Treść książki

Przejdź do opcji czytnikaPrzejdź do nawigacjiPrzejdź do informacjiPrzejdź do stopki
“[A]singledropofinkforamirror”
25
novelasamirrorimpliesitsabilitytoreflectparticularhistoricalreality,
andthereforeitsvalueasahistoricaldocument.
Thefollowingchapterre-examinesthecomplexrelationsbetweenthe
realistnovelandhistory,withaviewofestablishingthenovel’scredibil-
ityasahistoricalsource.Contemporaryhistoriographers,muchinspired
bypostmodernideas,pointtotheratherblurryboundarybetweenhistori-
calandliterarytexts.Notonlyaretheydeeplyawareofthetextualand
narrativenatureofhistory,buttheyalsoenlargeitsscope,byincluding
hithertoneglectedaspectsofthepastthatoncewerecommonlythedo-
mainofnovels.Thedevelopmentsinhistoriographyhavetheirequivalent
inthe“culturalturn”inliterarystudies,whichbeganasareactionagainst
formalistcriticismandwasmarkedbytheincreasedsignificanceofhis-
toricistandcontextualreadingoftexts.Theboundarybetweenaliterary
textandothertextsinaparticularcultureisobscured,sothataliterary
textcanalsobetreatedasahistoricaldocument.Thenineteenth-century
realistnovelis,however,averyspecialkindofdocument:althoughit
claimstoreflecttheworldfaithfully,itisneverthelessopenlyfictional.As
contemporarycriticsareprompttoshow,itcanhardlybetreatedsimply
asamirroraccuratelyreflectingthereal.Instead,thenovelconstructs
realityratherthanpassivelyreflectit,producingthecultureoftheperiod
anditsideologyaswellasbeingtheirproduct.Therefore,iftherealist
novelhasanyvalueashistoricalevidence,itisthroughitsrelationtoand
apartofcultureandideology.
1.Thenovelandhistory
Theemergenceofhistoryasadistinctdisciplineisusuallyidentifiedwith
thenineteenthcenturyandthefigureofLeopoldvonRanke,whostrove
fora“scientific”history.Previously,historyhadbeenconsideredapartof
literature,which,inturn,wasunderstoodasthepracticeofwriting
(Gossman1978:4).Ifhistorywasdistinguishedfromotherformsofwrit-
ing,likepoetryorepic,itwasbecauseitdifferedfromtheminregardto
thesubjectandthemeansoftreatingthesubject,but“thecraftwasthe
same”(Gossman1978:4).Thedistinction,then,wasformalratherthan
epistemological:itwasbasedondifferencesbetweenthetechnique
adoptedbythehistorianandthepoetratherthanonthenotionofveracity
orfictionality.Historydifferedfrompoetrynotsomuchbecauseitwas
truer(orlesstrue,asthecasemightbe),butbecauseitgavepriorityto