,softcushion,whoseglossyoumayonlyparadoxicallyimaginewithyoureyesclosedtight—seeitfeelingly,letitslipthroughyourmind'sfingers…
    AnEgg,Sir,istheanswer,asyouperspicuouslyreadfromthebeginning,anEgg,aperfectO,alivingStone,doorlessandwindowless,whoselifemayslumberontillshebeWaked—orfindshehasWingstospread—whichisnotsohere—ohno—
    AnEggismyanswer.WhatistheRiddle?
    Iammyownriddle.Oh,Sir,youmustnotkindlyseektoameliorateorstealawaymysolitude.Itisathingwewomenaretaughttodread—ohtheterribletower,ohthethicketsroundit—nocompanionableNest—butadonjon.
    Buttheyhaveliedtousyouknow,inthis,asinsomuchelse.TheDonjonmayfrownandthreaten—butitkeepsusverysafe—withinitsconfineswearefreeinawayyou…mySolitudeismyTreasure,thebestthingIhave…”
    (Byatt151
    Readingthesewords,noreadercandisregardthecomplicatedfeelingsandthoughtsofLaMotte.Firstly,readersaresurelyabletogetaclearpictureofthesituationforwomeninthe19thcentury.Mostwomenatthattimearemorelikeanegg,“alivingStone,doorlessandwindowless,whoselifemayslumberontillshebeWaked—orfindshehasWingstospread”.Thoughafteraseriesofsocialchangesinthefirsthalfofthe19thcentury,womenarestillinlowstatusandarenotwidelyacknowledgedandacceptedinsocialcircles.Womenaretaughttotrytomarrywell
    29

    andbefarawayfrom“terribletower”with“thicketsroundit”whichhasnocompanionsbutsolitude.Secondly,LaMotte’sstruggleagainstthemoresisvoiced.Evenifthetowerfullofsolitudeismorelikea“donjon”which“mayfrownandthreaten”,itmakeswomeninitfeelsafeandfreesincetheycanshatterthetraditionimposedonwomen,especiallythespiritualfetters.LaMotteexpresseswhatwomenlongforinVictoriantimes,whichaman“whohavefreedomtorangetheworld”neednotimagine.What’smore,LaMottenotonlylikessuchasolitudewhichwomen“aretaughttodread”,butregardsitas“mytreasure,thebestthingIhave”.Similarexamplesareabundant.ByreadingEllen’sjournals,onecanfindoutherregretforthefadingofherfloweringyears,herdedicationtoherhusbandandherambivalentattitudetowardsLaMotte’slettersandsoon.Throughlettersorjournals,Byattoffersreadersenoughroomtogettolearnthecharactersandtheirmostinnerheart.
    Byattskillfullyexploitsthecharacteristicsofepistolaryanddiarystylesina20thcenturywork,makingreadersfeellikebeingindulgedinthe18thand19thcenturyliteraturewhileappreciatingpossession.

    3.2IntertextualityofPossessionintheFormofRomance,DetectiveandBildungsromanNovels

    Byattnotonlyblends18thand19thepistolarynovelintoherPossession,butalsoparodiesseveraldifferentgenressuchasromance,detectiveandbildungsromannovelsinhernovel,whichbecomesatypicalexampleofintegratingpopularliteratureintotraditionalliteraryworks.
    AccordingtoKristeva,intertextualityisacomplicatedprocessofdevelopingtheusefulanddiscardingtheuseless,ora“negativite”processofdestroyingthepreviousandcreatingnewtexts.InplottingthetwolovestoriesofLaMottewithAshandMaudwithRoland,Byattsubvertsthetraditionalromancenovelandrecreatesherownversionofromances,whiledealingwiththeloveaffairsbetweenAshandLaMotte,thoughByattmakesreadersfeellikereadingadetectivenovel,yetitisdifferentfrom
    30

    thetraditionaldetectivenovels.Besides,thesearchofthesecretsofAshandLaMotteformodernscholarsMaudandRolandisalsoaspiritualquestforthemselves,throughwhichbothofthemrealizetheirself-development;fromthispoint,thenovelcanbecalledabildungsroman.However,obviouslyByattdoesn’tcompletelyfollowthepatternofabildungsroman.Inthefollowing,muchspacewillbedevotedtoelaboratinghowBayttparodiesthesethreegenresinherownversion.
    3.2.1TheSubversionofRomanceNovel
    Generally,romanceorchivalricromance,asaliterarygenreofhighculture,isastyleofheroicproseandversenarrativethatwaspopularinthearistocraticcirclesofHighMedievalandEarlyModernEurope.Romancesreworkedlegends,fairytales,andhistorytosuittastes.Theywereusuallyfantasticstoriesaboutthemarvelousadventuresofachivalrous,heroicknighterrant,ofsuper-humanability,who,abidingchivalry'sstrictcodesofhonoranddemeanor,goesonaquestandfightsanddefeatsmonstersandgiants,therebywinningfavorwithalady.
    Uptillnow,romanceshavegonethroughaseriesofchangesintermsofitsconnotativemeanings.ItmayrefertoakindoffantasticfictionsinthemodeofromancesuchasSirThomasMalory’sLeMorteDarthuorGothicfictionswithelementsofromanticseductionanddesiremingledwithhorroranddreadsuchasBramStoker’sDraculawhilemodernusageoftheterm"romance"usuallyreferstotheromancenovel,whichfocusesontherelationshipandromanticlovebetweentwopeopleandusuallyhaveanemotionallyhappyending.Amongtheseconnotations,romanticloveismoredrawnonwhetherinpopularliteratureortraditionalliteraryworksandasusualtheyfollowsuchatrend:ahandsomeyoungmanfallsinlovewithabeautifulgirlandeventuallytheygetmarriedhappily.Consequentlyonlywiththesetwoelements—alovestorytakingplacebetweentwoloversandahappyendingofmarriage—canastorymakearomance.
    InPossession,Byattdistinctlyshowstheintertextualityofherworkwithromanceinseveralaspects.Shefirstlyclaimssucharelationshipthroughthesubtitle
    31

    ofthenovel—aromance,whichnodoubtinvitesreaderstoapproachthebookasanexampleofitsgenre,romance.Theninthepreface,ByattquotespartsofNathanielHawthorne’sprefacetoTheHouseofSevenGables,inwhichHawthornewrites:

    “WhenawritercallshisworkaRomance,itneedhardlybeobservedthathewishestoclaimacertainlatitude,bothastoitsfashionandmaterial,whichhewouldnothavefelthimselfentitledtoassume,hadheprofessedtobewritingaNovel.Thelatterformofcompositionispresumedtoaimataveryminutefidelity,notmerelytothepossible,buttotheprobableandordinarycourseofman'sexperience.Theformer—whileasaworkofart,itmustrigidlysubjectitselftolaws,andwhileitsinsunpardonablysofarasitmayswerveasidefromthetruthofthehumanheart—hasfairlyarighttopresentthattruthundercircumstances,toagreatextent,ofthewriter'sownchoosingorcreation...”
    (Byattix

    ThroughthequotationofHawthorne’spreface,ByattseemstosuggestthatlikeHawthornehimself,shewouldliketo“presentthetruth”inthefashionofaromancewithhergreatimaginationandcreationunderthecircumstancesofherownchoicesofmaterials.
    Asaresult,inPossession,Byattparallelstwolinesoflovestories:thelovebetweenAshandLaMotteinVictoriantimesandbetweentwomodernscholars—RolandandMaud.However,theydon’tcompletelyfollowtheelementsofaromance.
    IntheloveaffairofAshandLaMotte,thetwogottoknoweachotheratCrabbRobinson’sbreakfastpartyinJune1858.WhetherfromthefirsttwodraftsbyAshwhichturnsouttobedeliveredtoLaMotte,“SinceourextraordinaryconversationIhavethoughtofnothingelse”(Byatt7,“SinceourpleasantandunexpectedconversationIhavethoughtoflittleelse.Isthereanywayinwhichitcanberesumed,moreprivatelyandatmoreleisure?”(Byatt8orfromthefirstletterfoundinSealCourttoLaMotte,“ItwasagreatpleasuretotalktoyouatdearCrabb'sbreakfastparty.Yourperceptionandwisdomstoodoutthroughthebabbleofundergraduatewit,
    32

    andevensurpassedourhost'saccountofthefindingofWieland'sbust.MayIhopethatyoutooenjoyedourtalk—andmayIhavethepleasureofcallingonyou?”(Byatt96,itisquiteobviousthatAshfallsinlovewithLaMotteatfirstsight.HowaboutLaMotte?InheranswertoAsh’sfirstletter,LaMottewrites,“…asforthewityoumayhaveperceivedinmewhenwemet,yousaw,youmusthaveseen,onlytheglimmeringsandglisterofyourownbrilliancerefractedfromthelumpensurfaceofadeadMoon…”(Byatt97,whichexpressesLaMotte’sadmirationforAsh’stalents;furthermore,shedoesn’trefuseAsh’srequestofcorresponding,“butifyoucaretowriteagain,youshallhaveasoberessayontheEverlastingNay,orSchleiermacher'sVeilofIllusion,ortheMilkofParadise,orWhatyouWill”(Byatt98.
    Inconsequence,lettersfullofvehementfeelingsandconcerninglife,love,artsandpoetsaredeliveredtoeachother,whichhelppromotetheirownpoemcompositionandtheirfriendship.Onthebasisofmutualtopicsandappreciationofeachother,theirsecretlovecomestoasurprisingturn:bothofthemgooutforajourney,morelikeashort-termhoneymoonsincetheyactashusbandandwife,“‘Iwanttobewithyou,’shesaid.‘Itookavaststep.Ifitistaken,itistaken.Iamquitehappytobecalledyourwife,whereveryouchoose,forthistime.ThatiswhatIhadunderstoodI—we—haddecided’”(Byatt300.Tillnow,thelovebetweenAshandLaMottefollowsthefashionofromance:themanfallsinlovewithawomanandhashadthehandofthewoman.
    However,differentfromthehappyendingwithamarriage,inPossession,thoughAshandLaMottegotunitedbodyandsoul,theywerenotmarried.What’sworse,LaMottecutofftheirlinkeversincetheirreturnfromthejourneytoNorthYorkshire.SoonshepaidavisittoherrelativeRaouldeKercozinBrittanyforseekingshelter.Nevertheless,LaMottedidnotbearthebabyinBrittany;insteadsheleftherrelativesandonlyaftershedeliveredthechilddidshereturntothefamily.Themomentshecameback:

    “Thissecondsightofher—arevenantinbroadday—wasmoreterriblystrangethanherfirstcominginthenightandthestorm.Sheisthinandfrail,andshehaspulledinherclothes
    33

    withagreatheavyleatherbelt.Sheisaswhiteasbone,andallherbonesseemtohavedispossessedherflesh,sheisallsharpedgesandknobs,asthoughtheskeletonweretryingtogetout.Andshehascutoffherhair.Thatis,allthelittlecurlsandcoilsaregone—shehasakindofcapofdullpalespikes,likedeadstraw.Andhereyeslookpaleanddeadoutofdeephollows”
    (Byatt408-09

    SuchadescriptionshowshowmuchhardshipLaMottehadgonethroughtohavethebaby.Afterthat,LaMottemovedtolivetogetherwithhersisterSophieandspenttherestofherlonelylifethere.Asisdiscoveredlater,Sophie’sdaughter,actuallythedaughterofLaMotteandAsh’s,hasalwaysbeenindisfavorofherauntLaMotteandregardsherasweird.Duringallthoseyears,AshhadbeentryingtofindoutthewhereaboutsofLaMotteandwhathadhappenedtotheirchild,butalltheattemptsseemedtoturnupnothing.EventhelastlettertellingeverytruthbyLaMottewhenhewasdying,didnotarriveathim.HereinPossession,thehappyendingissubstitutedforatragedy,tosomedegree.
    RolandandMaud’slovestorydoesn’twhollygowiththefashionofRomanceeither.InidentificationoftheunknownwomanAshaddressesto,RolandgoestoLincolntoconsultMaudaboutLaMotte.Byatt’sdescriptionofMaudattheirfirstmeetsubvertstheimagesofthefemaleandmaleinaromance.“Shewastall,tallenoughtomeetFergusWolff’seyesonthelevel,muchtallerthanRoland”and“Shehadaclean,milkyskin,unpaintedlips,clear-cutfeatures,largelycomposed”(Byatt44.What’smore,“Shesmelledofsomethingfernyandsharp.Rolanddidnotlikehervoice”(Ibid.Inatraditionalromance,thefemaleisusuallydescribedascute,ladylikeandsensitivewhilethemaleisahandsomeandmusculartoughman.However,inByatt’slovestory,Maud,thefemaleismuchtallerthanRolandandnotsensitive,instead,quiteindifferentandformidablebutRolandisvery“meek”and“unremarkable”.Theydon’tshowmuchinterestineachotherattheverybeginningandRolandevendislikeshervoice.
    IntheirsearchofthepossiblerelationshipbetweenAshandLaMotte,theygetto
    34

    knoweachotherbetterandfromthelinesitcanbereadthatbothofthembegintohavefeelingsforeachother,whichisclearlyimpliedintheirbathroomaccidentinChapter8.Nevertheless,thoughbothofthemfeelthe“electricshot”,theyattempttostifletheirfeelings.OnRoland’soccasion,hehasgotagirlfriend,Valthoughtheyseemnottohavetrueloveforeachotherbutsex;forMaud,thecaseisquitedifferent.AfterherfirstloveaffairwithFergus,Maudbeginstowrapherselfbodyandsoulandkeepadistancefrommales.Shedoesn’tbelievethereistrueloveintheirgenerationandtimesexceptsexuality.Therefore,evenwhenMaudandRolandgoouttohavetheirjourney,followingtheroutesofAshandLaMotteandvisitingBrittanywhereLaMotteseekssanctuary,theyliveinseparateroomsandthemostpassionatewaytoexpresstheirloveistouchinghandsandRoland“‘…wouldnever—blurtheedgesmessily—’”(Byatt550.Onthispoint,thelovebetweenMaudandRolandisnotliketheflamingpassionsdescribedinatraditionalromance.Onthecontrary,theirloveislikeatricklingbrook,clearandslowyetfar-reaching.Intheend,“Wecanthinkofaway—amodernway—Amsterdamisnotfar—”(Ibid,bothofthemagreetoworkoutamodernlovebetweenthem,warmingeachother’scoldbody.
    Indepictingtheirlove,withthesubversionofromanticloveattheverybeginningsincebothMaudandRolandhavenoromanticlovebutrepressedfeelingsforeachother,Byattendowstheirlovewitharomanticending,happyandsatisfying.
    Throughthesubversionofromanceinthesetwolovestories,Byattlinksthepastwiththepresent,offeringreadersapointofviewtopenetratethesetwodifferenttimesandsatirizingthelackofloveinmoderntimes.

    3.2.2TheSubversionofDetectiveFiction
    Detectivefictionisabranchofcrimefictioninwhichadetectiveordetectives,eitherprofessionaloramateur,investigatesacrime,moreoftenamurderoccurringrecentlyandusuallyinaremoteorbleakplace.Inadetectivefiction,theinvestigator,
    35

    whohassomesourceofincomeotherthandetectiveworkandsomeundesirableeccentricitiesorstrikingcharacteristics,issupposedtosolvecasesbyinferenceandanalysisofalltheattainableclues.Itismoreakindofstylizedandformulaicliterature,inwhich,thestructure,plot,charactersandeventhesettingsusuallyfollowcertainpatterns.Forexample,insettings,usuallyamurderoracrimetakesplaceinacountryhouse,ontrainsorcruiseshipssuchasAgathaChristie’sDeathontheNileandMurderOntheOrientExpressorinsomehollowvalleysthoughattimesthestorymaybesetinsomeotherbackdropsrelatedtowriter’spersonalexperiencessuchasWillCrofts’railwaysandNgaioMarsh’stheaters,whilethemostadoptedruleisTheTenCommandmentssetoutin1929byRonaldA.Knox:“Adetectivestorymusthaveasitsmaininteresttheunravelingofamystery;amysterywhoseelementsareclearlypresentedtothereaderatanearlystageintheproceedings,andwhosenatureissuchastoarousecuriosity,acuriositywhichisgratifiedattheend”(http://www.classiccrimefiction.com/goldenage.htm.
    Asthemostpopularliteraryform,detectivefictionoffersreadersmultifactoraesthetics—psychological,emotionalandlogicalparticipationwhilethedetective(ssolve(sthecaseinthefiction,andbenefitsreaders’logicalityandjudgment.Therefore,detectivefiction,thoughoutofitsgoldenage,isverypopularwithreaders,whichAgathaChristie’scaseisfullproofof.
    IndealingwiththeloveaffairofAshandLaMotte,Byattadoptsthispopularformofdetectivefiction.ShebeginsPossessionwithmodernscholarRoland’sdiscoveryofhandwrittendraftsbyAshtoanunknownwomanwhileRolandgoestoLondonLibrarysearchingforAsh’sowncopyofVico’sPrincipidiunaScienzaNuova.RolandiscuriousabouttheunidentifiedwomanandthepossiblerelationshipbetweenthewomanandAsh,whichintroducesthemaininterestofadetectivefiction—theunravelingofamystery.WhenhefindsoutitmaybetheVictorianpoetessIsidoreLaMottethatAshaddressesto,elementsofamysteryarepresentedagainanditdrawsgreatercuriosity.RolandissuggestedgoingtoDrMaudBailyinLincolnUniversityforhelp,whoisoneofthetwoLaMottespecialists.A“case”ofthepossiblerelationshiporloveaffairbetweenAshandLaMotteinthe19thcenturyis
    36

    underwayby“detectives”—twomodernscholarsRolandandMaud.Inordertoworkoutthemystery,thetwoscholarsmakegooduseofanyattainableclues:readingtheworksofthetwopoetsofthe19thcentury,journalentries,privatecorrespondencesandautobiographies,visitingtheplaceswherethetwopoetsspenttheirlife,retracingAsh’sinlandwalksandeventryingtofindoutthelastletterbyLaMottetoAshexcavatedfromthetomboftheAshes.Throughtheseresearches,thetruthisgraduallyunraveledandintheenditturnsoutthatMaudisthedescendantofbothAshandLaMotte.Then,thecuriosityisgratified.
    ButactuallyByatt’streatmentisasubversionofdetectivefictioninsteadoffollowingcompletelythepatternsofadetectivefiction.Ashasbeenstatedinthedefinitionofdetectivefictionabove,acrimeormoreoftenamurder,isthefocusofadetectivefiction,whichusuallytakesplacerecentlyandissetincertainbackdropssuchasaremoteandbleakcountryhouse,ontrainsorcruiseshipsorinsomehollowvalleys.Besides,thedetectivesinvolvedusuallyhavesomeundesirableeccentricitiesorstrikingcharacteristicsandareinterestedinandgoodatcasesolving,eitherprofessionaloramateurdetectives.InPossession,theoccasionisdifferent.Thefocusisnotacrimeoramurderbutthepossibleloveaffairbetweentwopoetsofthelastcentury;itisamysteryoflastcenturyinsteadofmoderntimes,nottospeakofrecently.Themysterydoesn’ttakeplaceinthesettingswell-establishedintraditionaldetectivefictions;instead,ittakesplaceinwhereverthetwopoetssetfoot.Thetwodetectives,MaudandRolandaretwomodernscholarswhorespectivelyspecializeinLaMotteandAshinsteadofsolvingcasesofmurdersorotherformsofcrimes.Intheirsearchforthetruth,theydomoreon-sitevisitingthananalysisandinference.Inaddition,thepurposeofthesearchisnottounmaskthevillain,whohasbeenfoundouttobeAshandLaMotteinPossession,butmorethantounravelthesecretbetweenthem.Attheendofthestory,notonlythesecretbetweenAshandLaMotteandMaud’soriginarebroughttolight,butalsothefaceofscholarshipwillbechanged.What’smore,ByattfurthersubvertsthetraditionaldetectivefictionthroughMaud’svoice.“Ineveryage,theremustbetruthspeoplecan'tfight—whetherornottheywantto,whetherornottheywillgoonbeingtruthsinthefuture”(Byatt276,which
    37

    goesagainsttheruleforadetectivefictionthatcuriosityisgratifiedintheendandtruthsareunraveled.InthePostscript1868,ByatttellsreadersthatalltheseekersofthesecretsbetweenAshandLaMotte,thetwodetectivesincluded,don’tknowthatAshknewhehadadaughterandhadmether.
    AlltheseofferreadersByatt’sversionofdetectivefictionadoptedinPossession.Inappreciatingherwork,readerscannotonlyexperiencethepleasureofthepopularliteraryformsofdetectivefiction,butalsoenjoymanyaspectsofByatt’sownuncertaintyofpostmodernism,andwhatistoldinthePostscriptin1868isanexample.Inthepostscript,readersaretoldthatAshactuallyknowshehasadaughterwithLaMottebutitisnotwithintheknowledgeofthemoderndetectivessuchasRolandandMaud.Throughsubvertingdetectivestories,Byattattemptstoindicatetheuncertaintyofdetectivestoriesinpostmodernism.

    3.2.3TheRevisionofBildungsroman
    Abildungsromanisacoming-of-agekindofnovel.ItaroseduringtheGermanEnlightenment,inwhich,theauthorpresentsthepsychological,moralandsocialshapingofthepersonalityofausually-youngmaincharacter,theprotagonist.ThetermwascoinedbyJohannCarlSimonMorgenstern.Thebildungsromanusuallytakesthefollowingcourse:firsttheprotagonistgrowsfromchildtoadultandthentheprotagonisthasareasontoembarkuponhisorherjourney.Alossorsomediscontentmust,atanearlystage,jarhimorherawayfromthehomeorfamilysetting.Usuallytheprocessofmaturationislong,arduousandgradual,involvingrepeatedclashesbetweentheprotagonist'sneedsanddesiresandtheviewsandjudgmentsenforcedbyanunbendingsocialorder.Eventually,thespiritandvaluesofthesocialorderbecomemanifestedintheprotagonist,whoisultimatelyincorporatedintothesociety.Thenovelendswiththeprotagonist'sassessmentofhimselforherself,anewplaceinthatsociety.
    38

    Tosomedegree,PossessionisabildungsromanwhichcoversthegrowthofbothMaudandRolandinsearchingforself-identity.
    Inthenovel,themaincharactersRolandandMaudareskepticaloftheirownidentities.WhenByattintendstointroducetheprotagonistRolandtoreaders,AshisfirstintroducedandthenRoland’ssupervisorBlackadder,whoinevitablybringsinthenameCropper,thetworivalsinacademiaonAsh.OnlyafteralltheseintroductionsdoesRolandcomeonthestage.InthefollowinginformationaboutRoland,muchofwhichispresentedthroughhisrelationwithhisgirlfriendVal.Obviously,Rolandseemstolosehimselfinthecomplicatednetworkofrelationshipswithothersandonlyintermsofotherscanheidentifyhimself.Thiscanalsobefoundoutinanotherdescriptionofhim:

    “Rolandhadlearnedtoseehimself,theoretically,asacrossing-placeforanumberofsystems,alllooselyconnected.Hehadbeentrainedtoseehisideaofhis"selfasanillusion,tobereplacedbyadiscontinuousmachineryandelectricalmessage-networkofvariousdesires,ideologicalbeliefsandresponses,language-formsandhormonesandpheromones”
    (Byatt459

    Fromhisrecollection,ByattgetsreaderstoknowamanwhoispushedforwardbyparentsinsteadofmakingchoicesofhisowninthechildhoodandlaterbyhisgirlfriendValwheninuniversityfromtheageof18.ThoughheisfascinatedwithAshandispleasedpersonallyandsecretlythatAshhasachievedsomuchinhiswholepeaceableandunruffledlife,inAshFactory,Rolandisnothingbutapart-timeemployee.TheatmosphereoftheAshFactoryismorelikethatintheInfernoandhissupervisorisadiscouragingperson.AllthesemakesRolandquitedepressedanddiscontentedwithhimself:

    “Hethoughtofhimselfasalatecomer.Hehadarrivedtoolateforthingsthatwerestillintheairbutvanished…Hehaddonewhatwashopedofhim,always,hadfourA'satALevel,aFirst,aPhD.Hewasnowessentiallyunemployed,scrapingalivingonpart-time
    39

    tutoring,dogsbodyingforBlackadderandsomerestaurantdishwashing.Intheexpansive1960shewouldhaveadvancedrapidlyandinvoluntarily,butnowhesawhimselfasafailureandfeltvaguelyresponsibleforthis.”
    (Byatt13-4

    Maudsharessimilarsituation.Sheisindifferentandevenhostiletotheworld,whereshecould“donothingwitheaseandgraceexceptworkalone,insidethesewallsandcurtains,herbrightsafebox”(Byatt151.Maudwrapsherselfinherownworldbodyandsoul,likeLaMotte’sunbrokenegg,anddoesn’tbelieveinloveatall.Sheevenquestionsherselfwhosheis.
    UnderthecreationofByatt,boththeprotagonistsRolandandMaudseemtogetlostinthesocietywithviewsandjudgmentsenforcedbyunbendingsocialorders.ForRoland,theatmosphereintheAshFactory,hissupervisorMrBlackadder,hisgirlfriendVal,hishavingnocareerandlifeinmess,alltheseseemtomakehimsuffocatedwhileMaud,livinginaman-dominatedworldandlosingfaithinlove,hastokeepherdefencesuptoavoidanypossibledisturbanceandhurt.Bothareinneedofembarkingonajourney,aquestandanadventure.Ash’sletteroffersone.
    Andtheyareonajourneyoffindingthemselves,aquestandadventureforunearthingthetruth.InChapter9,“TheThreshold”,theChildegaveupbothsweetladiesofGoldandSilver,therepresentativeofbothwealthandself-fulfillment,butchosetheLeadladywhotookhimtoarealmhehadneverseenordreamedof.ChildedesiredtochoosetheSilverLady,“forshemadehimseeinhismind'seyeaclosedcasementinahighturret,andaprivatecurtainedbedwherehewouldbemosthimself”(Byatt170,however,heintheendpreferredthethirdoneamongthethreeladies,becausehiscautionkepthimandhiscuriosityhadnotbeensatisfied.LikeChilde,ontheirjourneyoffindingoutthetruth,RolandandMaudbypasswealthandself-fulfillment.Thatistosay,insteadofjustpossessingthingsastheydidatthebeginning,theymoveforwardandcontinuetheirquest,whicheventuallynotonlysatisfiestheircuriosityandkeepthemhonorablescholarsbydistinguishingthemfromCropperandLeonora,theonesByattseemstodespiseforgettingliterarymaterialsby
    40

    anymeans,butalsothegradualmaturationofbothprotagonistsRolandandMaud.IntracingthesecretofAshandLaMotte,bothgettoknowbetterabouttheirancestors.ForRoland,aftersuchaperiod’spursuitwithMaud,heisledtotherealcourse.WhenhereturnstohisdampanddingyLondonflatwithagardenforbiddentohaveaccesstobyhislandladyinthepastbutaccessiblenow,hethinksaboutAsh.HisfascinationwithAshleadshimtofindthedraftsandletters,thepursuitoflettersdistanceshimfromAshsincesuchapursuitalmostmakeshimnodifferencefromCropper,a“vulture”.Butfortunately,afterallthese,readingandre-readingAsh’sTheGoldenApple,“Hesawthetree,thefruit,thefountain,thewoman,thegrass,theserpent,singleandmultifariousinform.…Ashhadstartedhimonthisquestandhehadfoundthecluehehadstartedwith,andallwascastoff,theletter,theletters,Vico,theapples,hislist”(Byatt512.Obviously,RolandisreadyforbecomingapoetandAshgiveshimclue.JustbeforehefindsdefinitelyheisgoingtofollowAshtobeapoet,hegetsthreeoffersfromHongkong,BarcelonaandAmsterdam.
    Withthese,Rolandreacheshismaturation:findingouthisidentityandhisplaceinsociety,adiscipleofAshasapoetandawell-acceptedAshscholar,breakingawayfromhissupervisorandhisgirlfriendwithhisownfreedom.ButByattseemsnotsatisfiedwithRoland’smaturationandthereisonemore:hislovewithMaud.
    ForMaud,whohasnofaithinloveandalwayskeepsherselffencedup,abigstepistakenbyfallinginlovewithRoland.Maud’sancestressLaMotte,oncefiguringherselfastheLadyofShalottwhochoseherjourneydeathwardsatthesongofknightLancelot,isanimageofShalotttomostextent,whofallsinlovewithAshandispossessedandthenneverreleasesanyworksofgreattalent.This,plusherownexperiencewithFurgusWolff,makesher“isolated”fromothers.AfterthequestandadventurewithRoland,shegetstoknowbetteraboutLaMotteandtheyfallinlovewitheachother.Fromthispoint,Maudcomestohermaturationtoo.
    However,theirloveisarevisedone,whichdoesn’tfollowtheusualpatternforaloverelationship.Basedonherancestor’slove,Maud,thoughnolongerstiflingherloveforRoland,stillinsistsonherautonomyandself-possession,whichRolandiswillingtoletMaudembrace:
    41


    “‘Fergusisadevourer.Ihaven’tgotmuchtooffer.ButIcouldletyoube,Icould—’‘InHongkong,BarcelonaandAmsterdam?’
    ‘Itcanbequitecunning,’saidRoland.‘Wecouldthinkofaway—amodernway—Amsterdamisn’tfar—’”
    (Byatt550
    Inthisway,Byattstepbystepbringsherprotagoniststomaturationafteraseriesofadventureandquest,bothfindingthemselvesandtheirlove,especiallyforMaud,Rolandhisplaceandnewassessofhimself.However,throughanewpatternofloveinsteadofoneenforcedbysocialorder,ByattseemstoindicateherversionofBildungsroman.
    Throughtheintertextulaityofpossessionwiththeepistolarynovelsofthe18th
    and19thcentury,whichallowsreaders’goingthroughthejournalsentriesandlettersofthetimes,experiencingthefeelingsofLaMotte,Ash,EllenandSabinedeKercozandpryingintotheirinnermindfromtheirsubjectivepointsofview;withthreedifferentgenresofRomance,DetectivestoriesandBildungsroman,bysubvertingorrevisingthesegenres,Byattcreatesherversionofthemundercertaincontexts,betterservingherdepictionofcharactersandthethemeofhernovel.
    Asawhole,Byattmakesagooduseofherextensiveknowledgeofferingthereadershipanetworkofintertextualitywithothersources,kindofmacrointertextualphenomenagenerallyacknowledgedbytheoristsandespeciallyadvocatedbyKristeva,RolandBarthesandJonathanCullerandsoon.Asamatteroffact,besidesintertextualitywithforeignsourcesinPossession,thereisanotherkindofintertextuality—self-referencewithinthefictionorrepetitionadvocatedbyHillisMiller,whichisoneofimportantfeaturesofthenovel.ChapterFourwillfocusontheself-referenceorrepetition.

    42

    免费下载 Word文档免费下载： AS拜厄特《占有》中的互文性解读

    TOP热门搜索

    相关推荐：

    党建讲座材料

    • ￥29.8

      ￥45 每天只需1.0元
      1个月 推荐

    • ￥9.9

      ￥15
      1天

    • ￥59.8

      ￥90
      3个月

    选择支付方式

    • 微信付款
    会员须知 联系在线客服 登录账号
    郑重提醒：支付后，系统自动为您完成注册

    请使用微信扫码支付(元)

    订单号：
    支付后，系统自动为您完成注册
    遇到问题请联系 在线客服

    常用手机号：
    用于找回密码
    图片验证码：
    看不清？点击更换
    短信验证码：
    新密码：
     
    绑定后可用手机号登录
    请不要关闭本页面，支付完成后请点击【支付完成】按钮
    遇到问题请联系 在线客服

    侵权投诉  © 2013-2019 http://www.tcm999.cn   站点地图 |  手机版

    本站文档均来自互联网及网友上传分享，本站只负责收集和整理，有任何问题可通过上访投诉通道进行反馈