[a58] FORMS OF TIME AND CHRONOTOPE IN THE NOVEL will not engage them here, For us the following is importane whatever these meanings turn out ti perience [winch Sod of sg chat x andble ang visible fr us susie a all ‘matical form or linguists expressiongaskeich Without such-tempe csorsoion cen alaiast nas impossible. Canseauety. evry entry nto the ssa lags i accomplished ony dougie naeat he dean As we stated in the beginning of our essay, wg siey ae and spatial relationships in i es ee ee oe te ring enatthctogatolasinal oot oe ea lation Seip ladisedly adie isthe behets ay in this present work will prove freee ag Leia the further development of literary research cat 1937-1938" 19, The "Concluding Remarks” were written in 1973, DISCOURSE IN THE NOVEL hte principal idca ofthis essay is that the study of verbal art can and must overcome the divorce between an sbeey “formal” ap- Broach and an equally abstract “ideological” approach Form and Sontent in.discaurse are one, once. weunderstand that_verh: discourse is enomenon.—social throughout its entire aie and in each and every of its factors, from the sound image ‘o the furthest reaches of abstract meaning It's this idea that has motivated our emphasis on “the stylis. Fan Bente The separation of style and language fom the ques- aly adernt, has been largely responsible fora situation in whack only individual and period-bound overtones of - style are the priv. ilsged subjects of study, while its basic social vane ignored, The paked with individual artists and artistic movemen, For this tnd sorted’ bas been deprived of an authentic philosophical dears Cislogical approach to its problems, it has besa bogged ima stylistic trivia, it isnot able to sense boninr een individ- Aland pertod-bound shifts the great and anonymens destinies of Self ang ascittse itself, More often than not, stylistice defines: The ap usties of “private craftsmanship” and ignores the a, Galle Of discourse outside the artist's study, diseneee in the troupe ats of public squares, streets, cities and villages of soca Hiring fee tations and epochs, Stylistics is concerned not oan living discourse but with a histological speoten ade from it, Wrihabstract linguistic discourse in the service ofan artist's indi Widual exeative powers. But these individval on tendentious which diecn ooUG, Cut olffrom the fundamentally social modac ts Which discourse lives, inevitably come across ue fhe and abstract doit formulation and cannot therclore be studied organic tally with a work’s semantic components[274] prscouRsE IN THE NOVEL could not stand in a dialogic interrelationship with other lan- fuages. From the point of view of stylisties, the artistic work as a Wwhole—whatever that whole might be—is a self-sufficient and closed authorial monologue, one that presumes only passive lis~ teners beyond its own boundarics. should we imagine the worl ‘as a rejoinder in a given dialogue, ‘whose style is determined by its interrelationship with other yejoinders in the same dialogue {in the totality of the conversatic »n}—then traditional stylistics does not offer an adequate means for approaching such a dialogized style. The sharpest nnd externally most marked manifestations ‘of this stylistic category—the polemical style, the parodic, the ‘nsually classified as rhetorical and not as poetic phe Stylistics lacks every stylistic phenomenon into-the logic context of a given self-sutfic d hermetic utter “imprisoning i vere, xt; itis notable-to-s wit is not able to realize sts own stv mpi in ship with them, it is obliged to exhaust itself in ss hermetic context. Linguistics, stylistics and the philosophy of language—as reat centralizing tendencies of Euro: have sought first and foremost for nomena, sa stale forces in the service of the pean verbal-ideological lif vinity in diversity. This exclusive “orientation toward unity” in the present and past life of languages has concentrated the atten: tion of philosophical and linguistic thought on the firmest, most Stable, Teast changeable and most mono-semic aspects of dis: sourse-—on the phonetic aspects first of all—that are furthest re gmoved from the changing socio-semantic spheres of discourse Real ideologically saturated "language consciousness,” one thit participates in actual hereroglossia (Cs multi-languagedness, his partied outside its field of vision [tis precisely this orientation Mhanity dhat has compelled scholats £0 gaore all te vet Tquotidian, rhetorical acistic-prasel that were the carne aera ae raliging tendencies in the life ol language, OF tis Sean en case too TundameNtally implicated m hexcrogTo=ts The expression of this hetero- a5 w “well as polyglot consciousiiess in the specific forms and phenomena of verbal life remained ¥ ‘erly without determinative influence on linguistics and stylists thought. Therefore proper theoretical recognition and illuminating could not be found for the specific fecl for language and discourse bh DISCOURSE IN THE NOVEL [2 More complex artist Salieri ee ee ne ae ee ‘tistic forms for the ee aes iat 4 a ‘strate their themes by me; eae inallcatcterods and profound mele of noon es pre siats n, antes, Rabelais, Fielding, The problem of stylisties fo ist ie prose, in Smollett, Sterne r the novel inevitably tions. con- questions connected with Eos se aspects in the life of re had no light of discourse that ha : fave had no light cas deal with the life and behavior of disc. ry it iscourse in a contradictory and Discours % ‘ourse in Poetry and Discourse in the vel For the philosophy of a ilosophy of langua, stzuctured on their base, Ae fore remained almost enti ae linguistics and for stylistics : Whole series of phenomena have there oe ti pe 7 even the realm of consideratio1 epee enomena that are present s ae cr as dle oda ee eet is tual horizon,’ sei = : Tecent decades, it is attract the attention of their Nindamental and eee ee tc, these phenomena have begun t d language and styl teidamentel and widerangingsignicmce in al pheee ree is still far from acknowledged, ree kinds losis oe entation of a word amon; he fe psat cases of omeenes] creates new and signticost ene eRe i discourse, creates the potential es damon eo -h has found its fullest and deepest canes a 2 Linguists acko 5 acknowledges onl Scsnilagof gions tats one Oe Social idiom] whichis eer ad morphological), rae itl eiprocl influencing and in abstract linguistic. oa ed by elements phonetic[276] DISCOURSE IN THE NOVEL “We will focus our attention here on various forms and degrees of dialogic orientation in discourse, and on the special potential for a distinctive prose-art ‘As treated by traditional stylistic thought, the word acknowl: edges only itself that is, only its own context], its own object, its ‘own direct expression and its own unitary and singular language. Itacknowledges another. woud. 5 the word of no one in par ticular, as simply the potential for speech The direct word, as tra ditional stylistics understands it, encoiinters in its orientation toward the object only the resistance of the object itselé [the im- possibility of its being exhausted by a word, the impossibility of saying it all, but it does not encounter in its path coward the ob- ject the fundamental and richly varied opposition of, another's Wword, No one hinders this word, no one argues with it. (But no living word relates to its object in a singular way: be- teen the word and its object, between the word and the speaking subject, there exists an elastic environment of other, alien words about the same object, the same theme, and this is an environ- ment that it is often difficult to penetrate. It is precisely in the process of living interaction with this specific environmgnt that the word may be individualized and given stylistic share) (Indeed, any concrete discourse [utterance] finds the object at which it was directed already as it were overlain with qualifica- Hons, open to dispute, charged with value, already enveloped in fan obscuring mist—or, on the contrary, by the “light” of alien ‘words that have already been spoken about it({t is entangled, shot through with shared thoughts, points of view, alien value juda- ments and accents. The wor i 2 dialogically agitated and_tension-filled environment of alien words, value jud AcgeDts, eaves plo incencelationshins, merges with some, recoils from others, frersects with yeta third group: and all ¢his may crucially shape discourse, may leave 4 trace in.all irs semantic layers may com discourse, may leave a tae cade i expr2ssion and influcace its entire stylistic profile. eet vine utferance, having taken me Se eegaatdhape tape sigular historical moment in a socially specifc-casGxonmenk ca sgainet thousands of living dialogic-tbreads, 1 consciousness around the.given.ob- ject of an utterance, it cannot fail to become gn active participant ‘in social dialogue. After all, the utterance atises. cout of this. dic DISCOURSE IN THE NOVEL [277] alogue as a continuation alogueas a consinuation of i and asa roinder to The way in which the word conceptialize alex acral objects, open to dione and eee with qualifications, are from one sie highlighted while from the other side dimmed by heterogot socal apinion, by an alien word about them. And into this complex play of light and shadow the word enters ic becomes saturated with this play, and must deter dain within the boundaries ofits own semancie and stylistic plicated by a dialog interaction within the object esrcon ean, sted bya ction within the object between vari- us aspects a is sociowerbal intelligibility. ‘And an artistic pre. sentation, an “image” of the object, may be penetrated b th Alalogc play of verbal intentions that meet and are interwoven in Ju such an image need not stifle these forces, but on the cont tay activate and organize them, If we imagine the intention of auch a word that its directionality toward the object, in the form of ray of ight, then the living and uncepeatable Se Baaee es cp the facets of the itage that it constructs ean he Sh oj tas would be he ce cae eae fp pete geccicaacect he otis port) bur rather as its spectal dispersion in an atmosph > Hed with the alien words, value judgments and and which the ray passes on its way to eet thes does not mosphere of the word, the atmosph: aoe breaking through to its own meaning and its own, ton across an environment full of alien words a aie is environment and striking a dissonance with ona able, in this dialogized proc: aie xgized process, to shape its awn stylistic profile Such is the image in artistic prose and the image of novelistic S(Mighly significant in thi Isis, Dadatsm, Surrealism and analogous schools wath che "qual fed” na Ofc objet a struggle erated by the esa fetuen outed consciousness, to original consciousness, t ae ss, to the object itself in itself, to pure ¢ ¥ roUg! $s ty toward the abject; the sox say[278] DISCOURSE IN THE NOVEL DISCOURSE IN THE NoveL [279] pletely shot through with dialogized over ticular. In the atmosphere of the novel, the direct and prose n particule, In the ssoentis Os ell ox aoimething ink tically calculated nuances on unm diate ta back impoedblen tar malvece id tones of this heteroglossia, But eee under futhensie novelistic conditions, takes on the nature of trwattistic prose discourse—in any of its forms, quotidign she internal polemic and is consequently dialogized lin, for exam- Teall, Scholarly —cannot fail to be oriented toward the "already