Professional Documents
Culture Documents
The Johns Hopkins University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
New Literary History.
http://www.jstor.org
388
NEW LITERARY
HISTORY
Virtuality
(e.g., goal to be
obtained)
Actualization
(e.g., act necessaryto
goal)
Virtaattain
Absence of actualization
(e.g., inertia, impediment
to action)
Goal attained
(e.g., act successful)
Goal not attained
(e.g., act fails)
The elementary sequences combine so as to produce complex sequences. These combinations are realized according to variable configurations. Here are the most typical:
(1) The end-to-end series, for example:
Evil to perform
Evildoing
1
Deed avenged
The symbol = which we have used signifies that the same event simultaneously fulfills, within the perspective of a single role, two distinct functions. In our example, the same reprehensible action is
qualified, from the perspective of an avenger, as the end of a process
(evildoing) in relation to which he plays the passive role of witness and
as the opening of another process in which he will play an active role
(punishment).
(2) The enclave, for example:
389
POSSIBILITIES
Damage to inflict
Avenging process
Aggressive process
Deed avenged
Damage inflicted
vs.
vs.
vs.
Evil to commit
1
Evildoing
1
Evil committed = Deed to avenge
The symbol vs. which acts as a link between the two sequences means
that the same event which fulfills a function a from the perspective of
an agent A fulfills a function b when we shift to B's perspective. This
ability to perform a systematic conversion of points of view and to
formulate the rules of such a conversion will make it possible to delineate the spheres of action corresponding to the diverse roles (or
dramatis personae). In our example the borderline passes between an
aggressor's sphere of action and that of an administrator of justice
from whose perspective the aggression is equivalent to an evil deed.
These are the rules which will be tested in the following pages. We
will attempt to arrive at a logical reconstitution of the starting points
and directions of the narrative network. Without pretending to
explore each itinerary through to its final ramifications, we will try to
follow the main arteries, taking into account, along each distance
covered, the bifurcations at which the major branches split and so
engender subtypes. In this way we will draw up a tableau of model
sequences, much less numerous than one might imagine and from
among which the storyteller must necessarily choose. This tableau
390
itself will become the basis for a classification of the roles assumed by
the characters in the story.
Degradation expected
Process of
amelioration
Amelioration not
obtained
No process of
amelioration
Process of'
Degradation produced
degradation
Degradation avoided
No process of
degradation
391
POSSIBILITIES
Degradation produced
Processof amelioration
Processof degradation
Possibledegradation
Ameliorationto obtain
Ameliorationobtained
However, and this is not quite so obvious, this alternation is not only
possible but necessary. Let us consider the beginning of a story which
presents a deficiency affecting an individual or a group (in the form
of poverty, illness, stupidity, lack of a male heir, chronic plague, desire for knowledge, love, etc.). For this beginning to develop, the
situation must evolve; something must happen which will bring a
modification. In what direction? One might suppose either toward
amelioration or degradation. Rightfully, however, only an amelioration is possible. Misfortune may, of course, grow worse. There are
narratives in which misfortunes follow one after the other so that each
degradation brings on another. But in this case the deficiency which
marks the end of the first degradation is not the real point of departure of the second. This intermediary interruption-this reprieve-is
functionally equivalent to a period of amelioration, or at least to a
phase which represents the preservation of what can still be
saved.The departure point of the new phase of degradation is not the
degraded condition, which can only be improved, but the still relatively satisfying state which can only be degraded. Likewise, two
amelioration processes cannot follow one another, inasmuch as the
improvement brought about by the first still leaves something to be
desired. By implying this lack, the narrator introduces the equivalent
of a phase of degradation. The still relatively deficient condition
which results acts as a point of departure for the new amelioration
phase.
(2) By enclave. The failure of a process of amelioration or degradation in progress may result from the insertion of a reverse process
which prevents it from reaching its normal conclusion. In this case we
have the following schemata:
Possible degradation
Amelioration process = Possible
degradation
I
Degradation
process
I
Amelioration not
obtained
= Degradation
accomplished
Amelioration
process
I
392
NEW LITERARY
HISTORY
vs.
vs.
vs.
Possibledegradation
I
Degradation process
I
Degradation achieved
III. Amelioration
Process
POSSIBILITIES
393
Obstacleto
eliminate
Amelioration process
Elimia tn
Elimination
process
Possiblemeans
1
Means to be taken
Ameliorationobtained
Obstacle
eliminated
Means successful
394
NEW LITERARY
HISTORY
395
POSSIBILITIES
Three types of allies and three narrative structures are thus determined by the chronological ordering of the services exchanged. If two
associates are jointly interested in the completion of a single task, the
perspective of the beneficiary and that of the ally come so close together as to coincide: each one is the beneficiary of his own efforts
united with those of his ally. In a final stage there could be a single
character split into two roles: when an unhappy hero decides to right
his fate by "helping himself," he splits into two dramatis personae and
becomes his own ally. The completion of the task represents a voluntary degradation, a sacrifice (a fact which is supported by the expressions "to do something with great pain," "to toil," etc.) whose purpose
is to pay the price of an amelioration. Whether it is a question of a
single character who divides in two, or of two interdependent
characters, the role configuration remains identical: the amelioration
is obtained through the sacrifice of an ally whose interests are the
same as those of the beneficiary.
Rather than coincide, the perspectives oppose one another when
the beneficiary and his ally form the couple creditor/debtor. Their
roles then take on the following form: for example, A and B must
each obtain an amelioration distinct from that of the other. If A receives B's aid in order to achieve amelioration a, A becomes B's debtor
and will be obliged in turn to help B achieve amelioration b. The
narrative will follow the schema:
Perspectiveof A
(beneficiary of aid)
Perspectiveof B
Perspectiveof A
(obliging ally)
(obligated ally)
Perspectiveof B
(beneficiary of
aid)
Aid to be revs. Possible
ceived
service
1
I
Receiving of aid vs. Serviceable
action
$i ~ ~
Aid received
vs. Service
vs. Debt to be
accomplished
discharged
1
vs. Aid to be
received
I
The three types of allies that we have just distinguished-the interdependent associate, the creditor, the debtor-act according to a pact
which regulates the exchange of services and guarantees the repayment of services rendered. Sometimes this pact remains implicit (it is
understood
396
NEW LITERARY
HISTORY
obey the father who gave him life, that a slave obey the master who
saved his life, etc.); sometimes the pact is the result of a particular
negotiation, spelled out in the narrative more or less specifically. Just
as it was necessary to search for means before implementing them
when their lack constituted an obstacle to the completion of the task,
so aid must be negotiated when an ally does not cooperate spontaneously. Within the framework of this preliminary task, the abstention
of a future ally makes of him an adversary who has to be convinced.
This negotiation, soon to be discussed, constitutes the peaceful way of
eliminating an adversary.
VII. Negotiation
The negotiation consists for the agent in defining, in agreement
with the ex-adversary and future ally, the modalities of exchange of
services which constitute the goal of their alliance. But it is still necessary that the principle of such an exchange be accepted by both parties. The agent who takes such an initiative must act so as to create a
397
POSSIBILITIES
of the
Perspective
Seducer
Perspective of the
Seduced Person
Perspective
Aid to be received
I
Seduction to vs.
carry out
Seducing
process
to Both Parties
= Pact to
be concluded
Possible need
vs.
Growing awareness
of need
vs.
Need conceived
i
Success of
seduction
Common
i
= Aid to be
received
Pact to be
concluded
i
Negotiation
Pact concluded
Receiving
of aid
Aid received
vs.
Receiving
aid
vs.
Aid received
VIII.
of
= Promises to
be fulfilled
= Fulfillment of
promises
i
Promises fulfilled
Aggression
398
NEW LITERARY
HISTORY
Adversaryto be
eliminated
Elimination
process
Injury to inflict
vs.
Danger to be avoided
Aggressive process
I
vs.
Self-protection
process
Injury inflicted
vs.
Failureof protection
process
In the above schema it is the aggressor who retains the advantage.
However, this is obviously not always the case. If the adversary seems
to have at his disposal efficient methods of self-protection, it is desirable for the aggressor to catch him off guard. In that case the aggression takes on the more complex form of a trap. To use a trap is to act
so that the victim of aggression, instead of protecting himself as he
could, cooperates unknowingly with the aggressor (by not doing what
he ought to, or by doing what he ought not to). The trap is set in three
stages: first, a deception; then, if the deception succeeds, an error
committed by the dupe; finally, if the error-inducing process is
brought to its conclusion, the deceiver exploits his acquired advantage, which places a disarmed adversary at his mercy:
Adversary
eliminated
Perspective of
the Victim of
Aggression
Perspective ot the
Aggriessor-Deceiver
f
Dupe to create
I
Deception
Dupe
created
created
Dupe
vs.
vs.
Possible error
I
Error-inducing
process
Error
committed
Error
vs.
Opportunity
to seize I
Elimination
process
Process of
entrapment
Taking advantage
of opportunity
Injury to
inflict
I
Aggressive
process
Adversary
eliminated
Victim entrapped
Opportunity
seized
Injury
inflicted
399
Dupe to be
created
I
X to be
dissimulated +
Deception
process
Dissimulation
process
Non-Y to be
simulated
+ Simulation
process
i
Dupe
created
vs. Appearance of
Y believable
vs- Convincing
process
Y believed = Error to
be
committed
When the classification is further developed, several types of deception can be distinguished. Differences are created by the type of
simulation used by the deceiver to disguise the aggression being
planned: (1) the deceiver can simulate a situation implying the absence of any relationship between him and the future victim: he pretends not to be there, literally (if he hides) or figuratively (if he pretends to be asleep, to look away, to lose his mind, etc.); (2) the deceiver
can simulate peaceful intentions: he proposes an alliance, tries to
seduce or intimidate his victim, while he secretly prepares to break off
the negotiations or to betray the pact; (3) the deceiver simulates aggressive intentions so that the dupe, busy defending himself against
an imaginary assault, leaves himself open and defenseless against the
real attack.
400
NEW LITERARY
HISTORY
X. Degradation
Process
POSSIBILITIES
401
to pass from one perspective to another, they can be considered complements: (1) degradation brought about by sacrifice consented to for
the benefit of an indebted ally corresponds to amelioration achieved
through service received from an allied creditor; (2) degradation
caused by fulfilling an obligation to an allied creditor corresponds to
amelioration due to a service received from an indebted ally; (3) degradation undergone by submission to aggression corresponds to
amelioration achieved through the infliction of aggression; (4) degradation through error (which can be considered as the opposite of a
task: by doing, not what he ought, but what he ought not to, the agent
attains a goal which is opposite to the one envisaged) corresponds to
amelioration brought about by the success of a trap; (5) degradation
caused by punishment endured corresponds to amelioration realized
through vengeance obtained.
The degradation process initiated by these factors can develop
without encountering obstacles, either because these obstacles do not
appear on their own, or because no one has the desire or the ability to
intervene. If on the contrary obstacles occur, they act as devices which
protect the satisfactory state which came before. These devices may be
purely fortuitous, resulting from a fortunate combination of circumstances; they can also represent the resistance of an agent endowed with initiative. In this last case they form a pattern of acts
whose structure depends both on the shape of the danger and on the
tactics chosen by the protector.
These protective devices can succeed or fail. If they fail, the degradation which follows opens the possibility of compensating amelioration processes from among which certain ones, as we will see, take on
the form of a reparation specifically adapted to the type of degradation undergone.
402
NEW LITERARY
HISTORY
ted. But these rules can also be interdictions issuing from the will of a
legislator. In this case it is a question of restrictive clauses when an
"obliging" ally enters into a treaty with an "obliged" ally. The latter
is urged to observe them in order to profit from or go on profiting
from a service (to stay in Eden, etc.). Transgression of the rule harms
the "ally-creditor," and it is this injury which may bring about the
intervention of a retributor punishing the betrayal of the pact. The
error consists, in this case, not in the infraction itself, but in the
illusion of being able to break the rules with impunity.
Since the fault is primarily caused by blindness, this form of degradation brings on a specific form of protection, either a warning which
forestalls the error or an attempt at enlightenment which dissipates
the illusion. Sometimes events opportunely take over the protection
process; in other cases shrewd allies assume the task. When stating or
restating the rule, they tend to incarnate it even if they did not originate it; if the dupe ignores their advice, this stubbornness is injurious
to them, and the catastrophe which follows acts at the same time as the
punishment for this new transgression.
While the ally who incarnates the rule is treated as an adversary, the
adversary who helps to break it is treated as an ally. If he is unaware of
the consequences of the pseudohelp he is furnishing, he himself is a
dupe; but if he is aware of them, he is a deceiver. In the latter case the
deception takes place as the preparatory phase of a trap, in an aggression maneuver.
Degradation resulting from an error can mark the end of the narrative. The meaning of such a story is contained in the difference
between the desired goal and the actually achieved result: the
psychological opposition which corresponds to this meaning is presumption vs. humiliation. If the narrator chooses to go on, he disposes
of the various types of amelioration which we have pointed out.
Among these, however, there is one which is specifically suited to
repairing the consequences of the error because it represents the
opposite process: that is, the completion of a task through which the
agent, this time with adequate means, uses his ability to reinstate the
prosperity ruined by his foolishness.
POSSIBILITIES
403
The
Sacrifice
404
NEW LITERARY
HISTORY
XV. Punishment
From the perspective of a retributor any inflicted injury can become an evil deed to be punished. From the point of view of the
accused, the retributor is an aggressor, and the punitive action he
begins is a threat of degradation. The accused may either submit to or
defend himself against the danger thus created. In the latter case, the
three strategies indicated above-flight,
test of
negotiation,
405
POSSIBILITIES
(evil deed)
Deserved
Degradation
(punishment)
> Redemption
Meritorious
Degradation
(good deed)
Deserved
Amelioration
(recompense)
406
same time: free (for the narrator must at every moment choose the
continuation of his story) and controlled (for the narrator's only
choice, after each option, is between the two discontinuous and contradictory terms of an alternative). It is therefore possible to draw up
a priori the integral network of choices offered; to name and to place
in the sequence each type of event brought about by these choices; to
link these sequences organically in the unity of a role; to coordinate
the complementary roles which define the evolution of a situation; to
link evolutions in a narration which is at one and the same time
unpredictable (because of the play of available combinations) and
codifiable (because of the stable properties and the finite number of
combined elements).
At the same time this production of narrative types is a structuring
of human behavior patterns acted out or undergone. They furnish
the narrator with the model and substance of an organized evolution
which is indispensable to him and which he could not find elsewhere.
Whether it be desired or feared, their end rules over an arrangement
of actions which succeed one another and form hierarchies and
dichotomies according to an inviolable order. When man, in real life,
maps out a plan, explores in his mind the possible developments of a
situation, reflects on the course of action undertaken, remembers the
phases of a past event, he forms the first narrations of which we can
conceive. Inversely, the narrator who wants to order the chronological succession of the events he is relating, to give them a meaning, has
no other recourse but to link them together in the unity of an action
directed toward an end.
Thus to the elementary narrative types correspond the most general forms of human behavior. Task, contract, error, trap, etc., are
universal categories. The network of their internal articulations and
of their mutual relationships defines the field of possible experience a
priori. By constructing from the simplest narrative forms, sequences,
roles, and series of more and more complex and differentiated situations, we can establish the bases of a classification of the types of
narration; moreover, we define a framework of reference for the
comparative study of these behavior patterns which, always identical
in their basic structure, are diversified ad infinitum according to an
inexhaustible play of combinations and options, according to cultures,
periods, genres, schools, and personal styles. Although it is a technique of literary analysis, the semiology of narrative draws its very
existence and its wealth from its roots in anthropology.
407
POSSIBILITIES
Postface
My first reaction, after rereading my 1966 essay, is a sigh of relief: I
need deny nothing of what I wrote at that time. Then my relief is
colored by new misgivings: what progress have I made in the last
fourteen years? And how can I explain my groping attempts, not yet
brought to fulfillment, to apply this method to diverse corpora of
narrative?
I must then admit that this description, as accurate as it still may seem
to me, stops short of its stated project. It is not false, but it is not
economical. Scorning the principle maximumeffectumminimo sumptu, it
tolerates a plurality of concurrent solutions for the coding of each
text. Consequently, it does not provide the instrument needed for a
clear characterization and an indisputable classification of the events
of the narrative. A patient attempt to bring together categories of
analysis, to reduce the number of pertinent actions, and to grade
these units according to their degree of generality or specificity must
still be undertaken in order to make this model operative.
Having learned from experience, how would I rewrite this text
today? Without attempting to explain all the details of my present
method, I shall try to indicate its general direction in relation to a
central point. Moreover, the 1966 analysis will authorize me to take
certain shortcuts.
Any plot can be divided into a series of simultaneous or successive
events (or "processes"). There are two types of processes: on the one
hand, those that tend to modify the situation; on the other, those that
tend to preserve it. According to another division, each time that these
processes affect human characters (or anthropomorphic beings), they
are presented by the narrative as being favorable or unfavorable to
these characters. By intersecting these two distinctions we will construct four fundamental processes:
Process:
Modification:
Preservation:
Favorable
Amelioration
Protection
Unfavorable
Degradation
Frustration
408
Degradation:
X acquires blame
Protection:
X avoids acquiring
blame
Frustration:
X fails to acquire
merit
(2) Retributions
Amelioration:
X rewards Y
Degradation:
X punishes Y
Protection:
X protects Y from
punishment
Frustration:
X deprives Y of
reward
for
Amelioration of Y (end)
Protection of X (end)
by
Frustration of Y (means)
Frustration of X (means)
for
Protection of Y (end)
means can take two forms: the peaceable form of the prestation of
services, the hostile form of aggression. There result two specifications
of the preceding diagram:
409
POSSIBILITIES
(1) Prestations
Ameliorationof X:
X obtains a benefit from Y
Degradation of X:
X furnishes a benefit to Y
Protection of X:
X avoids furnishing a
benefit to Y
Frustrationof X:
X fails to receive a
benefit from Y
(2) Aggressions
Ameliorationof X:
X assaults Y
Protection of X:
X avoids Y's assault
Degradation of X:
X exposes himself to Y's
assault
Frustrationof X:
X fails to assault Y
Information processes can be considered as specific cases of prestation (if the information, being true, acts as a revelation), or of aggression (if the information, being false, acts as a deception, an inducement
to err). This situation produces the following two squares:
(1) Revelations
Ameliorationof X
by
Degradation of Y:
X obtains a revelation
from Y
Protection of X
by
Frustrationof Y:
X hides from Y that ...
Degradation of X
for
Ameliorationof Y:
X furnishes Y with a
revelation
Frustrationof X
for
Protection of Y:
X fails to obtain the
revelation furnished
by Y
Degradation of X
for
Ameliorationof Y:
X lets himself be induced
to err by Y
Frustration of X
for
Protection of Y:
X fails to induce Y to err
410
NEW LITERARY
HISTORY
The processes of influence, through which one agent motivates another to adopt a certain plan of action, can, in the same way, be
subdivided, on the one hand into a process of persuasion (which leads
to a modification),on the other, into a process ofdissuasion (which leads
to preservation). In another respect they can also be divided into two
categories, according to whether they induce the agent to perform an
act favorable or unfavorable to himself. The influence process which
induces the agent to perform a modificatory act which is favorable to
him is seduction; the one which induces the agent to perform a modificatory act which is unfavorable to him is the notificationof duties; the
one which induces the agent to perform a favorable preservative act is
intimidation; finally, the one which leads the agent to an unfavorable
preservative act is interdiction:
Inducement of X
To Perform an Act:
Favorable
Unfavorable
Modificatory
Seduction
(= desire of
Notificationof
Duties
amelioration)
(- duty of
degradation)
Preservative
Intimidation
Interdiction
of
(=
(fear degradation)
duty of
nonamelioration)
These few indications should suffice to measure the progress made
in the last fourteen years. It seems to me that the most serious fault
was to have attempted to construct the network of narrative possibilities taking explicitly into account only the modificatoryprocesses
(essentially amelioration and degradation). Every action, however, is
coupled with a reaction. The modificatory processes are continually
exposed to blockage by preservative counter-processes (essentially
frustration and protection). The dynamics of the plot rest on the constant tension between these contrary forces, on the repeated imbalances which affect the situation to the benefit of some and to the
detriment of others. Although I was aware of these facts, my first
construction does not strike an equal balance between the modificatory processes and the preservative processes: the latter are, so to
speak, envisaged only through pretermission. In the elementary sequence, nonactualization of the virtuality stands opposite to its actualization, the failure of the engaged action to its success: these negations of modification carve in intaglio a place for the process of
preservation. But this solution errs in that it envisages preservationonly
as the simple absence of modificationand not as an action having the
same degree of reality and calling for the same attempt at categoriza-
411
POSSIBILITIES
D'ETUDES
TRANSDISCIPLINAIRES.
PARIS