Making Things Strange- The Prehistory of a Literary Device

7/27/2019 Making Things Strange- The Prehistory of a Literary Device

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/making-things-strange-the-prehistory-of-a-literary-device 1/22

Making Things Strange: The Prehistory of a Literary DeviceAuthor(s): Carlo GinzburgReviewed work(s):Source: Representations, No. 56, Special Issue: The New Erudition (Autumn, 1996), pp. 8-28Published by: University of California Press

Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2928705 .

Accessed: 16/01/2013 05:31

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

University of California Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to

Representations.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded on Wed, 16 Jan 2013 05:31:23 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucal

http://www.jstor.org/stable/2928705?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp





http://www.jstor.org/stable/2928705?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucal



CARLO GINZBURG

MakingThings Strange:The Prehistory f a LiteraryDevice

I

IN A LETTER ADDRESSED IN 1922 to his friendRoman Jakobson,theRussiancriticViktorShklovskyheerfullywrote:"We knowhow life smadeand how Don Quixotend the car are made too."' Literary riticism s a scientific

enterprise, rt as a technological rtifact: his s theearlyFormalist rogram n anutshell.The names of bothcorrespondents, hen n their wenties,would cometobe definitivelyssociatedwith hismovement.2 t thetime, hklovsky as work-ing on his book Theory fProse,published n 1925,which ncluded the chapters"HowDonQuixotes Made" and "Art s Device." The latter, irst ublished n 1917,opened with ome remarks n humanpsychology:

If weexamine hegeneralawsofperception, e see that s itbecomeshabitual,talsobecomesutomatic.oeventuallyllof ur killsndexperiencesunctionnconsciously-automatically.fsomeonewere ocompare he ensation fholding pen nhishand or

speaking foreignongue or he ery irstimewith he ensationfperforminghis ameoperation or heten-thousandthime, henhewouldno doubt greewith s. It is thisprocess f automatizationhat xplainshe aws f ourprose peechwith tsfragmentaryphrasesnd half-articulatedords.

The roleplayedbyunconscioushabits sso pervasive, hklovsky enton,that"life fades into nothingness.Automatization ats away at things, t clothes,atfurniture,t our wives, nd at our fear ofwar."

He thenventured oward definition f art ngeneral:

And so, n order oreturnensationoour imbs,norder omakeus feel bjects, omake

a stone eel tony, anhas beengiven he oolof art.The purpose fart, hen,s to eadus toa feelingfthings,asedon visionnd not nly nrecognition.norder o achievethis oal rt elies pontwo evices: estranging"hingsndcomplicatingorm,he attermaking erception ore ifficultnd aborious. heperceptualrocessnart sa purposein tselfndought obe extendedothefullest. rt s a means f xperiencingheprocessofbecoming;he utcome f t squiteunimportant.3

Shklovsky'sdea of art as a tool to revitalize ur dull perceptualhabits m-mediately vokes the idea of "involuntarymemory" memoirenvolontaire)evel-

oped in the workof MarcelProust. n 1917 onlythe first olume ofA la recherche

du temps erdu-Du c6te echez wann 1913)-had been published.Not surpris-

8 REPRESENTATIONS 56 * Fall 1996 ( THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA







veryeffectivenessf Shklovsky'sdeas helped to conceal some intriguing ues-

tions.What reasons,besides the obvious,practicalones, led Shklovsky o focus

nearly xclusively n Russiantexts?Were riddles, s a populargenre, nsomeway

connectedto thesophisticated se ofestrangementmade byTolstoy?And above

all, should one regardestrangement s a trait f art in general (as suggestedbyShklovsky)r as a device relatedto a specific iteraryradition? uringtheseventyyearsthathave elapsed sincethepublicationof Shklovsky's heory fProse, uchquestionshave gone unposed and unaddressed-they can no longerbe ignored.

Myattempt o answerthemwill set thenotion ofestrangement,f am not mis-

taken, n a differentnd more complicatedperspective.

The devious path I am goingto followbeginswith famousworkfrom n-

tiquity: he reflectionsfthe Roman emperorMarcusAurelius,knownvariouslyas ToHimself, editations,houghts,nd so on,whichwerewrittennGreekin the

secondcentury .D.8 The first ook is a sortofautobiographyn the form fa listofpeople (relatives, eachers, riends) o whomMarcusAureliusfeltmorally nd

intellectuallyndebted;the other levenbooks assemblea seriesofseemingly an-

dom passages, sometimes ong, sometimesquite short.Composed forhis own

moral instructionn the language of the Stoicphilosophy nwhich he had been

educated, a number of passages were hurriedly et down duringmilitary am-

paigns.As I willdiscussbelow, he workwas not conceivedforpublication nd its

privatenatureaffectedtsform nd itstransmission.MarcusAureliuswas interestedn self-instruction,ot in introspection.His

favorite erbalmood wasthe mperative. Effacemagination!"he wrote verand

over,usinga word-4<avTaota-that was partofthe Stoics'technicalvocabulary.

According oEpictetus, he lave-philosopherwhose deas had a profound mpact

on MarcusAurelius,the obliteration fwrong maginationswas a necessary teptowarda rightperceptionofthings, ence towardvirtue.9MarcusAureliusoncedescribedthenext teps s follows: Cease to be pulledas a puppetby hy assions.Isolate the present.Recognizewhat befalls eitherthee or another. Dissect and

analyzeevery bject ntothe Causal and the Materialprinciples.Meditate on thy

lasthour."'0Each of theseadmonitions mplieda specificmoraltechniqueaimingat mas-

tery verthepassions,whichtransform s intopuppets (a comparisonof which

MarcusAureliuswas veryfond).First,we have to pause. What s attractive ousmustbe brokendowninto tscomponents.The "melodiousutterance" fa song,for nstance,mustbe dissected"into ts severalnotes and in the case of each ask

thyself: asthis hemasteryverme?"This attitudemustbe extended to everything, iththe exceptionof virtue:

"Rememberto turnto thecomponentparts, nd byanalyzing hem come to de-

spisethem.Bringthe same practice o bear on thewhole of ifealso" (MA, 11.2).

10 REPRESENTATIONS







But dissection s not enough. We must also learn to look at thingsfrom adistance:"Asia,Europe, cornersof the Universe: the whole Ocean a drop in theUniverse; Mount) Athosbut a little lod therein; ll thepresent point n Eter-nity; verythingn a tiny cale, so easilychanged,so quicklyvanished" 6.36).

Through the mmensity ftime nd themultiplicityfpeople, wewillrealizethe rrelevance four own existence.

Reflect .. on the ife ived ong go byothermen, nd the ife hat hallbe lived fterthee, nd s nowbeing ivednbarbarous ountries;nd howmany avenever venheardthy ame, nd howmanywill eryoonforgett, nd howmanywhonowperhaps cclaim,will eryoonblame hee, ndthat eithermemoryorfamenor nythinglsewhateveris wortheckoning.9.30)

This cosmicperspective larifiesMarcusAurelius's Meditate n thyasthour."Everything,ncludingour own death, mustbe seen as partof a general process

of transience nd change: "Regardingattentivelyvery xisting hingreflect hatit s already disintegratingnd changing, nd as if t werein a stateofdecompo-sition nd dispersion, r that verythings made bynature to die" (10.18).

A searchforthe causal principle s also partof the Stoicprogramaimed at arightperceptionof things:

Surelyt s an excellent lan,whenyou re seatedbefore elicacies ndchoicefoods, oimpress pon your magination40avTaG'iav]that his s thedeadbody fa fish,hat hedeadbody f a birdor a pig;andagain, hat heFalernianwine sgrape uice and thatrobe of purple lamb's leece ipped na shellfish'slood; and in matters f sex nter-course, hat t s attritionfanentrailnd a convulsivexpulsion f meremucus. urelythese re excellentmaginations40avTaG'iaL], going o theheart f actualfacts ndpene-tratinghem oas to see thekind fthings hey eallyre. You should doptthis racticeallthroughour ife,ndwherehingsmake n mpressionhichsvery lausible,ncovertheirnakedness,ee into heir heapness, trip ff heprofessionn which hey auntthemselves.6.13)

This extraordinary assage inevitablytrikes hetwentieth-centuryeader as

an earlyexample ofestrangement. he label is fullyustified.Tolstoyhad a deepadmirationforMarcus Aureliusand, in hisold age, edited an anthology funi-versalwisdom ncalendarform hat ncluded more thanfiftyassages fromMar-cus Aurelius'sreflections."But I would like tosuggest hat venTolstoy's ncom-promising pproaches to law,ambition,war,and love were deeply indebted toMarcus Aurelius.Like a horse, ike a child,Tolstoy ooked athuman conventionsand institutionss strange, paque phenomena,thereby tripping hembare oftheirconventionalmeanings.Things unveiledthemselves o his passionate anddetached gaze "as they eally re,"to use Marcus Aurelius'sphrase.

This readingof Marcus Aurelius'swork dds a new dimensiontoShklovsky's

Making hings trange: he Prehistoryf Literaryevice 11







discussionof "art as device." It also providesadditional supportto Shklovsky'sbrilliant uggestion hatriddles are examplesofestrangement. What s a lamb'sfleecedipped in a shellfish's lood?" Marcus Aureliusmayhave asked himself. norder to puthumanhonors, uchas the senatorial ymbol,ntheirproper place,

we have to move backfrom heobject to itscausal principle, o a riddlelikeques-tion. Moral self-educationrequires, as a preliminary tep, the effacement fwrong maginations, fassumptions akenforgranted, frecognitionsmade dulland repetitive your perceptualhabits. n order toseethings,we must firstookat them as iftheyweremeaningless-as seeminglymeaningless s a riddle.

II

In an essay that till emainsfundamental, he great Finnish folkloristAnttiAarne showed thatriddlesare a transcultural henomenon.'2 The possi-bility hatMarcusAurelius drew nspiration rom hispopular genrefitsnwellwith hehypothesis-one thathas inspiredmyworkformanyyears-of a circularrelationship etween earned and popular culture.This relationship lso affected,in a way to date unnoticed, hestrange fterlife f Marcus Aurelius'sreflections.A demonstration f this nfluencewillrequirea rather ong digression, nwhichI will larify owTolstoy ead Marcus Aurelius. The impactof thisreadingwas sostrongbecause it reinforced n attitude hatTolstoyhad absorbed at an earlierstageof his moral and intellectual evelopment.

The existenceof Marcus Aurelius'sreflections as been known ince ate an-tiquity hroughallusions and excerptsmade byGreek and Byzantineerudites.Butonly wo,more or lesscomplete,manuscripts ave survivedfrom hisperiod;one of them,which s now lost, providedthe basis for the first rintededition.This edition'scomparativelyate date-1558-was certainly ue to the unusualcharacterof Marcus Aurelius'swork: a series of fragmentaryeflectionswrittenina vivid, ften ursory,ometimes roken anguage. 3 ButMarcus Aurelius's ifeand lettershad become widelyknownto the European cultivatedpublic somedecades before hefirst ublication f hisreflectionsna disguised,fictitious orm.

The authorofthisforgerywas the FranciscanfriarAntonio de Guevara, bishopofMondofiedo, preacherat the court of theemperorCharles V. In the prefaceto thefirstditionof MarcusAurelius rthe iall ofPrinces, ublished nValladolidin 1529,Guevara claimedto havereceivedfromFlorence a Greekmanuscript fMarcus Aurelius, which subsequentlyhad been translated for him by somefriends.But the bookallegedly ranslated yGuevara bore no relation o the textof Marcus Aurelius's reflections ublished for the first imethirty ears later.Guevara added a pinchofhistory o a large amount of fiction, nventingetterswritten yMarcusAurelius,dialoguesbetweenhim and hiswife, nd so on. This

mixturewas incredibly uccessful.The GoldenBookofMarcusAurelius, s it was

1 2 REPRESENTATIONS







usuallycalled,was translated ntomany anguages, ncludingArmenian Venice,1738), and reprintedfor decades. In 1643 the EnglishphilologistMericCasau-bon, ntroducing iseditionof Marcus Aurelius's eflections, rote cornfullyhatthe successof Guevara's mposturewascomparableonlyto thatof theBible. 4 By

that ime,however,Guevara'sfamewas already n decline.The unflatteringntrydedicatedtohim n PierreBayle'sDictionnaireistoriquet ritiques theportrait fa forger.'5 ut a tiny ortionof Guevara's maginary ortrait fMarcusAureliuswas bound to survive:theharangue allegedly pronouncedbyMileno,a peasantfromthe Danube region, n front f MarcusAureliusand theRoman senators.This text,which was to inspirea famouspoem ofJean la Fontaine Le paysanduDanube)more thana centuryater s, as thefollowing assage will make clear,aneloquentdenunciationofRoman imperialism:

Yourcovetousnessftaking thermen'sgoodshas been so extremend yourprideofcommandingtrangeountries athbeensodisordinate,hatneither he ea can sufficeyou nthedeepness hereof,either he and assure s inthefields fthe ame.... YouRomans rebutdestroyersf thepeoplethat e peaceable, ndrobbers f the weat ndlabours f trangers.'6

This denunciationof the Roman empirewas immediately ecognized by asixteenth-centuryeader ikeVascode Quiroga as a disguisedattack n theSpan-ishconquestof theNew World. n fact,wemayregardMarcusAurelius rthe iallofPrinces s a lengthy ermon on thistopicaddressed bythe courtpreacherAn-toniode Guevara to theemperorCharlesV. This description s evenmore aptlyapplied to the "peasant of theDanube," the textof which circulatedamong theSpanish courtiers n an independent formbeforethe publicationof Guevara'sbook.'7 This harangue contributedpowerfully o themyth f the good savage,and spread itall overEurope:

inthat e aywedeserveobeslaves, ecausewehavenoprince o ommand s,nor enatetogovern s,nor rmy odefend s,to this will nswer,hat incewehad noenemies,weneedednoarmies,ndsince veryman s contented ith is ot ndfortune, e hadnonecessityfa proud enate ogovern s,andwebeing swe are allequal, tneed notweshould onsento have nyprincesmongst s.... Ifye sayfurtherhatwe havenotin ourcountry commonwealth,orpolicy utthatwe live as thebrutebeasts n themountains,nthis lsoyouhavebut mall eason. orwe nourcountryid suffero iars,neither ebels, or seditious ersons, ormenthat rought s (fromtrangeountries)any pparel o bevicious,o that ince napparelwe werehonest,nd inmeatvery em-perate,weneededno better ehaviour.'8

Readerswerenot ong nrecognizing acitus'sGermania s the nspiration orthis dyllic escription fan ideal society. he passages in whichthe misdeeds ofRoman imperialism re excoriated,on the otherhand, were clearlymouldedupon thepowerfulharanguepronouncedby Calgacus, the Caledonian chieftainwho (as we learn fromTacitus'sAgricola) ccused the Romansof"making desertand calling tpeace."'9 But Calgacus is a mere name. Mileno,thepeasant of the








Danube, is,on thecontrary,very oncrete, arthy resence.Antoniode Guevaradepictedhim as follows: This villainhad a smallface,great ips,holloweyes,hiscolour burnt, urled hair,bare headed, his shoes of porcupine skin,his coat ofgoatskin, isgirdleof bulrushes, longbeard and thick, iseyebrows overedhis

eyes,thestomach nd theneckcoveredwith kins,hairedas a bear,and a club inhis hands."20

"Abeast ntheform fa man": thiswasMarcus Aurelius's that s,Guevara's)comment.But who is this peasant who dared to denounce the misdeeds of theRoman empire? n a preliminarymanuscript raft f Guevara'stext, he peasantofthe Danube had no beard: a missing eature hat, t has been suggested, den-tifiedhim as an American ndian.2' But his monstrous, eastlyfeaturespointtoa different riginas well.He is a close relative fMarcolph,thepeasantwho, na well-knownmedievaltext, oldly ddresses to King Salomon:

This Marcolphwas of short taturend thick. he head had hegreat; broadforeheadred nd full fwrinklesrfrownces;is arshairy ndtothemid f heeks anging; reateyes ndrennyngthats,blear,ipposos];isnetheriphangingike horse.Abeardhardand foul ike nto goat.Thehands hort ndblockish. isfingersreatnd thick. oundfeet; nd thenose thickndcrooked; face ike nass;andthehair f hishead ikehairof goat;his hoes hurlishndrude, ndhis lothes oul nd dirty..

A smalldetail confirmshe close relationship etweenthe two texts.Antoniode Guevara's perplexingallusion to "shoes of porcupine skin" loszapatosde uncuero epuerco spin), an be explainedas an inadvertent usionof twopassages inthe Latinversionof theDialogue ofSalomon ndMarcolph, hereshoes are men-tioned immediately fter comparisonbetween the hair of Marcolph and por-cupine's thorns "capilli velutisunt spinule ericiorum;calciamenta pedum").23Guevara'sveiledcriticism ftheSpanishpolicy n the New Worldwas thus basedupon a curiousmixture:Tacitus,on the one hand; on the other, hose "fictionalpopular narratives"-as thetwelfth-centuryistorianWilliamofTyrehad calledthem-"in whichMarcolphbyturns olved Salomon's riddlesand sethimsomenew ones."24Both traditions,he ancient nd themedieval, ould be used to defyauthority.

In the medievalpopularizingtradition heking was challengedby a peasantwho combineda grotesquephysical ppearance withwit nd wisdom. n Le sotti-lissime stuziedi Bertoldo"theverysubtle witsof Bertoldo"),the famous Italianreworking ftheDialogueof alomon ndMarcolph, ingAlboinoproudlydeclares:"Look howmany ords andbaronsaresurroundingmetopaymehonor," owhichthe peasant Bertoldo retorts: Ants also surround the prune tree to gnaw itscork."25 hese parallelswith nimals tendto debase theking's uthority, themethathas been treatedwithprofound nsight yMikhailBakhtin nhisgreatbookon popular culture.26On the subjective ide, the same brutish nnocence that

allowedthe horse nTolstoy's tory o removetheveils from he hidden reality f

14 REPRESENTATIONS







socialrelationships ermits hepeasantof the Danube, "a beast in theformofaman," todeflate he mperial deologyof theRomansbycomparingthemto brig-ands who rob and kill nnocentpeople. The genuineMarcusAurelius,the most

powerfulman in the world,had come to a similar onclusionafterhavingscru-

tinizedhimself hroughhe ensof a seriesofbelittling, egradingcomparisons:

"A spiderprides tself n capturing fly; ne man on catching hare,anotheron

netting sprat, notheron takingwild boars,anotherbears,anotherSarmatians.Are not thesebrigands, f thou test heirprinciples?"MA, 10.10).`

Guevara'sclaim tohaveseena translation fMarcus Aurelius'sreflections asprobablyunfounded.Andyet here s something fthe emperor's hinkingnthetextfalsely ttributed ohim. I am nottryingo enrollGuevara among thefore-runnersof estrangement. he conclusionof the haranguedeliveredby thepeas-

ant of the Danube-"empire is nothingbut robbery"-is presented as self-evident; tdoes not emerge from previousstageof opaqueness or misunder-standing.But Guevara's text eft n indelible mark on the subsequentdevelop-ments f estrangements a literary evice. From thismoment nwardthe savage,thepeasant,and theanimal-whether isolatedor combined-provided a stand-

pointfor critical, etached,estranged pproach to society.Let's analyze a few examples,startingwithMontaigne.He was certainly a-

miliarwithGuevara'sMarcusAurelius,ne of the favorite eadings ofhisfather.28

In his essay"On Cannibals,"Montaigneexpressedamazementat contemporary

descriptions fthe customs f theBraziliannatives,whosepeaceful, nnocent ifeseemed torevive heancientmyths f thegoldenage. But at the end oftheessaythere is a sudden shift o Europe. Montaignetellsthe story f threeBraziliannativeswho had been brought o France. Askedwhathad struck hemmost, heymentioned wo hings: irst,hatgrown rmedmen theSwissguards)werewillingto obeya child (thekingofFrance) rather hanchoosinga leader among them-selves. Secondly,"theysaid ... that theyhad observed that there were men

amongstus, full and gorgedwith ll kinds of good things, nd thattheirhalves

[that s,othermen]werebegging t theirdoors,emaciated withhungerand pov-

erty; nd they houghtt

trangehowthesenecessitoushalves poorpeople] could

suffer uch injustice, nd thattheydid not seize the othersbythe throat, r set

fire o theirhouses."29The Brazilian natives,unable to understandthe obvious,had seen what is

usually oncealed byhabit nd convention.Montaignewasevidently elightedbythis.Unable to take theworld forgranted,he was accustomed, n his endless

questioning,to ump from the basic tenets of society o the smallestdetails ofeveryday ife.The Braziliannativesprovedbytheir urprisehow distantEuro-

pean society,markedby political nd economic nequality,was fromwhat Mon-

taignecalled "originalnaivete" naifvet' riginelle).30The word naive," rom he

Making hings trange: he Prehistoryfa Literaryevice 15







Latinnativus, ad in Montaigne's ocabulary distinctlyositive ir and embodiedhis distastefor artificiality.t also leads us to the verycore of the notionof es-

trangement. o understand ess,to be naive,tobe surprised-these can lead oneto see more,to see something eeper,something losertonature.

The French moralistsof the seventeenthcenturytransformed he formof the essay,as it had been developed byMontaigne, nto aphorismsand self-containedfragments. ne of the latter,ncluded in the 1689 editionof Jean de

la Bruyere'sCaracteres,evealed forthefirst ime thedisruptivepotentialities f

estrangement:

Onesees ome avage nimals,males nd females,catteredround he ountryside,lack,livid, un-burnt,tuck o theearth,which hey ig andmovewith n insuperabletub-bornness; hey avea sort farticulated oice, nd when hey tandup,they isplay

humanface nd, nfact,hey rehumans; t night heywithdrawntodenswhere heylive nbrown read,water,ndroots; hey pare ther eople he oil f owing,abouring,and harvestingo make heir iving,nd thereforehey eserve otto be inwant fthebread hey ave own.3'

This text s surprisingboth for itscontent,given La Bruyere'scustomaryidentification iththe dominant deology, nd for ts form, s a closer look will

show.An initialmisunderstanding"someanimals") s followedby contradictory,somewhatperplexedremark "theyhave a sortof articulated oice").Then there

isa sudden shockofrecognition,omparabletothe act ofsolving riddle: "When

they tand up theydisplaya human faceand, in fact eneffet]hey re humans."These words,"in fact," ntroducea factualdescription "at nighttheywith-

draw into dens" and so on) that ends with he ironicalremark: "Therefore they

deserve notto be in want of the bread theyhave sown."The alleged social andmoral equity voked bythis onclusion s mplicitlyenounced as hypocrisynthe

lightof what has been said before. "They" deserve to survive,nothingmore."They"are nevernamed.

Both Marcus Aurelius and Bertoldo directedthe comparisonwithanimalsto the top of the social ladder. Here the same comparison s transferred o the

bottom,with similar degrading implications. n principle,one could expect astraightforwardtatement ike "peasants live like animals,"or "peasants live ininhuman conditions."La Bruyere,on thecontrary,onfronts s with series ofobstacles:the nitialmisunderstanding,he unnamed object,the ronicalending.The reader s nvolved na cognitive ffort hat ransformshe mplicit onclusioninto sort freward.The impact, oth rtisticnd rhetorical,s nfinitelytronger.

In 1765 Voltairepublisheda shortPhilosophyfHistorynder an easilyrec-

ognizablepseudonym "l'abbeBazin"). The book includeda chapterentitled Des

sauvages" "on savages")thatbeganwith longrhetorical uestion:

16 REPRESENTATIONS







Do you understand y avagesomerusticsivingncabinswith heir emales nd someanimals,ncessantlyxposed oseasonal xtremes;cquaintedwith othingut he arththatnourishes hem, nd the market owhich hey ometimesepair o sell theirmer-chandise,norder o purchase ome oarse lothing;peaking argonwhich s unintel-ligible n cities; urnished ith ew deas, nd consequentlyew xpressions;ubjected,

without nowing hy, oa clerk, o whom hey arry very earhalf f what hey aveearned y he weat f heir row;meetingpon ertainaysna kind fbarn, o elebrateceremonies hichheyn noway omprehend;isteningo mandressed ifferentlyromthemselves, hom hey o not nthe eastunderstand;ometimesuittingheir ottagesat thebeatof a drum, ndengagingogoandfightna foreignand, oslay hose heyresemble, or quarter fwhat heywould arnbyworkingt home?

This splendid page was clearly nspired by the text by La Bruyerethat hasalreadybeen analyzed. In both cases we have a periphrasis hat generates a cog-nitive ensionby lowly nfolding he surprisinglynfamiliar eatures f a famil-

iar object. But here a difference merges.La Bruyeredoes not name the object;Voltaire,with a strokeof genius, gives t first wrong name,whichat the endprovesto be the right ne. Here isVoltaire's nswer o his own rhetorical uestion:

There aresuch avages s these ll overEurope. tmust ertainlye conceded hat hepeopleofCanada, nd theKaffers,homwehavebeenpleased o style avages,re nfi-nitelyuperior o our own.The Huron, heAlgonquin,heKaffernd theHottentot,llhave theartof fabricatingverythinghat s needful or hem; his rt our rusticsrewantingn.The colonies fAmericand Africa refree, nd oursavageshavenot venthe deaoffreedom. hesupposed avages fAmerica .. are lso cquainted ith onor,which oneofourEuropean avages as everheardmentioned.heyhave fatherland,

theyove t nd defendt; heymake reaties,hey ightourageously,nd oftenpeakwithheroic nergy.32

The Jesuits sometimes referredto the European countryside,where theylaunched theirmissionary ampaigns,as "otras ndias," the other Indias.33TheJesuits' penness towardnon-Europeancultures s also well-known. y identify-ing the true savageson our continent,Voltaire, he pupil of the Jesuits, ushedthe attitudeof his teachers to a paradoxical extreme.34 e looked at the life ofEuropean rustics rom n infinite istance, s thoughhe were one of thosegiantsfrom the star Sirius described in his own storyMicromegas.His deliberately

opaque, stupefied aze transformedaxation,war, he Mass intoa seriesofmean-ingless, bsurd, delegitimized estures.

In a chapterof hisTheoryfProsedealingwith the constructionn the noveland the shortstory," hklovskywent back to the notion of estrangement, ug-gesting hatTolstoyhad discoveredhis model for hisdevice"inFrench iterature,perhaps nVoltaire'sHuron,nicknamedL'Ingenu,'orperhaps nthedescriptionof the French courtmade byChateaubriand's Savage."'35The texts have dis-cussed in my ong digressionpointto a longer tradition, ne highlypraised by

Making hings trange: he Prehistoryfa Literary evice 17







Tolstoy.36 oltaire's hapter "On Savages" from the Philosophyf History-dedi-cated to CatherineII, empressof all theRussias, thenrepublishedas an intro-duction (Discours reliminaire)o his Essai sur les moeurs-wouldappear to be aparticularly elevantprecedent.37 he denunciation fthe"beastly" abitsof hu-man beings made byKholstomer, he horse, ooks likean echo of Voltaire's x-posure of European peasantsas the real savages. Shklovsky's enericallusion to"French iterature" s a precedentforTolstoy's strangementmust be qualifiedas "FrenchEnlightenmentiterature"-fundamentally oltaire.38 purelyformal-isticapproach inevitablymisses whatTolstoy earned fromVoltaire:the use ofestrangements a delegitimizing evice,operating tevery evel-political, social,religious. Meetingupon certaindays n a kindofbarn, tocelebrate ceremonieswhichthey n no waycomprehend; listening o a man dressed differentlyromthemselves,whomtheydo not in the least understand":Tolstoydeveloped this

passage intothedescription f the Mass inResurrection,hichthe RussianSynodtookas evidence ofa blasphemousattitude, jecting ts uthor from he OrthodoxChurch: "The servicewent ikethis: hepriest, avingrobedina peculiar, trangeand very nconvenient arment fgoldcloth, ut and arranged ittle itsofbreadon a saucer and then put most of them into a cup of wine, at the same time

repeatingvariousnamesand prayers . "39

Tolstoy's arly bsorptionof theEnlightenmentradition eeplyaffected islaterreception fMarcus Aurelius.This combined nfluence xplainswhyTolstoynever used estrangements a mere iterary evice. Forhim, twasa wayof"going

tothe heartof actualfacts nd penetrating hem o as tosee thekindofthings sthey eally re . . . uncovertheirnakedness, ee into their heapness,strip ff heprofession n whichtheyvauntthemselves,"s Marcus Aurelius wrote.For bothMarcusAurelius and Tolstoy goingto the heart of actual facts"meantovercom-ing false ideas and imaginations;ultimately,tmeantacceptingtransienceanddeath. Aleksandra,one of Tolstoy'sdaughters,tells a revealinganecdote. Oneday, he said to an old peasantwoman,whoworkedather house as a housemaid,that he was sad.

"If you read Marcus Aurelius,"the old woman replied, "all your sadnesswould disappear."

"Marcus Aurelius? Who? Why Marcus Aurelius?" Aleksandra Lvovnainquired.

"Yes," he womanexplained,"it's bookthat hecountgavetome. In the bookthere is written hat all of us will die. And ifdeath is facing us, our sadness isnothing.As soon as youthink bout death, youfeel a sense oflightness.When Ihave some grief always ay: Children,read me MarcusAurelius!"O40

Tolstoyheard this torywith ealdelight. tcertainly onfirmed isdeep con-viction hatpeasants,being foreign o modern society nd itsartificiality,erecloser to truth.The attitudeof Montaigne (anotherwriterdeeply admired by

Tolstoy) owardBrazilian nativeshad a similar rigin.Tolstoy's opulismhad no

18 REPRESENTATIONS







patronizing vertones:to him,the old peasantwomanwas perfectlyble to un-

derstandMarcus Aurelius. also believeshewas, partly ecause some ofMarcusAurelius'sreflections ad been nourishedbythepopular genreof theriddle.

III

We havenow, pparently,omefull ircle.Butmyreconstructionsstillincomplete. remarkedearlierthatShklovsky'shapteron "Art s Device" doesnotmention heworkof Proust.Now I wouldlike toshowthat different otionof estrangement, xplicitly nalyzed by Proust albeit under a differentabel,playedan important,fnota crucialrole in Proust's wnwork.

One ofthe mostprominent iguresn thesecondnovelof thecycle,A l'ombre

des eunesflles enfleur intheEnglish ranslation, ithin BuddingGrove),s the

narrator's elovedgrandmother.As everyProustreaderwill recall,shewas par-ticularly ond of the letters f Madame de Sevigne. "But my grandmother,"henarrator ellsus,

had taughtme toenjoy herealbeauties fher orrespondence....Theywerepresentlytostrikeme all themoreforciblynasmuchs Madamede Sevign6s a great rtist fthesame chool sa painter hom was o meet tBalbec, nd whosenfluencenmyway fseeing hings astobeimmense,lstir. realised t Balbec hat twas n the ameway she that hepresentedhingsous, nthe rder fourperceptionfthem,nstead ffirstexplaininghem ytheir ause.Butalready hat fternoonntherailwayarriage,s Ireadover gain hat etternwhichhemoonlightomes: I cannot esisthe emptation:

I putonallmy onnetsndveils, fwhich here s noneed, walk long hismall,wherethe ir s as sweet s inmy hamber; find thousand hantasms, onkshitendblack,severaluns reyndwhite,inensast erend here,en nshroudedprightgainsthereetrunks,etc.," was nrapturedywhat, littleater, should avedescribedfor oesnot hedrawlandscapesnthe ameway s he draws haracters?)s theDostoyevskyideof Madamede Sevigne'setters.4"

Madame de Sevigne,Elstir, yodorDostoyevsky-what id theyhave incom-mon? This questionsurfaces gain,either mplicitlyr explicitly,n fourdistinctpassagesofRemembrancefThingsPast,passagesthat omyknowledgehave never

been adequatelyanalyzedtogether.42n thefirst,hepassage I have ust quoted,Madame de Sevigne is praisedbecause "she presentedthings o her readers, nthe order of our perceptionof them, nstead of first xplainingthembytheircause."One is remindedof the definitionf thepurposeof artgivenbyShklovskyjust a fewyearsbeforethepublication fA l'ombre es eunesflles enfleur:"To leadus to a knowledgeof a thing hrough heorganofsight nsteadofrecognition."43But a closer ook revealsa divergence s well.

As I tried to showbefore,theintellectual radition ecapitulatedbyTolstoycan be ideallyconnectedtoMarcus Aurelius's earchforthe real causal principleas an antidoteto false maginations.After ll, to describe peasantsas animalsor








savages,as La Bruyereand Voltairedid, is not so different rom ookingat deli-cacies (as MarcusAurelius suggested)as "thedead bodyof a fish" r "thedeadbodyofa birdor a pig."Within histradition, strangements an instrument o

overcome ppearances in orderto achievea deeper understanding freality. he

aimof Proust eemsto be theopposite: topreserve he freshness fappearancesagainstthe ntrusion f deas,bypresenting hings inorderof theirperception,"stilluntaintedbycausal explanations.Estrangement ccordingto Tolstoymightbe exemplifiedbyLa Bruyere'sfragment n peasants; estrangement ccordingto Proust,bythe letterof Madame de Sevigneon themoonlight,written few

yearsbefore. n bothcases we have an attempt o conveythings as if theywere

seenfor he firstime."But theoutcomes eemto differ idely:moral and politicalcriticismnthe first ase, impressionisticmmediacyn thesecond.

The latterpoint seems to be supportedbymy second passage fromProust,

thepages in whichthe narratordescribes t lengththepaintings f Elstir.Elstiris usuallyregarded as an ideal portrait, combinationof several Impressionistpainters:Edouard Manetaboveall,with he possibleadmixture f Claude Monetor evenEdgar Degas.44Here Proust mplicitlylarifies heparallelwithMadamede Sevignehe had anticipated nthecomment quoted above:

The effort adebyElstiroreproducehings ot sheknew hem obebut ccordingotheoptical llusionsfwhich urfirstight f themscomposed, ad ledhim xactlyothis oint; egave pecial mphasiso ertainf hese aws fperspective,hichwere husall themore triking,ince rthad been thefirsto reveal hem.A river, ecauseof the

windingsf ts ourse, baybecause f the pparentontact fthe liffsn either ideofit,would ook s though here ad been hollowed ut ntheheart ftheplainor ofthemountains lake bsolutelyandlockedneveryide. n a picture f a view rom albecpainted pona scorching ay nsummer,n inlet f the ea appearednottobe the ea,which eganfartherut,but obe enclosednwalls fpink ranite. he continuityf theoceanwassuggestednlyby hegulls hat,wheelingverwhat,when ne looked t thepicture,eemed obesolid ock,were s a matter f fact nhalinghemoist apour ftheshiftingide."45

This passage isobviously n experimentntheancient radition fekphrasis:a highly ccomplishedattempt o providea verbaltranscriptionf nonexistent

butplausiblepaintings.But Proustalso meant to makea theoretical oint,whichwas laterdeveloped byMauriceMerleau-Pontynhis famousphenomenologicalessay on Paul Cezanne.46Elstirmade an effort, roust tellsus, "to reproducethingsnot s heknew hem . .": a remarkrelated both to his devaluationof intel-ligenceand to his emphasison theprimacy f livedexperience againstprecon-ceived formulas, gainstfrozenhabits, gainst"knowing."47

The contemporaryxplosionofurban ife s usuallyassociatedwith n enor-mous increase ofour sensorial ife, phenomenonthat s at the very ore ofthemodernist radition.48t conceals,however as has been oftennoted) a qualitative

impoverishmentf our experience.This processof automatization, enounced

20 REPRESENTATIONS







by Shklovsky, rovidesthe historical ackgroundforhis definition f estrange-

mentas an allegedlytimeless rtistic henomenon.A fewyears before,froma

similarbut independent perspective,Prousthad suggested thatpreconceived

representational ormulas hould be counteractedbynew artistic xperiments.

In Proust'sviewthoseexperimentswerenot imited o painting.Three inter-

veningnovels and several hundred pages afterhis surprising llusion to "theDostoyevskyide ofMme.de Sevigne,"Proust omesbacktothis uestion."What

I meant," henarrator xplainsto his over,Albertine, wasthatMme. de Sevigne,

like Elstir,ikeDostoyevsky,nsteadofpresenting hingsntheir ogicalsequence,

that s to saybeginningwith he cause, showsus first fall theeffect,heillusion

thatstrikesus. That is how Dostoyevsky resentshis characters.Their actions

seemto us as misleading s thoseeffectsnElstir's ictureswhere thesea appears

tobe in the sky."49We may add: this is how Proustpresentshis characters.One immediately

thinks f one ofhisgreatest reations, he baron of Charlus. For a long timewe,as readers,are confrontedwithCharlus's ncomprehensible estures nd words,

havingno clue, no causal explanationwhatsoever fhis behavior.But in a sense

thenarratorhas no clue as well.He tries, ikeus, to decipherCharlus-a myste-

riousentity,ike allhumanbeings-through whathe himself nows and does not

know)about him. It has oftenbeen stressed hatthepersonwho says"I" inRe-

membrancefThings astis, and is not,Marcel Proust.50 ometimesthe identity

betweenthosetwovoices is explicitlyuggested, s in the double mentionof the

"Dostoyevskyide ofMadame de Sevigne"': irstna commentmadeby heneutral

voiceofthenarrator nd then na commentmade by"I" inhis conversationwithAlbertine.But such an identitys deceptive.By staginghimself s a character n

his novel, Proust suggeststhat,far frombeing the all-knowingGod to whom

nineteenth-centuryovelists an be compared,he is as ignorant s we are of his

owncharacters'hidden motives.Here is an additionalbasicdivergencebetween

estrangement la Tolstoynd estrangement laProust. roust's olution, mplying

an ambiguitynthenarrator's oice,can be regardedas a structural evelopment

of the strategy dopted byDostoyevskyn The Demons: story old bya nearly

effaced haracter, learly ncapableof understanding t. n fact, here s a strong

resemblancebetweentheways n whichTheDemons'main character, tavrogin,

and the baronofCharlusare presented othe reader: through seriesof contra-dictory ragments,ikea puzzle tobe deciphered.

But whatrelevancedoes thishave-somebody might sk-for professional

historians, or cholarsworkingwith rchivaldocumentsor statisticaleries, nd

so on? Whyshould theybotherwithestrangement nd otherconceptsworked

outby iteraryheorists?A fourth uotationfromProust,from e tempsetrouveThePastRecaptured),








thefinal ectionofRemembrancefThings ast,will, hope, providean answerto

thesequestions.The narrator s speakingwithGilberte, herecent widow of his

friendRobertde Saint-Loup,killed n theGreatWar:

"There s onesideofwarwhich ewasbeginningo grasp," toldher, namely,hatt s

human,hat eople ive t s they o a love ra hatred,ndthat t ouldbe told ike novelandconsequentlyhat,f omeone oes bout epeatinghat trategys a science,hat oesnothelphim t all tounderstand ar,whichs not trategic.he enemy oesnotknowourplans nymore hanweknow he nd that hewomanwe ove spursuing-and tmaybe thatwedo notknow hese lansourselves.n their ffensivefMarch1918,did theGermans ave s their bjectivehe apture fAmiens?Wedo notknow tall.Perhapsthey id notknow hemselvesnd tmay ave een he utcome f heir dvancewestwardtoward miens hat eterminedheir lan.And even upposing ar o be scientific,newould till ave odepictt s Elstir idthe ea, n nverse rder,tartingithllusionsndbeliefshat ne correctsitbybit, s Dostoyevskyould elate he toryf life.'

Once more Proust associatesElstirwithDostoyevsky-as well as, implicitly,throughher"Dostoyevskyide,"withMadame de Sevigne.Butthis imeProustfo-

cuses on human intentions,hus addinga newdimensiontohiscustomary ppo-

sitionbetween mmediate mpressions nd causality.By shifting rom paintingsand novels othemost ffective ay fapproaching majorhistorical vent,Proust

unfoldsthe ambitious pistemologicalmplications f his previousremarks.We can easily imaginehow the author of Warand Peace would have loved

Proust's ejection fmilitarytrategy,een as the embodiment fthe absurd idea

thathumanlife spredictable; hatone can approachwar, ove,hatred, rton the

basis of ready-madeprescriptions; hatknowledgemeans imposinga blueprinton reality nstead of learningfrom t.There is also a "Tolstoyside" to Proust,

expressedbythe word-so dear to hisgrandmother-naturel: wordhavingboth

moraland aesthetic mplications. ut there s a "Dostoyevskyide" tohim as well,

relatedboth tohis wayofpresenting characterbya seriesof corrections,nd to

his fascinationwith rime.52The illustrationf the atterpointwould lead me far astray. prefer o focus

on somethingdifferentnd closertomyown work.Estrangement eemsa goodantidoteto a riskwe all face: thatoftaking heworld, nd ourselves,forgranted.

The antipositivistmplications f thisremarkwillnotbe missed.But in stressingthecognitivemplications festrangement would like also to distance myself s

strongly s possiblefromthe fashionabletheoriesthatblur the boundaries be-

tweenhistorynd fiction. his confusionwould have been rejectedbyProustas

well.When he wrotethatwar could be toldas a novel,he was not pleading for

historicalfiction;he was suggestingthathistorians nd novelists or painters)

sharea cognitive urpose. I am deeplysympathetic ith his pproach. In order

to describemyownproject, s a historian, wouldnot hesitate ouse,with small

change,a few inesfrom hepassage byProust quoted earlier:

22 REPRESENTATIONS







"And even supposinghistoryobe scientific,ne would stillhave to depict t asElstirdid the sea, in inverseorder."

Notes

I am grateful oJean-Christophe urelop and Samuel R. Gilbert,who polished myEnglish; to PerryAnderson,Jan Bremmer, nd Francesco Orlando for theirpercep-tive omments; oJohn Eliott,who firstntroducedme to Antoniode Guevara, and toPierCesare Bori for his invaluable help. The paper,first eliveredin Helsinki No-vember 1994), was then discussed in a seminar at the GettyCenter in Santa Mon-ica (Spring 1995), fromwhich I drew fruitful esearch suggestions will developelsewhere.

1. Quoted in PeterSteiner,RussianFormalism: MetapoeticsIthaca, N.Y., 1984),45.

2. Later on theirrelationship oured. In the ntroduction oTheorie e a littgrature:extesdesformalistesusses,d. TsvetanTodorov Paris,1965),JakobsondismissedShklovsky'sideas about estrangement s "platitudes."Anotherpolemicalallusion n the same textis clarified yVittorio trada, Strumentiritici, (ottobre1966): 100.

3. Victor Shklovsky, heory fProse,trans.Benjamin Sher (Elmwood Park, Ill., 1990),5-6 (slightlymodified). I did not keep Sher's suggestionto translate ostranenies"enstrangement."

4. Ibid., 7. 5. Ibid., 11. 6. Ibid., 12.7. See, e.g., Francesco Orlando,IlluminismoretoricafreudianaTorino, 1982), 163.8. I am deeply ndebtedto Pierre Hadot's excellent ssayson MarcusAurelius Exercices

spirituelstphilosophicntique Paris,1987]; in English,Philosophys a Way fLife, d.

Arnold I. Davidson,trans.Michael Chase (Oxford, 1995), 179-205.9. Ibid., esp. 180-91.10. The MeditationsftheEmperorMarcusAureliusAntoninus,d. and trans.A. S. L. Far-

quharson (Oxford,1944), 7.29. This volumewillbe cited nthetext sMA,withbookand sectionnumbersfollowing.

11. See Leo Tolstoy, ur alle Tage,hrsg.E. H. Schmitt nd A. Skarvan (Dresden, 1906-1907).

12. AnttiAarne,VergleichendedtselforschungenHelsinki,1918-1920), 26-28. On riddlesin Roman culture, ee hrsg.GeorgWissowa,Pauly'sRealencyklopddieer lassischenl-tertumswissenschaftStuttgart,856-1972), 116-22. See alsoAndreJolles, ormesimples(Paris,1972), 103-19 and the penetrating aper byS. Levi Della Torre,"Ermeneutica

Vinciana,"AchademiaeonardiVinci (1995) 228-31.13. See the remarksmade byJean PierredeJoly nthe ntroductiono his edition Pensgesde lempereur arc-Aurele-Antoninu lemone vertu uece Prince hilosopheefaisoit lui-memeParis, 1770], xix),which for thefirst ime tookadvantageofMS Vat. 1950 dis-coveredbyJohannWinckelmann.

14. MarciAntoninimperatoris.. de se ipsoetad ipsumibriXII, Guil.Xylander ugustanusGraece t atine rimusdidit, uncvero .. .) notas mendationesdjecitMericus asaubonus(Londini, 1643), prolegomena.

15. Pierre Bayle,Dictionnaire istoriquetcritique,d ed. (Rotterdam,1720), 2:1339-40.Bayle rejected n strong ermsAntonio de Guevara'sskeptical nswer tothe criticism

Making Things Strange:The Prehistoryf a LiteraryDevice 23







ab eo cur mare haberet infestum? pse libera contumacia respondit: Quid tibi, utorbemterrarum? ed quia ego exiguo navigio d facio, atrovocor, u vero,quia magnaclasse, diceris mperator."

28. Michel de Montaigne, De l'yvrognerie,"nEssais,ed. AlbertThibaudet (Paris,1950),379. Montaigne gavea negative udgment of Guevara's etters 330).

29. Montaigne,Essais,253.30. Ibid., 244.31. Jean de la Bruyere,Les caracteres,nOeuvres ompletes,d. Julien Benda (Paris, 1978),

333: "L'on voitcertains nimaux farouches,des males et des femelles, epandus parla campagne, noirs, ivideset toutbrfules e soleil, ttaches la terre u'ils fouillent tqu'ils remouent avec une opiniatrete nvincible; ls ont comme une voix articulee, tquand ilsse lvent sur leurs pieds, lsmontrent ne face humaine, et en effet ls sontdes hommes; ls se retirenta nuitdans des tanieres ut ls vivent e pain noir,d'eau etde racine; ils epargnentaux autres hommes la peine de semer,de labourer et derecueillir our vivre, t meritent insi de ne pas manquerde ce pain qu'ils ont seme."Roland Barthes'sremarkthat the people is here onlyan object of pity, learlymisses

the point (see his Essais CritiquesParis, 1964], 221-37). The passage is quoted andsuccinctly ommentedon byGalvanodella Volpe,Rousseau Marx Roma, 1962), 163-64 (manyyearsago thesepages drewmy ttention o this opic).

32. Voltaire, The Philosophy fHistory,"n TheBestKnownWorksNew York, 1927), 382-83; the translationhas been modified Essai surlesmoeurs, d. Rene Pomeau [Paris,1963], 22-23:

Entendez-vous par sauvagesdes rustresvivantdans des cabanes avec leursfemelleset quelques animaux, exposes sans cesse a toute l'intemperiedessaisons; ne connaissantque la terrequi les nourrit, t le marche ou il vontquelquefoisvendre eur denreespour yacheterquelques habillements ros-siers; parlantunjargon qu'on n'entendpas dans les villes; ayantpeu d'idees,

etpar consequentpeu d'expressions; oumis, ansqu'ils sachentpourquoy,un homme de plume,auquel ilsportent ous es ans la moitie6e ce qu'ils ontgagne a la sueur de leurfront; e rassemblant, ertainsjours, ans une especede grange pourcelebrerdes ceremonies u ilsnecomprennent ien, coutantun hommevetuautrement u'eux etqu'ilsn'entendent oint; quittant uel-que fois eur chaumiere orsqu'on bat e tambour, t s'engageant s'allerfairetuer dans une terre trangere, ta tuer eurssemblables,pour le quartde cequ'ils peuventgagnerchez eux en travaillant?1ya de ces sauvages-ladanstoute l'Europe. I1 fautconvenirsurtoutque les peuples du Canada et lesCafres, qu'il nous a plu d'appeler sauvages,sont nfiniment uperieursauxn6tres. Le Huron, l'Algonquin, 'Illinois, e Cafre, e Hottentot nt l'artdefabriquereux-memes tout ce dont ils ont besoin, et cet art manque a nos

rustres.Les peuplades d'Amerique etd'Afriquesont ibres, t nos sauvagesn'ontpas meme l'id&ede la liberte.Les pretendussauvages d'Amerique ... .) connaissent 'honneur,dont

jamais nos sauvages d'Europe n'ont entendu parler. Ils ont une patrie, lsl'aiment, ls la defendent; ls fontdes traites; ls se battent vec courage, etparlent ouvent vec une energie heroique.

33. See the remarkable ssay byAdrianoProsperi, 'Otras Indias': Missionaridella Con-troriformara ontadini selvaggi,"nScienze,redenzecculte,ivelli i culturaFirenze,1980), 205-34.

34. See Carlo Ginzburg,"Alien Voices: The Dialogic ElementinJesuitHistoriography,"TdHistorikd2, no. 22 (June 1995): 3-22 (in Greek).

MakingThingsStrange: The Prehistoryf a LiteraryDevice 25







35. Shklovsky,heoryf rose, 3. "To turn person nto a beastallyou need is a uniform,separationfromthefamily,nd beating on a drum," theyoung Tolstoywrote n hisdiary quoted in RichardF.Gustafson, eoTolstoy:esidentndStrangerPrinceton,N.J.,1980), 347, a passage that ounds likean echo of Voltaire'swords quoted in note 32.

36. Fora late document 1907), seeTolstoy's riefntroduction o an anthology fpassagesbyLa Bruyere nd otherFrenchmoralists, repared by discipleofhis,A. A. Rusanov(Tolstoy, Cannot e Silent:WritingsnPolitics, rt, ndReligion, d. W. Gareth Jones[Bristol,Eng., 1989], 200-201). Tolstoy et moralists including"theamazing Mon-taignewhosewriting artly elongsto thisgenre") nopposition osystematic hinkers,expressing clearpreference ortheformer.

37. See Pomeau, introd. to Essai sur les moeurs,v: "Dans toute l'oeuvre, ce fut cettePhilosophie e l'histoire,i contestable,meme a sa date, du point de vue de la sci-ence, qui exerca l'influence a plus marqu&esur les imaginations evolutionnaires tromantiques."

38. In his lluminismoa book to which am deeply indebted), Orlando sharplyopposed

the Enlightenment strangement o itsnineteenth- nd twentieth-centuryounter-parts see esp. 163)-Brecht, on whom would liketocommenton anotheroccasion,is a partialexception.The perspective sketchedhere suggests,on the contrary,fundamental ontinuity rompre-Enlightenmentnd Enlightenment strangementtoTolstoy's, n the one hand, and a fundamental iscontinuityetweenTolstoy's ndProust's, n theother.

39. Tolstoy, esurrection,rans.RosemaryEdmonds (London, 1966), 180. The same pas-sage is indirectlyecalledby Shklovsky, heoryf rose, .

40. See ValentinBulgakov,Leone Tolstoj ell'ultimonno della ua vita Foligno, 1930), 431(thispassagewas pointedout to mebyPierCesare Bori).

41. Marcel Proust,Within BuddingGrove,nRemembrancefThings ast, rans.C. K. Scott

Moncrieff New York, 1934), 1:496; I have amended Scott Moncrieff's ranslationthroughout n order to make itmore faithful o the original;A la rechercheu tempsperdu, d. Pierre Clarac and AndreFerre Paris,1960), 1:653-54:

Mais ma grand-mere ... ) m'avait ppris a en aimer les vraies beautes....Elles devaient bientotme frapperd'autant plusque Madame de Sevigne estune grandeartiste e la memefamille u'un peintre uej'allais rencontrerBalbec et qui eut une influence i profondesur ma vision des choses,Elstir.Jeme rendiscompte a Balbec que c'estde la memefacon que luiqu'elle nouspresente es choses,dans l'ordrede nos perceptions, u lieu de les expliquerd'abord par eur cause. Maisdeja cetapres-midi-la, ans cewagon,en relisantla lettre u apparait e clair de lune: "Jene pus resister la tentation,e metstoutesmes coiffes tcasaques qui n'etaient as necessaires,jevais dans ce maildont 'air est bon commecelui de ma chambre; e trouvemillecoquecigrues,desmoines lancs tnoirs, lusieurs eligieusesrises tblanches,u lingelje'tear-cipar-ld,des hommesnsevelis ousdroitsontre esarbres,tc."Je fus ravipar cequej'eusse appele,un peu plustard ne peint-elle as lespaysagesde lamemefacon que lui, les caracteres?) e cote Dostolevski des Lettres e Madame deSevigne.

The quotation provided byProust s incomplete:one must read "du linge ete par-cipar-la,des hommesnoirs,d'autres nsevelis tc.";see Madame de Sevigne, etter f 12June 1680, inCorrespondance,d. RogerDuchene (Paris, 1974), 970.

42. Samuel Beckett's erceptive emarksProust 1931; London, 1965], 85-87) have beenignored by atercritics ikeJean-Louis Backes, "Le Dostoievskidu narrateur," tudes

Proustiennes,(1973): 95-107; A. Labat,"Proust'sMme. de Sevigne,"L'Esprit reateur,

26 REPRESENTATIONS







mands, dans l'offensive e mars 1918, avaient-ilspour but de prendreAmiens? Nous n'en savons rien. Peut-etrene le savaient-ils as eux-memes,et est-ce 'Fvenement, eur progression l'ouest vers Amiens, qui determinaleur projet.A supposerque la guerre soit scientifique,ncore faudrait-il apeindrecomme Elstirpeignait a mer,par l'autre sens,etpartirdes illusions,

des croyancesqu'on rectifie eu a peu, comme Dostoievskiraconteraitunevie).

52. Proust,A la recherche,:379, as well as his "Sentiments iliauxd'un Parricide,"whichappeared inLe Figaro 1 February1907) (see Marcel Proust, astichestmelangesParis,1947), 195-206. Proust'shalf-concealed dentification ith Henri de Blarenberghe,the young man who had killedhismother,was particularlyxplicit n the censoredconclusionof thearticle. n a preceding passage Proust alluded to the guilt feelingshe had been subjectedto because ofthesufferings e had inflicted n his own mother.At a deeper level, however,his attitudewas possiblymore ambivalent, nd closer tothe sadisticpropensitieshe projected nto thegreatscene "aupres de Montjouvain."Significantly,he atter nds with n obviously utobiographical entence, choingtheaforementioned assageof "Sentiments iliaux 'un Parricide": cette ndifferenceuxsouffrances u'on cause et qui, quelques autres noms qu'on lui donne, est la formeterrible tpermanentede la cruaute" A la recherche,:165).

28 REPRESENTATIONS

Making Things Strange- The Prehistory of a Literary Device

Documents

Transcript of Making Things Strange- The Prehistory of a Literary Device