Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2003 20:04:42 +0100 (BST)
From: =?iso-8859-1?q?schizoreno=20little?= <schizoanalysishere-AT-yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: Re: dear one (or the mystery of eldorra)


article argues that studies of fictional dialogue have hitherto neglected the specific dynamics of multiparty talk. I will contend that this neglect contributes to the perpetuation of an "ideal" of conversation that allows no space for either the frustrations and inequalities of such encounters or the unique pleasures they may bring to the reader. I urge the importance of distinguishing between group talk, in which there is some element of cohesion and shared goals, and multiparty talk, in which the representation foregrounds fragmentation and explores the often subtle power games played by the participants. Focusing on a scene from Evelyn Waugh's Black Mischief (1986 [1932]), I argue that Waugh is sensitive to the dynamics of multiparty talk while orchestrating the representation for comic effect. I propose that analyzing such scenes of multiparty talk must make us reassess not only how we theorize fictional dialogue, but how far our models of everyday speech serve to privilege and
 universalize certain conversational practices and mechanisms based almost exclusively on the duologue. Multiparty Talk: Some Preliminaries 
The study of literary representations of speech has been largely preoccupied with what Andrew Kennedy (1983) has called the "duologue of personal encounter." This has meant that little attention has been given to [End Page 657] the specific challenges and techniques involved in attempting to represent groups of people interacting with one another. Where such scenes are discussed at all, literary critics have tended to make do with general comments about their effectiveness or their realism. For example, in his study of Evelyn Waugh, Frederick Stopp (1958: 181) makes the claim that group talk is Waugh's forte but offers no analysis or even examples of the technique. As we shall see, some insights have been offered by stylisticians concerned to examine the ways in which novelists experiment with the dynamics of group talk. But the tendency has been to evaluate the naturalism of the depiction rather than explore the wider implications of such scenes for our understanding of the
 representation of speech in the novel. Instead of subsuming all forms of talk under the generalized categories of "direct speech" or "dialogue" in this way, we need to examine how far the privileging of certain organizational and polite norms, almost exclusively based on the duologue, comes to make them seem inevitable and "natural." 
It has to be allowed that duologues are much more common in the novel than representations of speech involving three or more parties. This is especially true of direct forms of representation, where narrative framing, for example speech tags, is at a minimum. With the duologue, as long as speakers are identified at the outset, we can usually work out who is saying what by the sequencing of the utterances, but with multiparty talk, this is much more difficult and can result in confusion. However, my research (Thomas 1995) has shown that the comic novel of the 1920s and 1930s provides a rich source of experimentation with multiparty talk, perhaps because the reader is more prepared to put up with seeming chaos and confusion, since so much of the humor derives from misunderstandings. Another reason is that we may be more concerned with the characters as an ensemble, rather than empathizing with specific individuals, and are prepared to laugh at everyone in turn. In particular, I will be
 arguing that Evelyn Waugh goes some way toward capturing the complex dynamics of multiparty talk but also displays considerable artistry in the way in which he shapes and molds that talk to comic effect. 
Another reason for the concentration on "duologues of personal encounter" is that they may appear to be more fruitful sources of highly charged and intense interactions, especially where the focus is on a verbal duel or on the dynamics of an interpersonal relationship. As I shall argue later, it is possible for scenes of group interaction to offer a similar kind of intensity, for example, where participants debate with one another in a cohesive exchange. However, I will use the term multiparty talk (in preference to group talk) to allow for the sense of fragmentation and chaos that [End Page 658] such representations may provide. 1 With multiparty talk, the attention of the reader may shift from person to person, so that the movement is more spatial than linear, as we wander among topics and speakers rather than follow a specific thread of talk toward some kind of goal or outcome. In her study of dramatic dialogue, Vimala Herman (1995: 150) found that this has implications for our
 understanding not just of literary dialogue but of everyday conversation, as we need to allow for the possibility that "interactions need not develop into anything. They need not have a linear, developmental path, a teleology, or result in outcomes of any kind." 2 Thus it seems that focusing on multiparty talk necessarily involves reevaluating much that we have come to take for granted about orderliness and cooperation in conversation. 3 


schizoreno little <schizoanalysishere-AT-yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

REGINALD HARRIS wrote:where we come from?

we need you to care for us now, girl

"what?" "what?"

we have the hands of sharecropping sons

big, dark, rough appendages

that have not forgotten the cotton pickin'

from cant-see-to-cant-see

harden hands 

having not known a gentler way

bust watermelons open

for the sweetness at their center...




the struggle continues 
"in the belly..." 
reggie 









------------------------------------------
Add photos to your messages with 
------------------------------------------
MSN 8. 
------------------------------------------
Get 2 months FREE*.
------------------------------------------


--- StripMime Warning -- MIME attachments removed --- 
This message may have contained attachments which were removed.

Sorry, we do not allow attachments on this list.

--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- 
text/html (html body -- converted)
---


--- from list postcolonial-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---




---------------------------------
Yahoo! Plus - For a better Internet experience


--- StripMime Warning -- MIME attachments removed --- 
This message may have contained attachments which were removed.

Sorry, we do not allow attachments on this list.

--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- 
multipart/alternative
text/plain (text body -- kept)
text/html
---




---------------------------------
Yahoo! Plus - For a better Internet experience


--- StripMime Warning --  MIME attachments removed --- 
This message may have contained attachments which were removed.

Sorry, we do not allow attachments on this list.

--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- 
multipart/alternative
  text/plain (text body -- kept)
  text/html
---