Textual Dynamics in Chinua Achebe's Home and Exile and No Longer at Ease
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
In this paper, I use Chinua Achebe's nonfiction work Home and Exile (2000) and his novel No Longer at Ease (1960) as reference points for arguing that application of intertextual theory to postcolonial literature such groundbreaking studies as Wolfgang Klooss's collection Across Lines (1998) (1) and Monika Reif-Hulser's Borderlands (1999) (2) runs risk of suppressing critical multidimensionality of some postcolonial texts. I will call these additional dimensions and borrowing latter term from Robert Scholes, who defines it as situating text in relation to culture, society, world, (3) to which I would add: relation to life experience of writer. I will argue that Achebe's work inter-, intra-, and extratextual dimensions exist dynamic relationship, producing mutually deconstructive tension that permits authority to no single textual dimension, creating instead textual dynamic which continually challenges and subverts critical efforts to fix its position as literary text. Simon Gikandi, Reading Chinua Achebe, makes similar point observing that Achebe's narrative strategies are intended to stress multiplicity of meanings and indeterminate zones of representation. Gikandi's acute analysis of Achebe's intratextual narrative strategies, however, is premised on what I would call extratextual assumption: that author's project is to resist fetishization within which Africa has been fixed by the discourse of Western world. (4) Gikandi's position therefore illustrates risk I am positing of assigning primacy to single textual dimension from which further critical comment is to be generated. Clearly there is no way to prove that extratextual dimension, whether biographical, ideological, or political, is determinative. The postcolonial critic, however, may have agenda that includes assigning to subject work high degree of moral or political intentionality. Achebe's most consistent theme, Gikandi argues, is idea of affirming national community, and his pessimism is an expression of his anxieties about transference of his discourse on African destiny from imaginative realm, mythical space, to practices of everyday life. (5) By assigning primacy to extratextual, and to one facet of extratextual at that, namely, historical/political, Gikandi must continually slight textual wrestling match that I am advancing here as most productive way of viewing Achebean narrative environment, or mediatope--a term I am borrowing from Bernd Schulte (6)--and, I would argue, that of some other postcolonial writers such as Nuruddin Farah, whose work has also been subject to incisive treatment by Gikandi. Gikandi's treatment of Farah's use of modernism is similarly predicated on extratextual claims about Farah's intention of providing a critique of idea of Somali nation and traditions associated with it. (7) In short, Farah's narrative is elucidated by Gikandi same terms as Achebe's, illustrating pitfall of assigning primacy to historical/political intentionalities: postcolonial writers come to be viewed through similar lens, except for apostate few, like V. S. Naipaul, whose work cannot be fitted within extratextual parameters critic has drawn. While Robert Scholes does not regard extratextuality as form of narrative textuality, it is clear that his situating text in relation to culture, society, world, and to author's construction of his personal experience articulates creative act occurring within narrative teleology of some kind, such as empowerment, liberation, decolonization, or even tragedy. The critique I am offering here of postcolonial criticism based on extratextual assumptions can also be made of criticism based on intertextual premises. Intertextuality--premised, Julia Kristeva's definition, on assumption that every text builds upon itself as mosaic of quotations . …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,005 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,012 | 0,013 |
| Communication savante | 0,006 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,005 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».