| For Mikhail Bakhtin, the novel as a genre is as “yet | | | | for ‘languages’ and for the epochs of language, |
| uncompleted” and “continues to develop” (3) | | | | for the various Greek literary dialects. . . but creative |
| and that is why it is hard to clearly explain its generic | | | | consciousness was realized in closed, pure |
| characteristics. Bakhtin’s this essay/book chapter | | | | languages” (12). This could be very easily compared |
| aims to provide a methodology of the novel in | | | | to high Arabic literature: even though Arabic has |
| comparison with the “completed” and finished | | | | several regional and class-based dialects, most |
| genre of the epic. | | | | traditional Arabic language is still written in the classical |
| While discussing the complexities of a theory of the | | | | Arabic, as it is considered the only suitable language |
| novel, Bakhtin also makes the following, now slightly | | | | for high literature. |
| dated, claim: | | | | The rise of polyglossia is linked directly to the rise of a |
| Of all the major genres only the novel is younger than | | | | polyglot world, the material conditions of contemporary |
| writing and the book: it alone is organically receptive to | | | | time that, as we have already learned, inform the |
| new forms of mute perception, that is, to reading. But | | | | novelistic mode of writing. Thus, “the new cultural |
| of critical importance here is the fact that the novel | | | | and creative consciousness lives in an actively polyglot |
| has no canon of its own. . . . only individual examples of | | | | world” (12) and as the languages compete with |
| the novel are historically active, not a generic canon as | | | | each other the “period of national languages, |
| such. (3) | | | | coexisting but closed and deaf to each other, comes |
| Obviously, by now the novel does have a certain | | | | to an end” (12). All this, according to Bakhtin sets |
| canon, but it still is the only genre that continues to | | | | ” “into motion a process of active, mutual |
| develop and its consumption is still primarily related to | | | | cause-and-effect and interillumination” (my emph. |
| the act of reading. Despite its late arrival and | | | | 12). Thus, in this polyglot world new “relationships |
| provisional generic status, Bakhtin asserts, the novel | | | | are established between language and its object (that |
| also affects and causes a novelization of other | | | | is, the real world). It is this relationship between |
| genres. In way, then, “parodic stylizations of | | | | language and the real world that has serious |
| canonical genres and styles occupy an essential place | | | | consequences for already established and completed |
| in the novel” (6). Here is how Bkhatin recounts the | | | | genres as they were formed “during the eras of |
| way the novel impacts the other “completed” | | | | closed and deaf monoglossia” (12). This changed |
| and canonized genres: | | | | condition is, in effect, the ideal precondition for the rise |
| They [the other genres] become more free and | | | | of the novel: “the novel emerged and matured |
| flexible, their language renews itself by incorporating | | | | precisely when intense activization of external and |
| extraliterary heteroglossia and the “novelistic” | | | | internal polyglossia was at the peak of its activity; this |
| layers of literary language, they become dialogized, | | | | is its native element” (12). |
| permeated with laughter, irony, humor, elements of | | | | Epic and the Novel |
| self-parody and finally–this is the most important | | | | Since the novel emerges in the world of ployglossia, |
| thing–the novel inserts into these other genres an | | | | the novel, thus, has the capacity of “developing and |
| indeterminancy, a certain semantic openendedness, a | | | | renewing literature and in its linguistic and stylistic |
| living contact with unfinished, still evolving contemporary | | | | dimensions” (12). This concludes Bkahtin’s |
| reality. (7) | | | | discussion of the first of three basic characteristics of |
| Thus, since the novel itself is in touch with the | | | | the novel: “Its stylistic three-dimensionality” (11). |
| contemporary and fluid, it forces the other genres to | | | | Bakhtin then moves on to discuss, in comparison with |
| become open to change. Novel, thus, is not only a | | | | the epic, the other two characteristics of the novel: 1) |
| “novel” genre in itself but also causes innovation | | | | “The radical change it effects in the temporal |
| and change in other older and “completed” | | | | coordinates of the literary image”; 2) “The new |
| genres. This happens, partly, because the novel is | | | | zone opened by the novel for structuring literary |
| grounded in the contemporary reality and being an | | | | images, namely, the zone of maximal contact with the |
| open and developing genre “it reflects more deeply, | | | | present (with contemporary reality) in all its |
| more essentially, more sensitively and rapidly, the reality | | | | openendedness” (11). To make this comparison |
| itself in the process of its unfolding” (7). Being a | | | | more fruitful, Bakhtin first describes the basic |
| genre of the new and a changing world, the novel, for | | | | characteristic of the epic. |
| Bakhtin, affects the other genres and since it | | | | Three Constitutive Features of the Epic: |
| anticipates its own development and the | | | | 1. A national epic past (absolute past) serves as the |
| “development of literature as a whole” (7) it | | | | subject for epic. |
| makes the novel the most important genre “as an | | | | 2. A national tradition (not personal experience) serves |
| object of study for the theory as well as the history of | | | | as the source for epic. |
| literature” (7) | | | | 3. An absolute epic-distance separates the epic world |
| While further discussing the novel’s impact as a | | | | from contemporary reality, that is, from the time in |
| new genre, Bakhtin points out the following important | | | | which the singer (the author and his audience) lives. (13) |
| aspects of the novelistic mode of writing: | | | | These three constitutive features serve as a |
| * The novel parodies other genres (precisely in their | | | | comparative grid upon which Bakhtin plots the rise and |
| role as genres). (5) | | | | description of the novel in comparison with the epic. It is |
| * It exposes the conventionality of forms and their | | | | important first, therefore, to understand his discussion |
| language. (5) | | | | of these characteristics as our understanding of the his |
| * It Squeezes out some genres and incorporates | | | | theory of the novel depends on it. |
| others into its own peculiar structure, reformulating and | | | | The World of the Epic |
| re-accentuating them. (5) | | | | * Is the national heroic past: it is a world of |
| Of “particular interest,” Bakhtin suggests, “are | | | | “beginnings” and “peak times” in national |
| those eras when the novel becomes the dominant | | | | history. |
| genre, for “all literature is then caught up in the | | | | * The epic was never a poem about the present, |
| process of ‘becoming,’ and in a special kind of | | | | about its own time. |
| ‘generic criticism’” (5). Theses eras include | | | | * It is “from the beginning a poem bout the past” |
| “Hellenic period,” “the late Middle Ages,” | | | | and the “authorial position” is that of a “man |
| and the “Renaissance” (5), but the most | | | | speaking about a past that is to him inaccessible, the |
| important era is the “beginning” of “second | | | | reverent point of view of a descendant” (13). |
| half of the eighteenth century” (5). This is the time | | | | * The singer and the listener are at the same temporal |
| when, according to Bakhtin, the novel “reigns | | | | plane-the present–but “the represented world of |
| supreme” and all other genres are, in one way or | | | | the heroes stands on an utterly different and |
| the other, “novelized” (5). | | | | inaccessible time-and-value plane, separated by epic |
| Novelization of other Genres | | | | distance” (14). |
| They [the other genres] become more free and | | | | * The space between the singer-listener and the |
| flexible, their language renews itself by incorporating | | | | heroes of the epic is “filled with national tradition” |
| extraliterary heteroglossia and the “novelistic” | | | | (14). |
| layers of literary language, they become dialogized, | | | | Epic and the Absolute Past |
| permeated with laughter, irony, humor, elements of | | | | Thus, as we understand it, the narrative content of the |
| self-parody and finally–this is the most important | | | | epic is always from an absolute past, underwritten by |
| thing–the novel inserts into these other genres an | | | | a shared national tradition, and while the singer-listener |
| indeterminancy, a certain semantic openendedness, a | | | | inhabit the contemporary time, the story itself is located |
| living contact with unfinished, still evolving contemporary | | | | in the past and is always about a past. To render the |
| reality. (7) | | | | past contemporary, by eliminating the epic distance, |
| Thus, since the novel itself is in touch with the | | | | would, in Bakhtin’s words, mean “to undertake a |
| contemporary and fluid, it forces the other genres to | | | | radical revolution, and to step out of the world of epic |
| become open to change. Novel, thus, is not only a | | | | into the world of novel” (14).thus, epic is a |
| “novel” genre in itself but also causes innovation | | | | “completed” and “finished” genre in which |
| and change in other older and “completed” | | | | “the memory, and not knowledge . . . serves as the |
| genres. This happens, partly, because the novel is | | | | source and power for the creative impulse” (15). |
| grounded in the contemporary reality and being an | | | | The Novel ” in comparison “is determined by |
| open and developing genre “it reflects more deeply, | | | | experience, knowledge and practice” (15) and is |
| more essentially, more sensitively and rapidly, the reality | | | | thus related to the present and looks toward a future. |
| itself in the process of its unfolding” (7). Being a | | | | Bakhtin also suggests that the reason epic is a closed |
| genre of the new and a changing world, the novel, for | | | | genre is because the past in it is “monochronic and |
| Bakhtin, affects the other genres and since it | | | | valorized” (17) and this is the reason one cannot |
| anticipates its own development and the | | | | destroy this boundary between the absolute past and |
| “development of literature as a whole” (7) it | | | | the contemporary without destroying th epic as a |
| makes the novel the most important genre “as an | | | | form. |
| object of study for the theory as well as the history of | | | | Epic and Tradition |
| literature” (7) | | | | Since epic past is closed off from any other influences, |
| Problems with Traditional Explanations of this Generic | | | | it is preserved “in the form of a national tradition” |
| Struggle | | | | (16). Now the important thing is not the factual truth of |
| Bakhtin sees the traditional explanations of this impact | | | | this tradition but its representation as “sacred and |
| of the novel on other genres as faulty. As the literary | | | | sacrosanct” demanding from all “a pious attitude |
| historians, Bakhtin suggests, “usually reduce this | | | | toward itself” (16). This valorization of tradition, in a |
| struggle between the novel and other already | | | | way, predecides the respect accorded to the epic and |
| completed genres . . . to the actual real-life struggle | | | | the language used to narrate it. |
| among ‘schools’ and ‘trends’” (7). | | | | Absolute Epic Distance |
| Thus, according to Bakhtin, the current theory is | | | | This is the third main characteristic of epic that Bakhtin |
| inadequate when it comes to explaining the novel as a | | | | discusses. in his view “the epic world is an utterly |
| genre. Bakhtin explains the inability of current theory to | | | | finished thing, not only as an authentic event of the |
| theorize the novel as follows: | | | | distant past but also on its own terms and by its own |
| The utter inadequacy of literary theory is exposed | | | | standards; it is impossible to change, re-think, tor |
| when it is forced to deal with the novel. In the case of | | | | re-evaluate anything in it” (17). It is this immutability |
| other genres literary theory works confidently and | | | | that defines the epics absolute epic distance. Bakhtin |
| precisely, since there is a finished and already formed | | | | further asserts: “This distance exists not only in the |
| object, definite and clear. . . . Right up to the present | | | | epic material . . . but also in the point of view and |
| day, in fact, theory dealing with these already | | | | evaluation one assumes toward them; point of view |
| completed genres can add almost nothing to | | | | and evaluation are fused with the subject into one |
| Aristotle’s formulations. Aristotle’s poetics, | | | | inseparable whole” (17). Thus is the epic world is |
| although occasionally so deeply embedded as to be | | | | constructed “in the zone of an absolute distant |
| almost invisible, remains the stable foundation for the | | | | image, beyond the sphere of possible contact with the |
| theory of genres. (8) | | | | developing, incomplete and . . . rethinking and |
| Having discussed the inability of existing theory in | | | | reevaluating present” (17). This epic distance is |
| dealing with the novel, Bakhtin also, briefly discusses in | | | | challenged only with arrival “on the scene of an |
| the basic problems and flaws in the theory that does | | | | active polyglossia and and interillumination of |
| try to explain the novel an its basic characteristics. | | | | languages” (17). After this Bakhtin continues to |
| Bkahtin sums up these flawed attempts as follows: | | | | discuss the closeness of other genres, which, in his |
| The Generic Definitions of the Novel: Bakhtin suggests | | | | view, share the same kind of characteristics as the |
| that “the experts have not managed to isolate a | | | | epic, and then he moves on give his concluding |
| single definite, stable characteristic of the | | | | thoughts on the novel. |
| novel–without adding a reservation, which | | | | Novel and the Contemporary Reality |
| immediately disqualifies it altogether as a generic | | | | As explained above the time of the epic is sacred and |
| characteristic” (8). Some examples: | | | | ‘high’ in comparison the narrative time of the |
| * “The novel is a multi-layered genre (although there | | | | novel is of a “lower order in comparison with the |
| also exist magnificent single-layered novels)” (8). | | | | epic” (19). The contemporary and the low, Bakhtin |
| * “The Novel is a precisely plotted and dynamic | | | | suggests was “subject of representation only in |
| genre (although there also exist novels that push to its | | | | low genres” (20). The authentic “folkloric roots |
| literary limits the art of pure description) “(9). | | | | of the novel are to be sought” (21) in laughter. It is in |
| * “The novel is a complicated genre (although | | | | parody and laughter that the high world of gods and |
| novels are produced as pure and frivolous | | | | legends is “contemporized” and “brought |
| entertainment)” (9). | | | | low” (21). |
| * “The novel is a prose genre (although there exist | | | | Novel’s Precursor: Spoudogeloion (Serio-Comical) |
| excellent novels in verse)” (9). | | | | Bakhtin considers the Greek serio-comic the precursor |
| Normative Definitions of the Novel: Here Bakhtin points | | | | to the novelistic mode of writing. In his view “the |
| out the flaws in the normative definitions of the novel | | | | weakly plotted mimes of Sophron, all the bucolic |
| as offered by the novelists themselves. Bakhtin | | | | poems, the fable, early memoir literature . . . pamphlets |
| suggests that the problem with such normative | | | | all belong to this field” (21). Also included in this filed |
| definitions of the novel by the novelists themselves is | | | | are the “Socratic Dialogues,” “Roman |
| that they “produce a specific novel and then | | | | satire,” the literature of “the Symposia” and |
| declare it the only correct, necessary and authentic | | | | the “Menippean satire” (22). Bakhtin considers all |
| form of the novel” (9). He also acknowledges | | | | these genres “authentic predecessors of the |
| some of the attempts made by the eighteenth century | | | | novel” (22). Why should we consider these as |
| novelists, which presents a sort of theory of the novel | | | | predecessors of the novel? Bakhtin explains: |
| in its different stages. Some salient points of this: | | | | “Contemporary reality serves as their subject |
| * “The novel should not be poetic, as the word | | | | and–even more important–it is the starting point |
| poetic is used in other genres of imaginative | | | | for understanding, evaluating, and formulating such |
| literature” (10). “The hero of a novel should not | | | | genres” (22). There is no epic distance, |
| be ‘heroic’ in either the epic or tragic sense of | | | | “contemporary reality provides the point of |
| the word. . .” (10). The hero “should not be | | | | view” (23) and there is laughter. Laughter makes |
| portrayed as an already completed and unchanging | | | | the subject matter into an “object of familiar |
| person but as one evolving and developing, a person | | | | contact” and thus, “delivers the object into the |
| who learns from life” (9). | | | | fearless hands of investigative experiment” |
| * “The novel should become for the contemporary | | | | (23).This play on the old, infused with contemporary |
| world what the epic was for the ancient world.” (10) | | | | reality and laughter, transforms the epic mode to |
| Treating all of these defined traits as a positive | | | | “the plane of comic (humorous) representation” |
| development, Bakhtin still finds them less satisfactory. | | | | (23). |
| While these definitions do provide a criticism of a the | | | | Socratic Dialogues–Dialogized Story |
| novel, they do not, however, “provide a theory of | | | | Socratic dialogues, for Bakhtin, are a “remarkable |
| the novel” (10). And that brings us to Bakhtin’s | | | | document that reflects the simultaneous birth of |
| main project: to articulate and explain a viable theory | | | | scientific thinking and a new artistic-prose model for |
| of the novel. Bakhtin explains his main project, | | | | the novel” (24). Its characteristics: |
| articulating a viable theory of the novel, as follows: | | | | * Based on personal memories of real conversations |
| I will attempt below to approach the novel precisely as | | | | amongst contemporaries. |
| a genre-in-the-making, one in the vanguard of all | | | | * The main character, Socrates, wearing a popular |
| modern literary development. I am not constructing | | | | mask of a bewildered fool–wise ignorance. |
| here a functional definition of the novelistic canon. . . . I | | | | * Socrates–new type of prose heroization. |
| am [rather] trying to grope my way toward the basic | | | | * Spoken dialogue framed by a dialogized story. |
| structural characteristics. . . that might determine the | | | | Menippean Satire (26) |
| direction of its peculiar capacity for change and of its | | | | Bakhtin suggests that the Socratic dialogue and the |
| influence and effect on the rest of the literature. (11). | | | | Menippean satire are “genetically related” as the |
| It is obvious that Bakhtin is not relying on the earlier | | | | latter is sometimes considered “a product of the |
| modes of explanation of the novel, the normative and | | | | disintegration” of the former. In a Menippean satire |
| generic, but that he is attempting to provide a mode of | | | | “the unfettered and fantastic plots and situations all |
| defining that takes into account two important aspects | | | | serve one goal–to put to test and to expose ideas |
| of the novel: the novel as a genre-in-the-making and | | | | and idealogues” (26). |
| the novel’s immediate relationship with the | | | | Concluding Thoughts on the Novel |
| contemporary reality as it unfolds. | | | | As opposed to the closed and high form of the epic, |
| Three Basic Characteristics of the Novel | | | | the novel, a genre in constant flux, is informed by its |
| Bakhtin suggests the following as three main basic | | | | precursors and opens the narrative form to further |
| characteristics of the novel and novelistic mode of | | | | change and experimentation. Appended below is a |
| representation: | | | | summary of Bakhtin’s concluding thoughts on the |
| 1. Its stylistic three-dimensionality | | | | novel: |
| 2. The radical change it effects in the temporal | | | | * The novel is in contact with the inconclusive present |
| coordinates of the literary image. | | | | and it keeps the genre from “congealing” (27). |
| 3. The new zone opened by the novel for structuring | | | | * Authorial language now lies on the same plane as |
| literary images, namely, the zone of maximal contact | | | | depicted language of the hero (there is no epic |
| with the present (with contemporary reality) in all its | | | | distance) (27). |
| openendedness. (11) | | | | * Instead of the national past, the foreign past can also |
| The way the first characteristics is explained is through | | | | be included in the representation. (20). |
| its connection with “multi-languaged consciousness | | | | * Concept of an individual’s upbringing [and its |
| realized in the novel” (11). The three characteristics | | | | impact on the characters] also becomes a constant |
| are interrelated “organically” and historically | | | | trope in the novel. (29). |
| situated, and, as Bakhtin points out, “powerfully | | | | * Due to its location in the present, the novel also is |
| affected by a very specific rupture in the history of | | | | deeply invested in the future. (29). |
| European civilization: Its emergence from a socially | | | | * The represented image acquires a specific actual |
| isolated and culturally deaf semipatriarchal society, and | | | | existence. (30). |
| its entrance into international and interlingual contacts | | | | * The plot does not have to be wholistic; a part can be |
| and relationships” (11). Thus, the rise of the novel is | | | | represented as a whole (31) |
| affected, inherently, by widening of the linguistic | | | | Besides these, Bakhtin also offers several other |
| repertoire and by Europe’s contact and awareness | | | | concluding thoughts on the novel, all pointing to the |
| of other cultures, sometimes, outside Europe. Novel, | | | | novelistic form, its constant challenge to established |
| being a genre of the contemporary and the present is | | | | genres, and its extreme importance for the future of |
| deeply affected by these changes. This is what | | | | literature. |
| Bakhtin calls the “active Polyglossia” (12) of the | | | | * This is my reading summary, with some brief |
| world of novelistic representation. | | | | comments, of Bakhtin’s essay “Epic and Novel: |
| Bakhtin does not offer polyglossia as something | | | | Toward a Methodology for the Study of the |
| completely new. In fact, he suggests that polyglossia | | | | Novel.” All citations are from The Dialogic |
| “had always existed” (12) but it “had not | | | | Imagination: Four Essays.Trans. Caryl Emerson and |
| been a factor in literary creation” (11). In his view | | | | Michael Holquist. |
| even though classical Greeks “had a feeling both | | | | |