Cognitive narratology, rhetorical narratology, and interpretive disagreement: a response to Alan Palmer's analysis of Enduring Love.(Critical essay): An article from: Style
Book Details
Author(s)James Phelan
PublisherNorthern Illinois University
ISBN / ASINB002ZBAYU8
ISBN-13978B002ZBAYU0
AvailabilityAvailable for download now
Sales Rank99,999,999
MarketplaceUnited States 🇺🇸
Description
This digital document is an article from Style, published by Northern Illinois University on September 22, 2009. The length of the article is 5918 words. The page length shown above is based on a typical 300-word page. The article is delivered in HTML format and is available immediately after purchase. You can view it with any web browser.
From the author: This essay uses Alan Palmer's cognitive analysis of Enduring Love as a way to compare and contrast cognitive and rhetorical narratology. Focusing on our different interpretations and evaluations of McEwan's handling of Clarissa Mellon--Palmer finds it deeply flawed, while 1 find it successful--the essay addresses two main questions: (1) What is it about the two approaches that lead Palmer and me to disagree as we do? (2) What are the particular elements in McEwan's design of the novel that contribute to this disagreement? In answering the first question, the essay contrasts Palmer's concern with the novel's representation of the intermental unit formed by Joe and Clarissa with the rhetorical approach's concern with the novel's progression. Palmer's focus generates substantial insights into the novel, but it neglects an important dimension of the context within which McEwan places Clarissa's responses: the progression's thematic concern with the vexed relationship between love and logic. Within this context, Clarissa's responses become both plausible and sympathetic. In answering the second question, the essay focuses McEwan's difficult balancing act with Joe's retrospective narration: McEwan wants to demonstrate both that Joe is reliable about the major issues and that Joe is privileging his perspective over Clarissa's. Intelligent readers may focus on Joe's reliability more than his partisanship, and, therefore, find McEwan's handling of Clarissa to be flawed. The essay concludes by suggesting that this comparison and contrast between the approaches is implicitly an argument for the value of putting them in dialogue with each other.
Citation Details
Title: Cognitive narratology, rhetorical narratology, and interpretive disagreement: a response to Alan Palmer's analysis of Enduring Love.(Critical essay)
Author: James Phelan
Publication:Style (Magazine/Journal)
Date: September 22, 2009
Publisher: Northern Illinois University
Volume: 43 Issue: 3 Page: 309(15)
Article Type: Critical essay
Distributed by Gale, a part of Cengage Learning
From the author: This essay uses Alan Palmer's cognitive analysis of Enduring Love as a way to compare and contrast cognitive and rhetorical narratology. Focusing on our different interpretations and evaluations of McEwan's handling of Clarissa Mellon--Palmer finds it deeply flawed, while 1 find it successful--the essay addresses two main questions: (1) What is it about the two approaches that lead Palmer and me to disagree as we do? (2) What are the particular elements in McEwan's design of the novel that contribute to this disagreement? In answering the first question, the essay contrasts Palmer's concern with the novel's representation of the intermental unit formed by Joe and Clarissa with the rhetorical approach's concern with the novel's progression. Palmer's focus generates substantial insights into the novel, but it neglects an important dimension of the context within which McEwan places Clarissa's responses: the progression's thematic concern with the vexed relationship between love and logic. Within this context, Clarissa's responses become both plausible and sympathetic. In answering the second question, the essay focuses McEwan's difficult balancing act with Joe's retrospective narration: McEwan wants to demonstrate both that Joe is reliable about the major issues and that Joe is privileging his perspective over Clarissa's. Intelligent readers may focus on Joe's reliability more than his partisanship, and, therefore, find McEwan's handling of Clarissa to be flawed. The essay concludes by suggesting that this comparison and contrast between the approaches is implicitly an argument for the value of putting them in dialogue with each other.
Citation Details
Title: Cognitive narratology, rhetorical narratology, and interpretive disagreement: a response to Alan Palmer's analysis of Enduring Love.(Critical essay)
Author: James Phelan
Publication:Style (Magazine/Journal)
Date: September 22, 2009
Publisher: Northern Illinois University
Volume: 43 Issue: 3 Page: 309(15)
Article Type: Critical essay
Distributed by Gale, a part of Cengage Learning
More Books by James Phelan
