NARRATOLOGY LECTURE NOTES

LECTURE 2
I.

Early models for the analysis of narrative discourse (2)

I.4. The Formalist fabula/sjuzhet distinction

Refuting the earlier perspectives which regarded literature as a mere reflection of
biographical, historical or social reality, Russian Formalism insisted on its specificity so it
aimed at finding a "scientific", objective method for defining the specific features of literature,
its methods and devices.
The Formalist definition of literature is a differential one: what constitutes literature is
its difference from other orders of fact; literature is defined by its special use of language
deviating from and distorting practical language. The object of literary studies =
LITERARINESS (LITERATURNOST) of the poetic and fictional works, their specific
organization and the structural devices that differentiate them from other types of discourses.
The operative concept in this differential specification is DEFAMILIARIZATION
(OSTRANENIE, i.e. making strange). See Viktor Shklovsky:
Art defamiliarizes things that have become habitual or automatic. It makes objects
unfamiliar, in order to help us experience the artfulness of objects, in other words to
ensure our fresh, non-habitual, non-automatic perception of words and ideas. The
purpose of a work of art is to change our mode of perception from the automatic and
practical to the artistic. (Art as Technique, 1917 in Richter, 2006: 778)
In the case of prose fiction, the main artistic method of defamiliarization consists in making
forms difficult and increasing the difficulty and the length of perception:
not naming the familiar object;
narrating from the point of view of an it-narrator;
introducing erotic riddles (based on euphemism);
slowing down or interrupting actions;
time shifts (causes are given after effects);
the narrative discourse laying bare its own literary techniques (emphasis on the
actual process of presentation)

E.g. V. Skhlovskys essay The Parody Novel: Sternes Tristram Shandy

E.g. Boris Tomashevsky on Gullivers Travels
For the Formalists, the business of literary studies is to analyse the differences implied in the
opposition between practical and poetic language, relying on the concept of defamiliarization
to bring those differences into focus.
Fabula/Sjuzet:
Fabula (story) = the raw material, the chronological sequence of events.
Sjuzhet (plot) = the order and manner in which they are actually presented in the
narrative. It prevents us from regarding the incidents as typical and familiar.
The relation between fabula and sjuzhet is roughly analogous to the one between practical and
poetic language. The sjuzhet creates a defamiliarizing effect on the fabula; the devices of

the sjuzhet are not designed as instruments for conveying the fabula, but are foregrounded at
the expense of the fabula. E.g. Laurence Sternes Tristram Shandy (Skhlovsky) The
constructional devices (chaotic narrative order, prominent self-conscious authorial
commentary, transposition of material, temporal displacements, the inclusion of secondary
anecdotes, digressions of all kinds) are laid bare and not motivated by the events or situations
in the story.
Vladimir Propp (Morphology of the Folktale) establishes the important principle according
to which personages are variable, but their functions are constant and limited.
The functions of characters serve as stable, constant elements in a tale,
independent of how and by whom they are fulfilled and they constitute the
fundamental components of a tale.
The number of functions known to the fairy tale is limited.
The sequence of functions is always identical.
All fairy tales are of one type in regard to their structure.
Propp organizes the quest of his heroes into six main stages (preparation;
complication; transference; struggle; return; recognition) and thirty one different
functions.
Propp also identifies several spheres of action (the evil doer/the villain; the giver
donor, provider; helper/assistant; the emperor and his daughter; the sender/dispatcher;
the hero seeker or victim; the false hero) with three possible situations:
The sphere of action corresponds exactly to one character.
One character functions in several spheres of action.
One sphere of action includes several characters (one role may employ more
than one hero).
I.5. The Structuralist histoire/rcit or story/discourse distinction
Structuralism is an intellectual movement evolving outside the universities, providing a
revolutionary alternative to traditional academic habits, having implications for a whole range
of academic subjects in the arts and the social sciences. Its most revolutionary feature: the
importance that it attributes to language used as a model for all sorts of non-linguistic
institutions.
The essence of structuralist theories is the belief that things cannot be understood in
isolation, they have to be seen in the context of the larger structures (hence, the term
structuralism). To particularise for literature, the structuralist approach relies on a constant
movement away from the interpretation of the individual literary work and a parallel drive
towards understanding the larger, abstract structures which contain them.
Structuralism began in France in 1950s (e.g. the anthropologist Claude Lvi-Strauss
and the literary critic Roland Barthes); it developed during the 1960s, reaching a kind of peak
in the years 1967-8. It was exported into Britain and the USA mainly in the 1970s (e.g. in
Britain: Terence Hawkes, Frank Kermode, David Lodge; in the USA: Jonathan Culler) and it
attained widespread influence throughout the 1980s.
In structuralist terms, literature is not only organised like language, but it is actually
made of language (Todorov literature is always about language) and thus it makes us aware
of the nature of language itself. Language is not just the means of communication in
literature, but it is also the content of literature. According to the structuralists, the
relationship between literature and language is one of parallelism/homology: literature is
organised at every level like language. Hence, some of the structuralists aimed at creating a
universal grammar of narratives. By concentrating on the signifying structures of

literature, the structuralist approach sets aside all questions of content. The language of
literature is no longer regarded as subordinated to the message carried by the text. The
organisation of language precedes any message or reality (these are products constructed
by the language system and not vice versa).
Structuralist narratology (Roland Barthes, Tzvetan Todorov, etc.) the two-fold
distinction of fabula/ sjuzhet translated it into French terms as histoire/rcit. (In English, the
French terms are transposed by Seymour Chatman, for instance, into story/discourse.)
Structuralist Narratology - Andr J. Greimas:
According to Greimas, human beings make meaning by structuring the world in terms
of two kinds of opposed pairs: A is the opposite of B and -A is the opposite of B. It is
this fundamental structure of binary oppositions that shapes all human languages, human
experience, and consequently, the narratives through which that experience is articulated.
plot formulas (conflict and resolution, struggle and reconciliation, separation and union) are
carried out by actants (structural roles).

six actants: subject/object; sender/ receiver; helper/opponent.

three main patterns of plot:
Stories of Quest/Desire: a Subject (hero) searches for an Object
(person/state/thing).
Stories of Communication: a Sender (person/god/institution, etc.) sends the
Subject in search of the Object which the Receiver ultimately receives.
Stories of Auxiliary Support or Hindrance (sub-plots): A Helper supports the
Subject in the Quest; an Opponent hinders the Subject from carrying on his Quest.
20 functions grouped into three main types of structures (syntagms):
Contractual structures (making/breaking agreements; establishment/violation of
prohibitions; alienation/reconciliation);
Performative structures (performance of tasks, trials, struggles);
Disjunctive structures (travel, movement, arrivals, departures).
Bibliography
Barry, Peter (1995, 2002) Beginning Theory. An Introduction to Literary and Cultural Theory,
Manchester: Manchester University Press.

Jefferson, Ann and David Robey (eds.) (1991) Modern Literary Theory. A Comparative Introduction,
London: B. T. Batsford Ltd.
Selden, Raman, Widdowson, Peter and Brooker, Peter (2005) A Readers Guide to Contemporary
Literary Theory, Fifth edition, Harlow, London, New York: Pearson Education Limited.
Shklovsky, Viktor (1917) Art as Technique. In Richter, David H. (ed.) (2006) The Critical Tradition.
Classical Texts and Contemporary Trends, Third edition, Boston, New York: Bedford/St.
Martins, 774-784.
Surdulescu, Radu (2002) Form, Structure, and Structurality in Critical Theory, Bucureti:
Universitatea din Bucureti.
Tyson, Lois (1999) Critical Theory Today: A User-Friendly Guide, Routledge.