Dissertation Final Daniel McLeod

!

!THE!UNIVERSITY!OF!NOTTINGHAM!

!

SCHOOL!OF!ENGLISH!STUDIES!

!

!

!!

Reflective!Metaphor:!!

Embodied!Experience!as!an!Interpretive!Device!

!

!

By!Daniel!McLeod,!B.A.!

I.D.!No.!4244002!

!

!

A!dissertation!submitted!to!the!University!of!Nottingham!in!partial!fulfillment!of!the!

requirements!of!the!degree!Masters!of!Arts!in!Literary!Linguistics!

!

!

Date!Submitted:!5th!September,!2016!

Daniel!McLeod!

! Page 2 of 50!

TABLE!OF!CONTENTS!

!

Reflective!Metaphor:!Embodied!Experience!as!an!Interpretive!Device!....................................!3!1.!!!Introduction!..................................................................................................................................................!3!2.!!!What!is!Reflective!Metaphor?!...............................................................................................................!5!

2.1! Introducing!Reflective!Metaphor!.........................................................................................!5!3.!!!Text!World!Theory!....................................................................................................................................!6!4.!!!Embodiment!and!Metaphor!...................................................................................................................!8!! Case%1.%HERE%WE%GO%(2015)%–%Caryl%Churchill……………………………………………………11%5.!!!Emotional!Response!................................................................................................................................!13!

5.1! Simulation!Theory!....................................................................................................................!13!5.2! The!Primacy!of!Emotions!.......................................................................................................!15!5.3! Empathy!........................................................................................................................................!16!!!!!!5.3.1!!!!!The!Shared!Manifold!of!Intersubjectivity!..............................................................!17!!!!!!5.3.2!!!!!Metaphors!of!Personal!Identification!......................................................................!19!

! Case%2.%'Vagues'%(2016)%–%Joanna%Walsh……………………………………………………………..20%6.!!!Authorial!Intention!..................................................................................................................................!21!

6.1! Model!Reader!..............................................................................................................................!21!6.2! Editorial!Revisions!....................................................................................................................!23!6.3! Subjective!Readings!.................................................................................................................!24!

7.!!!Role!of!the!Reader!....................................................................................................................................!25!7.1! Closed!Texts!.................................................................................................................................!25!7.2! Open!Texts!....................................................................................................................................!26!

! Case%3.%The%Name%of%The%Rose%(1980)%–%Umberto%Eco……………………………….…..........27%7.3! Naïve!versus!Critical!Readers!..............................................................................................!28!

8.!!!Stylistic!Analysis!of!‘Signs!and!Symbols’!........................................................................................!31!8.1! Introduction!.................................................................................................................................!31!8.2!! Nabokov!on!Art!and!Criticism!............................................................................................!32!8.3! Editorial!Process!with!The!New!Yorker!..........................................................................!34!8.4! Naïve!and!Critical!Readings!..................................................................................................!36!8.5! The!Symbolism!of!‘Signs!and!Symbols!.............................................................................!37!8.6! Reflective!Metaphorical!Interpretation!...........................................................................!40!

9.!!!!Closing!Remarks!......................................................................................................................................!42!!!!!9.1!!!!!Recapitulations:!Embodied!Experience!as!an!Interpretive!Device!......................!42!9.2! New!Directions!...........................................................................................................................!42!9.3! In!Closing!......................................................................................................................................!44!

References!..........................................................................................................................................................!45!APPENDIX!A!–!Stylistic!Analysis!of!‘Vagues’!!APPENDIX!B!–!Summary!of!‘Signs!and!Symbols’!APPENDIX!C!–!‘Signs!and!Symbols’!Full!Text!APPENDIX!D!–!Analysis!of!Symbolism!in!‘Signs!and!Symbols’!

Daniel!McLeod!

! Page 3 of 50!

Reflective)Metaphor:)Embodied)Experience)as)an)Interpretive)Device)

1.)))Introduction)

Relatively!recent!work!in!the!cognitive!sciences!claims!that!the!mind!is!inherently!

embodied,!thought!is!mostly!unconscious,!and!abstract!concepts!are!largely!

metaphorical,!challenging!more!than!2!millennia!of!philosophical!theories!on!reason!

(Lakoff!and!Johnson,!1999)!and!consequently!forcing!us!to!rethink!entirely!what!it!

means!to!be!human.!Such!revelatory!cognitive!scientific!discoveries!naturally!have!

significant!implications!for!research!into!literature:!as!we!seek!to!resolve!the!

complicated!matter!of!how!literary!texts!affect!their!readers,!this!uncovering!of!the!

readers’!cognitive!processes!provides!important!avenues!for!critical!speculation.!

Specifically,!such!discoveries!reveal!a!complex!web!of!interconnectivity!between!

topics!in!both!the!cognitive!sciences!(psychology,!philosophy,!linguistics,!

neuroscience)!and!the!institution!of!literary!criticism.!Embodiment,!metaphor,!

emotions,!empathy,!authorial!intention,!reader!response,!and!interpretation!are!just!

a!few!topics!that!appear!to!contain!undeniable!and!foundational!links.!In!short,!the!

more!we!learn!about!the!brain,!the!more!we!understand!readerly!responses!to!

literature:!this!is!the!essence!of!the!cognitive!turn!in!literary!analysis—the!study!of!

literature!as!it!is!created!and!consumed!by!humans.!!

The!intergrelated!nature!of!cognitive!scientific!theories!means!that!virtually!

each!new!discovery!affects!many!previous!ones.!Take,!for!example,!the!discovery!

that!emotions!can!be!registered!unconsciously!(Berridge,!Kent,!Winkielman,!2003),!

and!!the!implications!this!has!for!metaphors!of!personal!identification!in!literature!

(Cohen,!1999;!Miall,!2002):!in!exploring!the!role!that!feeling!plays!in!guiding!

readers’!literary!interpretations,!it’s!essential!to!account!for!feelings!that!may!exist,!

as!Stockwell!puts!it,!“at!the!edges!or!just!below!the!surface!of!articulate!conscious!

awareness”!(Stockwell,!2012);!thus,!readers!may!experience!metaphorical!

understanding!of!narrators,!characters,!or!narrative!situations,!implanted!

stylistically!into!texts,!without!being!fully!conscious!of!the!emotions!that!initiate!the!

Daniel!McLeod!

! Page 4 of 50!

metaphorical!understanding.!It!seems!to!me!that!any!attempt!to!understand!the!true!

nature!of!a!literary!text’s!effect!on!readers!must!necessarily!encompass!a!wide!range!

of!theoretical!work,!acknowledging!the!connectedness!between!numerous!

contemporary!theories.!This!may!seem!a!daunting!task,!as!it!calls!for!an!

interdisciplinary!approach!demanding!both!formidable!comprehensive!general!

awareness—of!literary!history!and!the!cognitive!sciences—and!intricate!theoretical!

specificity.!For!example,!an!analysis!of!J.D.!Salinger’s!short!story!A!Perfect!Day!for!

Bananfish!may!benefit!from!a!contextual!frame!theory!response!(Emmott,!1997)!

that!highlights!the!foregrounding!of!the!main!character!Seymour’s!mental!illness,!

potentially!pairing!with!theory!of!mind!(Zunshine,!2006)!to!provide!an!

interpretation!of!how!readers!establish!their!empathic!relationship!to!Seymour!

through!an!inability!to!provide!motivational!inferences!from!his!actions;!however,!

this!provides!merely!the!foundation!for!a!further!level!of!interpretation!that!

explores!the!historiographical!context!surrounding!Salinger’s!experience!as!a!

soldier!in!World!War!II,!and!the!story’s!potential!social!commentary!on!the!author’s!

recurring!theme,!the!loss!of!innocence!(Lane,!G.,!1973).!This!kind!of!total!

exploration!appears!to!be!the!future!of!literary!analysis.!!

The!following!paper!proposes!an!interdisciplinary!model!of!metaphor,!

termed!reflective!metaphor,!which!relies!on!theories!from!both!literary!criticism!

and!the!cognitive!sciences.!Reflective!metaphor!is!a!dialectical!process!through!

which!the!stylistic!features!of!a!text!are!affectively!coded!by!readers!and!reflected!

upon!to!form!an!interpretation!of!the!text.!Drawing!from!a!wide!range!of!existing!

cognitive!poetic!theories—including!Text!World!Theory,!Embodiment,!Emotions!

and!Empathy,!Intentionality,!Reader!Response,!and!Interpretation—this!paper!

explores!the!complex!processes!at!work!in!reflective!metaphor,!from!its!inception!in!

the!author,!to!its!stylistic!manifestation!within!the!text,!to!its!affective!operations!in!

readers.!The!primary!textual!evidence!for!reflective!metaphor!in!this!paper!will!be!

found!in!an!extensive!stylistic!analysis!of!Vladimir!Nabokov’s!postgmodernist!short!

story!Signs!and!Symbols.!Additional!cases!of!reflective!metaphor!will!be!analyzed!at!

various!points!throughout!the!essay,!demonstrating!specific!aspects!of!the!general!

model.!!Caryl!Churchill’s!(2015)!play!HERE%WE%GO,!Joanna!Walsh’s!(2016)!short!

Daniel!McLeod!

! Page 5 of 50!

story!‘Vagues’,!and!Umberto!Eco’s!(1980)!novel!The%Name%of%the%Rose!will!form!Case!

1,!2,!and!3.!

Reflective!metaphor!can!exist!in!any!type!of!literary!or!nongliterary!text.!It!is!

not!restricted!to,!for!example,!literary!fiction.!In!the!following!paper!I!will!use!

several!terms!to!describe!participants!and!narratives!that!span!multiple!formats.!

The!word!‘text’!will!refer!to!any!act!of!communication—story,!article,!script,!

advertisement,!enactment!of!a!play,!or!conversation.!And!the!word!‘reader’!will!

refer!to!the!experiencer!of!this!act!of!communication—reader,!audience,!listener,!

and!so!forth.!

2.)))What)is)Reflective)Metaphor?)

2.1! What!is!Reflective!Metaphor?!

Reflective!metaphor!is,!in!a!sense,!a!form!of!embodied!metaphor!in!that!it!provides!a!

way!of!conceptualizing!an!abstract!concept!in!terms!of!a!bodily!sensation.!In!the!

case!of!reflective!metaphor,!affective!responses!form!the!bodily!sensation:!the!

reading!of!a!text!produces!a!certain!feeling!in!the!reader,!which!manifests!embodied!

changes;!the!reader!then!undergoes!a!process!of!reflection!upon!this!affective!

response,!triggering!his!or!her!understanding!of!an!abstract!concept!located!within!

the!text.!!

Numerous!theories!apply!to!our!understanding!of!this!dialectical!process.!For!

starters,!Text!World!Theory!provides!a!clear!way!of!conceptualizing!the!shifts!

between!the!world!of!the!text!and!the!world!in!which!the!reading!takes!place—the!

process!through!which!information!is!presented,!transferred,!understood,!and!

applied!towards!an!interpretive!act.!Embodiment!and!metaphor!theories!provide!

the!necessary!conceptual!structures!to!outline!the!effects!of!reader!responses!to!a!

text.!Relatedly,!theories!of!emotions!such!as!PSS!(Perceptual!Symbol!Systems),!the!

primacy!of!emotions,!and!unconscious!emotions!help!to!explain!how!textual!

information!creates!conscious!and!unconscious!emotional!effects,!providing!readers!

with!a!functioning!stance!towards!a!text!(Ellis,!2005);!and!theories!of!empathy,!

including!Simulation!Theory!and!the!more!literarygcentric!theory!of!Metaphors!of!

Daniel!McLeod!

! Page 6 of 50!

Personal!Identification,!provide!ways!of!understanding!the!implications!of!such!

affective!responses!to!texts!and!the!consequences!of!reflective!metaphor’s!ability!to!

shift!a!reader’s!understanding!of!themselves!through!identification!with!textual!

elements!such!as!characters!or!narrative!events.!Finally,!the!literary!critical!theories!

of!authorial!intention,!reader!response,!and!interpretation!form!the!frame!within!

which!to!view!reflective!metaphor’s!inner!cognitive!workings.!

3.)))Text)World)Theory))

As!stated!above,!reflective!metaphor!entails!an!extension!of!textuallygcreated!affect!

beyond!the!text,!manifesting!an!internal!shift!or!realization!in!the!reader;!this!

change!in!psychological!state!(new!knowledge)!is!perceived!by!the!reader!and!

reflected!upon,!then!applied!back!onto!the!text!in!order!to!form!an!interpretation.!

Given!the!dialectical!nature!of!this!process—the!reader’s!conceptualization!of!a!

source!domain!is!revised!upon!relating!understanding!of!source!to!target,!in!a!

cognitive!system!resembling!a!feedback!loop—one!helpful!way!of!conceptualizing!it!

is!to!apply!the!cognitive!poetic!theory!of!text!worlds.!Text!World!Theory!(hereafter!

TWT)!arose!out!of!the!claim!that!reality!is!not!directly!accessible!to!us,!but!rather!

“we!make!use!of!mental!representations!in!order!to!interpret!reality.”!(Werth,!1999:!

8)!In!TWT,!the!discourse!(real)!world!is!individuated!from!the!text!(fictional)!world;!

distinction!between!the!two!worlds!arises!from!the!“indirect!relation!between!

human!mind!and!external!reality!(that)!governs!our!interaction!and!processing!of!

texts.”!(1999:!8)!Embedded!within!the!text!world!are!multiple!subgworlds,!including!

deictic,!attitudinal,!and!epistemic!subworlds!(HidalgogDowning,!2002:!123;!Werth!

1999)!!

Toggling!occurs!when!readers!(or!characters)!switch!between!worlds!

(Stockwell,!2002:!142)!This!process!is!key!to!what!is!known!as!the!Construction!

Integration!model!of!comprehension,!which!can!be!integrated!with!TWT!to!form!an!

eloquent!model!of!literary!comprehension!highly!applicable!to!our!understanding!of!

how!metaphor!generally,!and!reflective!metaphor!more!specifically,!operates!to!

inform!textual!interpretation.!!

Daniel!McLeod!

! Page 7 of 50!

Construction!Integration!(CI)!is!a!twogstage!process!that!evolved!from!early!

work!in!discourse!comprehension!(see!van!Dijk!&!Kintsch,!1983).!According!to!

Stockwell,!“the!first!stage!is!a!construction!phase!in!which!a!macrostructural!

representation!is!created.”!(2002:!153)!This!macrostructural!representation!is!

“constructed!from!the!textbase!together!with!inferences!made!at!the!local!level!of!

the!reading!process”!(2002:!153)—the!“local!level!of!the!reading!process”!here!is!

equivalent!to!the!situational!act!of!reading!in!TWT’s!discourse!world.!Stage!one!

provides!readers!with!a!rough!idea!of!a!text’s!propositional!content.!Literary!

comprehension!develops!in!stage!two,!when!the!macrostructural!representation!

achieves!coherence!through!integration!with!a!discourse!world’s!contextual!

consideration:!the!“cognitive!constraints!of!coherence,!relevance!and!significance!

have!to!be!satisfied!by!rejecting!local!incoherences!in!favour!of!a!globally!coherent!

representation.”!(2002:!154)!Thus,!overall!comprehension!is!a!result!of!a!text’s!

propositional!content,!as!contained!within!the!textgworld,!combined!with!its!“social!

and!personal!impact,!its!felt!experience”!(2002:!154)!which!exist!only!in!the!

discourse!world.!This!model!of!comprehension,!which!integrates!cognition!with!

emotional!and!motivational!aspects!of!a!reading!experience,!aptly!applies!to!the!

theory!of!reflective!metaphor.!

Literary!metaphors!by!definition!trigger!a!world!switch!between!the!text!and!

discourse!worlds:!in!order!to!realize!something!as!metaphorical,!a!reader!must!

temporarily!leave!the!text!world!and!reflect.!In!his!article!‘The!Positioned!Reader’,!

Stockwell!writes!that!it!is!“physically,!conceptually,!and!in!principle!impossible”!to!

simultaneously!read!and!analyze!reading,!affirming!that!a!literary!reader!and!

analyst!exist!on!different!ontological!levels:!the!analyst!contains!the!reader,!but!not!

vice!versa!(Stockwell,!2013:!3).!Further,!Stockwell!claims!that!reading!is!a!direct!

form!of!consciousness,!“pointed!at”!the!world!of!the!text.!From!a!text!world!

perspective,!this!places!the!reader!in!the!discourse!world!with!his!or!her!

consciousness!aimed!directly!at!the!text!world,!excluding!perception!and!awareness!

of!the!discourse!world.!Upon!analysis,!the!reader!is!drawn!out!of!this!text!world!in!

an!act!of!selfgconsciousness,!pointed!back!at!him!or!herself.!!

Daniel!McLeod!

! Page 8 of 50!

In!the!case!of!reflective!metaphor,!information!contained!within!the!text!

world!initiates!an!affective!readerly!response!triggering!a!world!switch!out!into!the!

discourse!world!as!the!reader!is!challenged!(via!the!CI!process)!to!make!sense!of!his!

or!her!felt!experience.!This!affective!response!is!then!reflected!upon!through!

integration!with!the!text’s!propositional!content!in!order!to!form!an!interpretation.!

TWT!and!CI!provide!a!useful!framework!with!which!to!discuss!the!dialectical!

process!at!work!through!a!readerly!enactment!of!this!stylistic!device.!!

4.)))Embodiment)and)Metaphor)

Embodiment!in!the!cognitive!sciences!refers!to!the!concept!of!experiencing!and!

forming!an!understanding!of!the!world!through!our!own!anatomically!complex!

bodies,!taking!into!consideration!the!body’s!role!in!everyday,!situated!cognition!

(Gibbs,!2005:!1)!Described!neatly!in!his!book!Women,%Fire%and%Dangerous%Things,!

Lakoff!states!that!“the!structures!used!to!put!together!our!conceptual!systems!grow!

out!of!bodily!experience!and!make!sense!of!it;!moreover,!our!conceptual!system!is!

directly!grounded!in!perception,!body!movement,!and!experience!of!a!physical!and!

social!character.”!(Lakoff,!1987:!xiv)!The!theory!of!embodied!cognition!has!been!

revolutionary!within!the!field!of!cognitive!sciences,!with!impacts!felt!in!various!

realms,!including!perception,!action,!imagery,!memory,!reasoning,!language,!

communication,!emotion,!and!consciousness,!to!name!a!few!(Gibbs,!2005).!The!

widegreaching!consequences!of!embodied!cognition!are!outlined!in!Lakoff!and!

Johnson’s!1999!ambitious!work!Philosophy%in%the%Flesh,!which!sought!to!provide!a!

broad!regevaluation!of!human!experience!in!the!wake!of!embodied!cognition,!an!

intellectual!discovery!that!erases!over!2!millennia!of!a!priori!philosophical!

speculation!on!reason.!More!specific!to!our!purposes,!embodied!cognition!has!

important!implications!for!the!study!of!conceptual!metaphor.!!

Conceptual!metaphor!entails!the!act!of!understanding!an!abstract!(target)!

domain!in!terms!of!a!concrete!(source)!domain.!(Lakoff!&!Johnson,!1980)!

Unrestricted!to!literary!language,!conceptual!metaphors!are!pervasive!in!everyday!

thought!and!language.!Take,!for!example,!the!metaphor![IDEAS!are!FOOD],!often!

Daniel!McLeod!

! Page 9 of 50!

used!to!conceptualize!the!abstract!domain!of!‘ideas’!by!relating!it!to!the!concrete!

domain!of!‘food’.!Successful!metaphors!involve!submappings,!which!relate!aspects!

of!the!source!domain!to!comparative!aspects!of!the!target.!Thus,!in!the!metaphorical!

construction![IDEAS!are!FOOD],!!‘thinking’!is!‘preparing!food’,!‘understanding’!is!

‘digestion’,!‘believing’!is!‘swallowing’,!‘communication’!is!‘feeding’,!and!so!on.!!

Embodied!metaphor!evolves!naturally!from!conceptual!metaphor!theory’s!

fusion!with!the!now!widely!accepted!theory!of!embodied!cognition,!showing!how!

abstract!concepts!can!become!closely!tied!to!the!concrete!bodily!experience!of!

sensations!and!movements!(Barsalou,!2008;!Niedenthal,!Barsalou,!Winkielman,!

KrauthgGruber,!&!Ric,!2005).!Lakoff!and!Johnson!(1980)!first!described!how!

sensorimotor!information!provides!a!rich!source!for!metaphorical!

conceptualizations!of!subjective!experiences!by!enabling!conventional!mental!

imagery!to!inform!our!understanding!of!abstract!concepts.!For!example,!“we!may!

form!an!image!of!something!going!by!us!or!over!our!heads!(sensorimotor!

experience)!when!we!fail!to!understand!(subjective!experience).!A!gesture!tracing!

the!path!of!something!going!past!us!or!over!our!heads!can!indicate!vividly!a!failure!

to!understand.”!(Lakoff!&!Johnson,!1999:!45)!!

More!than!conceptualizing!abstract!concepts!in!terms!of!familiar!

sensorimotor!experience,!we!actually!“respond!aesthetically!and!emotionally!to!

metaphor!as!a!felt!sense!of!embodied!movement”!(Gibbs,!2008:!210).!In!fact,!Gibbs!

defines!emotional!response!as!movement!through!affective!space—affective!space,!

according!to!Gibbs,!has!“a!sensuous!feel!to!it,!a!texture!that!makes!it!neither!purely!

mental,!nor!reducible!to!the!physiological!body”!(2008:!213).!Empirical!studies!in!

conceptual!metaphor!theory!reveal!that!metaphor!has!a!special!power!to!move!us!

emotionally!(Gibbs,!2008).!As!a!result,!embodied!emotional!response!often!

manifests!a!corporeal!urge!to!perform!an!action:!to!attack,!approach,!run!away,!or!

touch!something.!Such!emotional!response!reflects!a!change!in!postural!attitude;!

simple!actions!are!imbued!with!an!affective!quality,!ex.!the!impulse!to!run!away!in!

response!to!fear!possesses!a!negative,!undesirable!quality.!Building!off!the!work!of!

Cataldi!(1996),!who!claims!that!emotions!possess!felt!textures—such!as!feeling!

frozen!with!fear,!radiant!with!love,!or!steamy!with!lust—!Gibbs’!studies!in!poetic!

Daniel!McLeod!

! Page 10 of 50!

metaphor!reveal!that!literature!has!the!power!to!move!its!readers!in!a!way!that!is!

not!purely!intellectual,!but!visceral:!in!one!study,!selfgreported!body!sensations!(of!

heat,!movement,!expansiveness)!rated!consistently!higher!in!literary!metaphors!

than!in!their!paraphrased!counterparts,!suggesting!that!“a!felt!sense!of!movement!is!

readily!experienced!when!we!encounter!metaphorical!language”!(Gibbs,!2008:!217).!!

To!date,!studies!in!embodied!metaphor!have!tended!to!focus!solely!on!

physical!manifestations—for!example,!performing!tasks!while!physically!enacting!

conventional!creativity!metaphors!(ex.!‘on!the!one!hand,!then!on!the!other!hand’,!or!

‘thinking!outside!the!box’)!in!order!to!study!their!effects!on!creative!problem!solving!

(Leung!et!al.,!2012).!This!view!of!embodied!metaphor!is!restricted!to!

conceptualizations!of!abstract!concepts!in!terms!of!the!felt!experience!of!physical!

actions;!however,!given!the!felt!sense!of!embodied!movement!characteristic!of!

metaphor,!I!posit!that!the!theory!of!embodied!metaphor!should!take!into!account!

the!possibility!of!understanding!more!complex!and!nebulous!abstract!concepts!

(such!as!themes!in!literary!narratives)!in!terms!of!an!embodied!emotional!

experience.!That!is,!the!concept!of!embodied!emotional!experience!may!provide!the!

source!domain!for!conceptualizations!of!increasingly!abstract!domains.!!

This!is!a!slight!reroute!from!our!typical!understanding!of!embodied!

metaphor,!in!which!the!emotions!themselves!often!form!the!abstract!concepts!that!

are!conceptualized!in!terms!of!concrete,!physical!sensorimotor!experience.!This!

notion!forces!us!to!rethink!the!categorization!of!‘concrete’!and!‘abstract’,!a!

categorization!that!until!now!has!been!defined!in!binary!fashion:!a!concept!is!either!

concrete!or!abstract,!but!not!both,!and!the!divide!in!absolute.!Instead,!reflective!

metaphor!introduces!a!clinal!system!of!categorization!resultant!from!discoveries!in!

embodied!cognition,!in!which!concepts!range!from!concrete!to!abstract!along!a!scale!

of!degrees.!In!this!system,!emotions!fall!somewhere!in!the!middle,!as!they!seem!to!

rely!more!heavily!on!embodied!sensorimotor!experience!than,!say,!the!concepts!of!

literary!themes,!or!mathematics.!

In!cases!of!reflective!metaphor,!only!through!accessing!the!mental!

frameworks!associated!with!emotional!responses—frameworks!that!are!embodied!

in!the!sense!that!corporeal!experience!is!used!as!a!source!for!metaphorical!

Daniel!McLeod!

! Page 11 of 50!

understanding,!such!as!the!impulse!to!run!away!in!fear—can!an!individual!form!an!

understanding!of!a!nebulous!abstract!concept,!such!as!a!literary!theme.!

To!illustrate!this!idea,!let!us!examine!Case!1!of!reflective!metaphor,!in!Caryl!

Churchill’s!2015!play!HERE%WE%GO.!

!

Case%1.%HERE%WE%GO%(2015)%—%Caryl%Churchill%

Caryl!Churchill’s!play!HERE%WE%GO%was!first!performed!at!the!National!Theatre,!

London!in!November!of!2015.!Churchill,!widely!renowned!for!her!experimentation!

with!form!(most!notably!in!Cloud%9,!1989),!is!considered!among!England’s!greatest!

living!playwrights.!Her!newest!play!HERE%WE%GO!focuses!on!the!death!of!“a!man!

with!an!adventurous!past!and!a!ginger!cat!that!needs!a!home.”!(Churchill,!2015)!The!

play’s!final!act!contains!the!most!visceral!instance!of!reflective!metaphor!I!have!

encountered!to!date.!Reproduced!with!permission!from!Nick!Hern!Books!Ltd.,!Act!

3’s!script!is!as!follows:!

!

3.)GETTING)THERE)

!

A%very%old%or%ill%person%and%a%carer.%

%

The%old/ill%person%is%in%nightclothes%and%is%helped%by%the%carer%to%get%dressed,%

slowly%and%with%difficulty%because%of%pain%and%restricted%movement.%

%

Then%to%get%undressed%and%back%into%nightclothes.%

%

Then%to%get%dressed.%

%

Then%to%get%undressed%and%back%into%nightclothes.%%

%

Then%to%get%dressed…%

%

for%as%long%as%the%scene%lasts.%

Daniel!McLeod!

! Page 12 of 50!

!

Of!the!play’s!45!minutes!the!final!scene!accounts!for!roughly!15,!although!Churchill!

allows!for!an!open!length!in!her!directions,!writing!that!scene!continues!“for!as!long!

as!the!scene!lasts.”!(Churchill,!2015)!Online!reviews!of!HERE%WE%GO!dwell!on!the!

final!scene’s!uncomfortable,!frustratingly!dull!and!repetitious!quality.!“It!is!

Churchill’s!third!section,!Getting!There,!that!is!both!the!most!testing!and!humane”!

Michael!Billington!writes!in!his!4!star!Guardian!review.!“The!concluding!coda!seems!

determined!to!bore!us!to!death”,!says!Dominic!Cavendish!in!his!contrarily!scathing!1!

star!review!for!The!Telegraph.!Interestingly,!such!a!diverse!range!of!reader!

response!is!indicative!of!the!polarizing!nature!of!reflective!metaphor!between!

critical!readers!who!discern!the!existence!of!a!complex!embodied!metaphor!and!

naïve!readers!who!fail!to!observe!this!level!of!interpretation.!

HERE%WE%GO’s!final!scene!forces!readers!to!develop!an!understanding!of!

dementia!and!old!age!by!metaphorically!applying!a!reflection!of!their!affective!

response!in!the!discourse!world!back!onto!the!text:!the!embodied,!corporeal!

manifestation!of!frustration,!anxiety,!and!ultimately!boredom!initiated!through!

indefinite!repetition!can!be!reflected!upon!to!inform!an!interpretation!of!a!text!in!

which!the!protagonist!is!held!captive!by!the!degradation!of!his!own!mind!and!body.!!

The!reader’s!affective!response!to!HERE%WE%GO’s!propositional!content!

achieves!coherence!only!through!integration!with!the!reader’s!discourse!world!

consideration!of!coherence,!relevance,!and!significance:!by!asking!themselves,!“Why!

am!I!being!subject!to!this?”,!readers!can!arrive!at!the!interpretation!that!HERE%WE%

GO!challenges!us!to!consider!our!own!mortality,!as!we!contemplate!value!of!the!

protagonist’s!dour!existence!and,!more!broadly,!what!it!means!to!be!alive.!Note!that!

reflective!metaphor!is!distinctly!individuated!from!an!ordinary!metagtextual!

metaphor!by!its!dialectic,!embodied!cognitive!operations.!A!metagtextual!metaphor!

at!work!in!this!scene!is!found!in!“for!as!long!as!the!scene!lasts”:!the!indefinite!length!

of!living!with!dementia!is!metaphorically!conceptualized!as!the!indefinite!length!of!

the!play.!

!

End%of%Case%1.%

Daniel!McLeod!

! Page 13 of 50!

!

In!upcoming!sections,!we!will!explore!the!cognitive!processes!at!work!within!

reflective!metaphor,!closely!examining!the!simulation!process!through!which!

affective!responses!are!created!in!readers,!and!the!implications!of!the!empathic!

connections!to!literary!narratives!such!simulated!responses!create.!Perceptual!

Symbol!System!theory!places!embodiment!at!the!core!of!emotional!information!

processing,!offering!a!viable!foundation!on!which!to!base!a!theory!of!reflective!

metaphor.!Further,!recent!works!in!the!primacy!of!emotions!offer!valuable!insights!

into!the!role!of!emotional!response!in!human!understanding!and!literary!reading!in!

particular.!!

5.)))Emotional)Response)

An!inclusive!outline!of!the!neural!and!cognitive!mechanisms!involved!in!embodied!

cognition!is!beyond!the!interests!of!this!paper.!Instead,!I!will!rely!on!current!

supported!hypotheses!relevant!to!a!discussion!of!reflective!metaphor.!

5.1! Simulation!Theory!

Simulation!theory!proposes!that!we!understand!the!thoughts!of!another!person!by!

placing!ourselves!in!their!mental!shoes,!so!to!speak,!and!using!our!own!mind/body!

as!a!model!for!the!minds!of!others.!(Gallese!&!Goldman,!1998)!Dedicated!brain!

structures!known!as!“mirror!neurons”!underpin!a!direct,!automatic,!nonpredictive,!

and!noninferential!simulation!mechanism!enabling!the!observer!to!recognize,!

understand,!and!imitate!the!behaviour!of!others.!(Gallese,!2001)!This!simulation!

process!is!thought!to!underlie!a!wide!range!of!cognitive!processes,!including!“action!

perception!and!imitation!(as!simulation!of!the!observed!action),!emotion!perception!

(as!simulation!of!the!perceived!emotion),!and!mindreading.”!(Gibbs,!2005:!36)!

Simulations!are!imaginative!acts!that,!in!most!cases,!are!performed!subconsciously!

(Ravenscroft!&!Currie,!2002;!Gibbs,!2006:!442).!For!example,!when!observing!a!lady!

reaching!for!a!sandwich!we!may!subconsciously!simulate!this!action!in!ourselves!to!

form!an!understanding!of!the!action:!she!is!hungry,!she!wishes!to!eat!the!sandwich.!

Daniel!McLeod!

! Page 14 of 50!

However,!this!process!occurs!without!conscious!reflection!on!our!part.!This!notion!

of!subgconscious!simulation!is!closely!tied!to!online!vs.!offline!embodiment.!

Online!embodiment!(also!known!as!situated!cognition)!deals!with!cognitive!

activity!that!operates!directly!on!realgworld!environments.!(Niedenthal,!Barsalou,!

Winkielman,!KrauthgGruber,!&!Ric,!2005:!187)!For!example,!the!act!of!smiling!in!

imitation!of!another!person’s!happy!facial!expression.!Offline!embodiment!deals!

with!cognitive!activity!that!is!“decoupled”!from!the!realgworld!environment,!but!

whose!“operations!continue!to!be!supported!by!processing!in!modalitygspecific!

systems!and!bodily!states”!(2005:!187);!thus,!understanding!the!word!‘happiness’!or!

recalling!a!happy!experience!by!recruiting!modalitygspecific!systems.!This!onlineg

offline!distinction!to!which!simulation!theory!is!intimately!tied!is!the!basis!for!

Perceptual!Symbol!Systems!theory,!or!PSS,!and!is!key!to!understanding!how!stylistic!

choices!can!incite!emotional!meaning!in!readers.!

“According!to!PSS…!the!modalitygspecific!states!that!represent!perception,!

action,!and!introspection!in!online!situations!are!also!used!to!represent!these!

situations!in!the!offline!processing!that!underlies!memory,!language,!and!thought”!

(2005:!194)!Thus,!the!cognitive!system!uses!reenactments!(or!simulations)!of!

online,!modalitygspecific!states.!PSS!is!founded!upon!Damasio’s!(1989)!theory!of!

Convergence!Zones!(CZ),!and!the!assumption!that!perception!of!an!object!activates!

relevant!feature!detectors!in!the!brain’s!modalitygspecific!systems.!Thus,!even!

without!direct!access!to!a!modalitygspecific!state,!such!as!loved!one’s!physically!

manifested!happiness,!we!can!obtain!our!understanding!through!a!process!of!

reenactment,!in!which!stored!conjunctive!neurons!are!activated!to!produce!“featural!

maps”,!or!hierchicallygorganized!packets!of!information—ex.!a!featural!map!of!

happiness!might!include!the!colour,!orientation,!and!planar!surfaces!of!the!face!

(Damasio,!1989;!Niedenthal,!Barsalou,!Winkielman,!KrauthgGruber,!&!Ric,!2005:!

194).!

Recent!work!by!Dancygier!on!the!intensity!and!texture!of!imagery!draws!an!

exciting!connection!between!PSS!and!literary!linguistic!analysis.!Here,!Dancygier!

looks!at!how!imagery!can!evoke!a!specific!poetic!mood!naturally!correlated!with!the!

expression!of!feelings.!Arguing!that!what!causes!the!connection!between!bodily!

Daniel!McLeod!

! Page 15 of 50!

perceptions!described!by!a!text!and!a!resultant!feeling!awakened!in!the!reader!is!not!

clear,!Dancygier’s!contention!is!that!stylistic!analyses,!paired!with!cognitive!

scientific!theories!of!simulation,!could!help!to!clarify!the!sources!of!this!connection.!

Consistent!with!an!offline!theory!of!simulation,!Gibbs!&!Matlock!(1999)!and!Pecher!

&!Zwaan!(2005)!show!that!words!evoke!simulations!in!our!brains!similar!to!

observing!actual!actions.!Dancygier!uses!this!finding!to!argue!that!the!effects!of!

imagery!depend!“in!equal!measure!on!the!bodily!roots!of!experience!and!on!the!role!

of!language!in!prompting!conceptualizations!and!simulations”!(Dancygier,!2013:!

215)!

Following!a!similar!stream!of!thought,!simulation!theory!feeds!into!the!

notion!of!reflective!metaphor!by!providing!insight!into!the!possible!cognitive!

processes!at!work!in!literary!reading.!More!specifically,!I!contend!that!when!a!

reader!comes!across!a!stylistic!element!in!a!text,!he!or!she!undergoes!an!embodied!

act!of!understanding!through!simulation.!Modalitygspecific!information!contained!

within!the!text!triggers!offline!processing,!simulating!knowledge!structures!that!

provoke!associated!poetic!feelings.!This!system!of!reading!has!the!power!to!create!

new!knowledge!through!textual!response,!as!feelings!generated!through!simulations!

are!reflected!upon!and!the!reader!ties!corporeal!sensations!to!new!associations!

located!within!the!text.!!

5.2! The!Primacy!of!Emotions!

Recent!work!in!the!primacy!of!emotions!reveals!that!“fully!intentional!emotions,!

whether!conscious!or!not,!actually!ground!and!shape!all!other!conscious!states”!

(Ellis,!2005:!4).!That!is,!human!emotions!exist!at!levels!preceding!cognitive!

appraisal,!enabling!them!to!function!as!lenses!through!which!humans!experience!

the!world!(Miall,!2014:!424).!By!now!the!notion!that!cognitive!processes!and!states!

can!be!unconscious!or!implicit!is!widely!accepted!(Winkielman!&!Berridge,!2004).!

This!has!obvious!implications!for!the!study!of!literature.!Namely,!that!emotions!

appear!to!play!a!primary!role!in!the!experience!of!literary!reading,!“shaping!

responses,!staging!conflicts…[and]!marking!the!limits!of!understanding.!(Miall,!

2014:!124)!For!some,!this!discovery!has!meant!a!move!away!from!literary!analysis!

Daniel!McLeod!

! Page 16 of 50!

focusing!primarily!on!the!act!of!interpretation!(a!form!of!analysis!that!has!

dominated!the!institution!of!literary!criticism!essentially!since!its!inception),!

towards!a!critical!study!of!a!literary!reader’s!cognitive!experience,!focusing!more!on!

concepts!such!as!felt!emotions,!imagery,!autobiographical!memory,!selfgconcept!

issues,!etc.!(2014:!124)!These!two!disciplines,!however,!are!by!no!means!mutually!

exclusive—emotion,!imagery,!autobiographical!memory,!selfgconcept,!and!the!like!

can!all!be!integrated!into!a!theory!of!interpretation!that!places!at!its!core!a!reader’s!

embodied!experience!of!a!text.!What!if,!for!instance,!emotions!evoked!during!

literary!reading!actually!informed!a!reader’s!interpretation!of!a!fictional!narrative?!

What!if!the!purpose!of!the!story!was!to!effect!a!change!on!the!reader’s!selfgconcept?!

Certain!fictional!works!provide!overwhelming!evidence!in!favour!of!this!kind!of!

interpretation,!and!consequently!these!are!the!questions!that!a!comprehensive!

theory!of!reflective!metaphor!aims!to!answer.!For!Stockwell,!“a!detailed!analysis!

[can]!illuminate!featural!effects!that!might!be!vague,!hard!to!articulate!or!define,!

very!subtle!or!faint,!or!at!the!very!edge!of!or!even!below!the!level!of!consciousness,!

but!which!nevertheless!have!an!effect!on!the!overall!reading!experience”!(Stockwell,!

2013:!267)!This!is!precisely!what!the!integration!of!PSS!into!Dancygier’s!stylistic!

analyses!of!imagery!aims!at!accomplishing:!a!cognitive!poetic!explanation!of!a!

reader’s!felt!experience.!A!theory!of!reflective!metaphor!replicates!this!logical!

connection.!

5.3! Empathy!

The!concept!of!empathy!is!intimately!tied!to!literary!reading.!Fictional!characters!

and!worlds!have!the!power!to!connect!readers!empathically!to!a!text,!potentially!

changing!the!way!we!think.!In!her!book!Empathy%and%the%Novel,!Suzanne!Keen!

demonstrates!how!readers’!and!authors’!empathy!contributes!to!emotional!

resonance!in!fiction,!or!the!heightening!of!a!reader’s!felt!experience!(Keen,!2007).!

To!Keen,!“the!capacity!of!human!beings!to!engage!intellectually!and!emotionally!

with!imaginary!worlds!and!their!denizens!places!narrative!empathy!at!the!

intersection!of!aesthetics,!psychology,!and!philosophy”!(2007:!34)!The!following!

discussion!of!the!cognitive!processes!active!in!empathy!creation!is!meant!to!inform!

Daniel!McLeod!

! Page 17 of 50!

our!understanding!of!literature’s!ability!to!incite!emotional!understanding!and!selfg

growth!in!readers.!

5.3.1! The!Shared!Manifold!of!Intersubjectivity!

The!Shared!Manifold!of!Intersubjectivity!is!a!theory!of!empathy!devised!by!Gallese!

(2003)!to!explain!the!origins!of!empathy.!To!begin,!it!proposes!that!“the!concept!of!

empathy!should!be!expanded!to!account!for!all!different!aspects!of!expressive!

behaviour!enabling!us!to!establish!a!meaningful!link!between!others!and!ourselves”!

(Gallese,!2003:!177)!To!understand!the!cognitive!process!involved!in!the!creation!of!

empathy!resultant!from!literary!reading,!it!is!necessary!first!to!provide!a!brief!

overview!of!Gallese’s!theory!(for!a!complete!overview,!see!Gallese!2003).!

!

Essentially,!the!shared!manifold!hypothesis!can!be!operationalized!at!three!levels:!

!1. “Phenomenological% level:% responsible% for% the% sense% of% similarity,% of% being%

individuals%within%a%larger%social%community%of%persons%like%us%

2. “Functional% level:% characterized% in% terms% of% ‘as% if’% modes% of% interaction%

enabling%models%of%self]other%to%be%created.%The%same%functional%logic%is%at%

work%during%both%self]control%and%the%experience%of%others’%behaviour.%Both%

are%models%of%interaction,%which%map%their%referents%on%identical%relational%

functional%modes%

3. “Subpersonal%level:%instantiated%as%the%level%of%activity%of%a%series%of%mirror%

matching% neural% circuits,% instantiating% a% supramodal% intentional% shared%

space.%The%activity%of%these%neural%circuits%is,%in%turn,%coupled%with%multilevel%

changes%in%body%states”!(Gallese,!2003)%

!

Literary!reading!fits!neatly!into!this!theory!in!the!following!way.!Wellgdeveloped!

fictional!characters!are!recognized!at!the!phenomenological!level!as!possessing!a!

sense!of!similarity!to!the!reader.!This!enables!the!second!level!functional!activity!of!

‘as!if’!simulation,!mapping!the!experience!of!fictional!characters!onto!identical!

relational!functional!modes!in!the!reader.!Next,!the!reader’s!mirror!matching!

mechanism!activates!multilevel!changes!in!body!states,!allowing!the!reader!to!

Daniel!McLeod!

! Page 18 of 50!

experience,!appreciate,!and!implicitly!and!pregreflexively!understand!the!emotions!

and!sensations!of!the!fictional!character.!!

Empathy’s!ability!to!provoke!affective!responses!to!emotional!states!in!others!is!

wellgdocumented!and!highly!applicable!to!literary!reading.!Singer!et!al.’s!(2004)!

study!on!affective!and!sensory!components!of!empathy!for!pain!demonstrates!that!

“empathic!responses…!can!be!elicited!automatically!in!the!absence!of!an!emotional!

cue!(such!as!facial!reactions),!through!mere!presentation!of!an!arbitrary!cue!that!

signals!the!feeling!state!of!another!person.”!(Singer!et!al.,!2004:!1158)!This!

statement!is!in!accordance!with!a!PSS!model!of!offline!processing,!and!more!

specifically!with!Gallese’s!Shared!Manifold!Hypothesis;!further,!it!confirms!

unequivocally!the!roots!of!literature’s!capacity!to!incite!empathy!in!readers.!Singer!

et!al.!conclude!their!article!with!the!claim!that!empathizing!with!the!pain!of!others!

does!not!involve!activation!of!the!whole!pain!matrix,!but!rather!sparks!activation!of!

only!secondgorder!representations!containing!the!subjective!affective!dimension!of!

pain,!suggesting!“a!segregation!of!sensorygdiscriminative!and!autonomicgaffective!

attributes!of!the!pain!experience.”!(2004:!1160)!While!there!are!yet!no!empirical!

studies!confirming!the!existence!of!an!affective/sensory!divide!present!in!empathic!

responses!to!feelings!other!than!pain!(such!as!pleasure,!fear,!concern,!etc.),!I!will!

operate!under!the!reasonable!assumption!that!alternate!human!feelings!are!

experienced!in!cognitively!comparative!ways.!

By!understanding!the!cognitive!processes!involved!in!literature’s!provocation!of!

empathic!feelings!in!readers!we!obtain!a!more!accurate!understanding!of!the!

connection!between!literary!reading!and!its!personal!and!social!benefits.!

Specifically,!I!have!shown!that!literary!reading!uses!the!same!modalitygspecific!

states!that!represent!perception,!action,!and!introspection!in!online!situations.!

Additionally,!we!have!learned!how!the!affective!component!of!empathic!feeling!is!

decoupled!from!its!sensorimotor!counterpart!active!in!direct!experience!of!an!

emotional!state,!and!how,!from!a!cognitive!perspective,!empathic!responses!possess!

the!same!affective!component!as!more!direct,!personal!felt!experiences.!This!

provides!evidence!of!literature’s!ability!to!incite!the!necessary!affective!response!

required!for!interpretation!of!a!text!via!reflective!metaphor,!as!well!as!provides!

Daniel!McLeod!

! Page 19 of 50!

motivation!to!believe!that!a!close!examination!of!such!a!text’s!stylistic!features!can!

illuminate!the!roots!of!emotional!response.!

5.3.2! Metaphors!of!Personal!Identification!

In!discussing!the!selfgimplicating!nature!of!feeling,!Miall!and!Kuiken!state!that!

“because!feeling!is!so!central!to!our!sense!of!ourselves,!it!is!generally!selfg

implicating.”!(Miall!&!Kuiken,!2002:!229)!Thus,!stylisticallygcreated!aesthetic!

feelings!have!the!power!to!imaginatively!challenge!a!reader’s!sense!of!self,!as!the!

reader!implicitly!takes!on!the!embodied!affective!position!of!the!text.!(Miall!&!

Kuiken,!2002;!Wilshire,!1982)!!

Fictional!reading!enables!the!reader!to!reflect!on!an!emotion,!a!process!

through!which!“the!reader!may!reach!an!insight,!and!build!a!new!piece!of!his!or!her!

model!of!self!and!its!relations.!In!other!words,!some!cognitive!transformation!may!

result”!(Oatley,!2002:!54)!To!Oatley,!reading!is!a!form!of!simulation!in!which!

emotional!response!plays!a!central!role!(1999,!2002).!Cupchik!et!al.!(1998)!provide!

two!distinct!modes!of!personal!recollection!active!in!literary!reading:!remembered!

and!fresh!emotions.!Remembered!emotions!are!those!in!which!the!reader!

encounters!similarity!between!the!text!world!and!a!comparablygscripted!situation!in!

memory:!“they!recognize!a!setting!as!something!familiar;!a!character’s!behaviour!

reminds!them!of!something!they!have!done;!or!a!narrative!event!is!reminiscent!of!a!

similar!scene!from!another!text.”!In!contrast,!fresh!emotions!are!those!in!which!the!

reader!“realize[s]!something!in!a!literary!text!that!they!have!not!previously!

experienced—or!at!least!that!they!have!not!experienced!in!the!form!provided!by!the!

text.”!(Miall!&!Kuiken,!2002:!225g6)!!

Essential!to!our!purposes,!Cohen’s!(1999)!work!on!selfgmodifying!feelings!

and!metaphor!generation!proposes!that!fresh!feelings!arising!from!literary!reading!

implicitly!create!an!ad!hoc!class!(similar!to!a!generic!mental!space!in!blending!

theory)!wherein!emotional!content!from!the!text!world!is!mapped!onto!the!reader.!

“The!reader’s!reflections!on!implications!of!a!change!in!psychological!state!come!

into!focus…[as]!the!thematic!significance!of!the!story!has!become!superimposed!

upon!the!reader’s!own!sense!of!self.”!(Miall!&!Kuiken,!2002:!237)!Through!this!

Daniel!McLeod!

! Page 20 of 50!

process!of!implication!with!a!story’s!theme,!literature!has!the!ability!to!reconfigure!a!

reader’s!personal!feelings!and!beliefs,!ultimately!changing!their!sense!of!self!

through!a!metaphorical!identification!brought!about!by!a!simulation!process!active!

during!the!experience!fresh!feelings!elicited!during!reading.!

Specifically,!Miall!&!Kuiken’s!past!catalogue!of!research!examines!moments!

of!defamiliarization!in!response!to!foregrounding,!and!how!stylisticallygcreated!

aesthetic!feelings!can!“instigate!an!affectively!guided!search!for!alternative!

interpretations!that,!in!turn,!shape!subsequent!understanding.”!(Miall!&!Kuiken,!

2002:!229;!see!Miall!&!Kuiken,!1995,!2001;!Miall,!1989).!However,!Miall!&!Kuiken!

continually!ignore!the!potential!integration!of!the!domains!of!embodied!reader!

experience!and!textual!interpretation.!Reflective!metaphor!aims!to!unify!these!two!

essential!viewpoints,!concerning!itself!with!the!study!of!how!the!stylistic!features!

active!in!evoking!aesthetic!feeling!manifest!metaphors!of!personal!identification!

that!inform!readers’!thematic!understanding!of!a!text.!!

!

Case)2:)Vagues%(2016)%—%Joanna%Walsh%

Joanna!Walsh’s!recent!output!of!small!works!(five!in!just!three!years)!is!nothing!

short!of!prolific.!!In!a!recent!interview!with!The!Irish!Times,!Walsh!provided!

illumination!into!her!experiments!with!style:!

“I% like,%sometimes,%to%play%with%things%“in%real%time”,% for%example%in%my%story,%

Vagues,% there’s% a% lot% of% repetition% as% the% bored% narrator% scans% her%

environment,% then% scans% it% again.% I’m% not% only% writing% about% tedium,% I’m%

trying% to%explore%and%replicate% the% feeling%of% that%experience% for% the%reader.”%

(Walsh,%2016)%%

Vagues!bravely!strives!to!recreate!the!narrator’s!sense!of!boredom!in!the!reader!

through!repetition!in!order!to!create!a!heightened!empathic!connection!with!her!

narrating!character,!instilling!readerly!understanding!of!her!frame!of!mind!while!

she!contemplates!cheating!on!her!husband!with!another!man.!For!example,!the!

narrator!surveys!the!scene!and!remarks!the!rubbish!on!the!beach:!“Yes,!the!beach!

has!rubbish,!though!not!much,!and!though!the!restaurant,!by!its!presence,!makes!the!

Daniel!McLeod!

! Page 21 of 50!

rubbish!unmentionable.”!(14)!She!then!goes!on!to!remark!further!features!of!the!

setting,!which!she!habitually!regobserves!throughout!the!story!in!unpunctuated!

sentences!such!as,!“The!man!sitting!opposite!me,!looking!out!at!the!sea!the!seaweed!

the!rubbish!the!seagulls!the!stork!the!stone,!all!of!which!I!cannot!see!but!which!I!

know!are!behind!me…”!(18)!The!listlessness!of!narration!is!manifest!through!

various!forms!of!repetition!(syntactic,!lexical,!phonological—as!the!narrator!sans!

and!regscans!her!environment,!remarking!the!same!things!over!and!over!again).!

This!serves!to!foreground!the!narrator’s!detached!form!of!boredom.!From!this!

insight!into!her!mind,!readers!learn!a!great!deal!about!the!narrating!character’s!

views!on!her!marital!situation.!!

For!a!more!detailed!analysis!of!phonological,!lexical,!and!syntactic!

parallelism!in!‘Vagues’,!see!Appendix!A.!

%

End%of%Case%2%

6.)))Authorial)Intention)

The!study!of!authorial!intention!assumes!that!authors!compose!literary!works!with!

more!or!less!“correct”!interpretations.!While!some!recent!work!in!cognitive!poetics!

has!downplayed!the!significance!of!interpretation!and!focused!more!on!the!reader’s!

active!experience!of!a!text,!a!theory!of!reflective!metaphor!considers!interpretation!

as!integral!to!the!act!of!reading,!and!thus!intentionality!must!be!examined.!The!

following!subgsections!discuss!various!aspects!of!intentionality!and!their!connection!

to!reflective!metaphor.!The!primary!argument!is!that!an!author!embeds!a!reflective!

metaphor!in!the!text!through!a!series!of!codes!(or!stylistic!choices)!to!be!deciphered!

by!a!model!reader.!!

6.1! Model!Reader!

Miall!&!Kuiken!are!adamant!to!point!out!that!“although!aesthetic!feelings!may!be!

evoked!widely!among!readers!who!are!responsive!to!variations!in!linguistic!form,!

selfgmodifying!feelings!are!evident!only!among!certain!readers—and!among!them!

Daniel!McLeod!

! Page 22 of 50!

only!some!of!the!time.”!(2002:!229)!This!is!particularly!true!in!the!case!of!reflective!

metaphor!(as!demonstrated!in!Case!1!reviews).!The!following!section!will!provide!

theoretical!reasoning!behind!the!failure!of!certain!readers!to!obtain!textual!

interpretation!through!the!selfgimplicating!process!of!reflective!metaphor.!!

The!concept!of!authorial!intention!seems!to!me!logically!linked!to!that!of!

reader!response.!To!semiotician!Umberto!Eco,!literary!texts!are!communicative!

strategies!that!contain!innumerable!codes—rules!allowing!their!readers!to!attribute!

signification!to!a!sign,!i.e.!textual!elements.!(Eco,!1988:!28)!For!Eco,!textual!

understanding!evolves!through!the!deciphering!of!codes,!which!are!produced!

“generatively”!by!the!author!and!received!“interpretatively”!by!the!reader.!(Sallis,!

1986)!Thus,!the!reader!and!the!author!cooperate!in!discovering!the!codes!of!a!text,!

and!ultimately!the!text’s!meaning.!(Eco,!1979:!7)!According!to!Eco,!the!reader!“plays!

an!active!role!in!textual!interpretation!because!signs!are!constructed!according!to!

an!inferential!model.”!(1981:!44)!Further,!in!order!for!a!text!to!have!communicative!

value,!an!author!needs!to!make!certain!assumptions!about!his!or!her!possible!

readers!and!their!shared!knowledge.!In!other!words,!the!author!has!to!“foresee!a!

model!of!a!possible!reader!(model!reader)…![who!is]!able!to!deal!interpretatively!

with!the!expressions!in!the!same!way!that!the!author!deals!generatively!with!them.”!

(Eco,!1979:!7)!!

According!to!Jakobson’s!model!of!communication,!a!code!“designates!all!of!

the!conventions!that!make!it!possible!for!the!sender’s!message!to!be!understood!by!

the!receiver’s!in!an!act!of!communication.”!(Guillemette!&!Cossette,!2016)!Included!

in!this!classification!are!all!stylistic!devices,!including!reflective!metaphor,!through!

which!a!reader!can!form!an!interpretation!of!a!literary!text!based!on!close!analysis.!

What!follows!is!the!implication!that,!just!as!a!reader!can!form!an!interpretation!of!a!

text’s!theme!through!reflective!metaphor,!so!can!an!author!implant!this!sort!of!code!

within!his!or!her!text!to!be!deciphered!by!a!model!reader.!By!looking!at!this!

phenomenon!from!both!sides,!we!can!form!a!more!complete!understanding!of!the!

process!of!reflective!metaphor!and!provide!a!substantial!argument!for!its!existence!

in!literary!texts.!!

Daniel!McLeod!

! Page 23 of 50!

As!a!model,!reflective!metaphor!relies!on!this!postulation!of!a!model!

reader—elsewhere!referred!to!as!an!“ideal”!or!“implied”!reader.!(Iser,!1978;!Fish,!

1980)!The!author’s!ability!to!imagine!a!possible!reader!and!devise!a!system!of!

codes,!or!what!Iser!calls!“responseginviting!structures,!impelling!the!reader!to!grasp!

the!text”!(Iser,!1978:!34)!rests!at!the!core!of!authorial!intention.!The!real!reader!

ideally!plays!the!role!of!correctly!interpreting!the!textual!structure,!enacting!

through!a!predetermined!and!structured!act!the!intended!reflective!metaphor!in!

order!to!derive!meaning.!

6.2! Editorial!Revisions!

For!empirical!evidence!of!authorial!intention,!Violeta!Sotirova!turns!to!the!close!

examination!of!editorial!correspondences!between!author!and!publisher,!proposing!

that!an!“analysis!of!authorial!revisions!must!necessarily!account!for!intention!and!

rationale!in!the!changes!introduced.”!(Sotirova,!2013:!138)!Sotirova’s!analysis!of!

editorial!revisions!in!the!work!of!Virginia!Woolf!indicates!that!revisions!are!most!

often!stylistic!in!nature,!rather!than!plot!or!eventgrelated.!Her!comparison!between!

the!initial!version!‘Mrs.!Dalloway!in!Bond!Street’%and!Mrs.%Dalloway!reveal!that!a!

careful!analysis!of!alterations!can!“offer!evidence!for!an!interpretation!that!is!based!

on!linguistic!analysis,![while]!at!the!same!time…!the!linguistic!analysis!can!

illuminate![the!author’s]!meaning!in!the!overall!conception!of!the!work.”!(Sotirova,!

2013:!138)!Comparisons!between!editorial!versions!are!thus!devoted!to!uncovering!

the!communicative!intention!behind!stylistic!alterations,!which!Sotirova!says!act!to!

intensify!already!established!techniques!and!themes.!(2013:!138)!To!employ!Eco’s!

methodology,!editorial!revisions!are!made!to!enhance!the!clarity!of!(typically)!

alreadygexisting!codes!constructed!by!the!author!for!decipherment!by!his!or!her!

model!reader.!Later,!in!Section!8.4,!I!will!turn!to!a!discussion!of!the!editorial!process!

in!Vladimir!Nabokov’s!‘Signs!&!Symbols’,!and!explore!how!editorial!revisions!

support!an!interpretation!of!the!short!story!by!means!of!reflective!metaphor.!!

Daniel!McLeod!

! Page 24 of 50!

6.3! Subjective!Readings!

One!way!to!resolve!the!subjectivist!conflict!of!reader!response!theory!(accounting!

for!intentionality!in!the!presence!of!multiple!interpretations/readings)!is!to!imagine!

that!readers!recreate!the!intentionality!of!a!text!based!on!their!own!experience.!!

Dancygier!distinguishes!subjectivity!as!a!point!of!view!attributed!with!the!ability!to!

be!engaged!in!perception!or!motion!(Dancygier,!2012;!Dancygier!&!Sweetzer,!2010),!

and!designates!such!an!experiential!viewpoint!as!an!“Ego”.!In!this!view,!an!Ego!that!

is!constructed!by!the!author!then!becomes!the!locus!of!experience!described!in!the!

text—this!can!be!an!experiencing!person,!an!element!of!nature!(flower!or!bird),!an!

observer,!or!a!narrator.!(Dancygier,!2014)!From!here,!the!words!of!a!text!move!the!

reader!into!two!kinds!of!responses:!

!

1. a!reader!aligns!themselves!mentally!with!the!Ego!the!text!profiles!

2. “the!reader!needs!to!become!another!experiencing!Ego!by!responding!to!the!

construal!the![text]!proposes,!albeit!only!through!simulation!of!what!the!text!

evokes”!!(Dancygier,!2014:!217)!

!

In!her!application!of!PSS!to!literature,!Dancygier!claims!that!due!to!the!imperfect!

nature!of!empathic!simulation,!readers’!emotional!response!to!the!same!text!will!

inevitably!vary!due!to!the!fact!that!observed!behaviour!is!not!mapped!identically!to!

experienced!behaviour.!(Danygier,!2014:!217)!For!Dancygier,!this!seems!to!be!what!

happens!during!literary!reading:!a!text!can!be!read!in!as!many!different!ways!as!

there!are!different!readers!reading!it.!The!observed!behaviour!of!the!text!remains!

constant,!with!interpretive!differences!stemming!from!varied!embodied!responses!

arising!from!alternate!mappings!of!identical!content.!

Intentionality!can!be!observed!at!various!depths,!so!to!speak.!Umberto!Eco’s!

theory!of!semiotics!in!fiction!relates!how!levels!of!intentionality!are!built!

generatively!into!text.!We!will!now!turn!to!a!discussion!of!the!role!of!the!reader!and!

an!examination!of!how!texts!can!be!either!more!open!or!closed!to!multiple!levels!of!

interpretation.!

Daniel!McLeod!

! Page 25 of 50!

7.)))Role)of)the)Reader)

Not!every!text!can!be!interpreted!by!means!of!reflective!metaphor,!and!not!just!any!

reader!is!capable!of!correctly!interpreting!it;!it!takes!both!a!special!kind!of!text!and!a!

special!kind!of!reader.!The!following!section!will!explore!Eco’s!theory!of!open!and!

closed!texts.!It!will!also!explore!naïve!and!critical!readers!and!how!these!relate!to!

different!types!of!texts,!and!ultimately!to!an!interpretation!via!reflective!metaphor.!

The!distinction!between!open!and!closed!texts!is!valuable!to!a!theory!of!reflective!

metaphor!as!it!supports!the!idea!that!some!texts!are!more!open!to!obscure,!or!

complex!interpretations!than!others.!

7.1! Closed!Texts!

Closed!texts!are!designed!by!the!author!to!elicit!a!specific!response!from!a!reader.!

However,!Eco!maintains!that!closed!texts!are!actually!open!to!several!

interpretations:!“the!texts!that!obsessively!aim!at!arousing!a!precise!response!on!the!

part!of!more!or!less!precise!empirical!readers…are!in!fact!open!to!any!possible!

‘aberrant’!decoding”—where!aberrant!refers!a!reader’s!interpretation!being!

different!from!how!it!was!intended!by!the!author.!(Eco,!1980:!8)!Thus,!Eco!writes!of!

fiction!such!as!Superman%or!James%Bond,!and!the!possibility!of!reading!too!far!into!

such!texts!to!produce!complex!interpretations.!For!example,!suppose!the!character!

of!Wonder!Woman!appeared!briefly!in!the!Superman!and!a!reader!chose,!on!this!

basis,!to!provide!a!feminist!interpretation!of!the!book.!While!this!is!probably!not!

how!the!author!intended!for!the!book!to!be!read,!a!feminist!interpretation!does!not!

detract!from!a!reader’s!total!understanding!of!Superman.!Rather,!it!only!adds!to!it;!

the!reader!has!a!straightforward!superhero!narrative!with!a!feminist!thread!woven!

into!it.!!

Closed!texts!are!designed!to!be!“immoderately!open!to!every!possible!

interpretation”,!with!each!interpretation!existing!independently!from!the!others.!

(1980:!8)!In!fact,!Eco!states!that!a!“text!is!considered!closed!precisely!because!it!

does!not!adequately!take!the!reader’s!ability!to!interpret!a!variety!of!meanings!into!

Daniel!McLeod!

! Page 26 of 50!

account.”!(Eco,!1979:!7)!Thus,!an!interplay!between!various!possible!interpretations!

does!not!exist.!The!text!is!closed!to!such!creative!readings.!

7.2! Open!Texts!

Contrary!to!closed!texts,!which!can!be!interpreted!in!almost!any!number!of!ways,!

open!texts!are!(contrary!to!intuition)!less!open!to!interpretation.!Eco!writes!that!!

“an!author![of!an!open!text]!can!foresee!an!ideal!reader…!able!to!master!different!

codes!and!eager!to!deal!with!the!text!as!a!maze!of!many!issues.!But!in!the!last!

analysis!what!matters!is!not!the!various!issues!in!themselves!but!the!mazeglike!

structure!of!the!text.!You!cannot!use!the!text!as!you!want,!but!only!as!the!text!wants!

you!to!use!it.!An!open!text,!however!‘open’!it!be,!cannot!afford!whatever!

interpretation.”!(Eco,!1980:!9)!The!“mazeglike!structure!of!the!text”!to!which!Eco!

refers!alludes!to!the!reader’s!metaphorical!movement!through!numerous!

interpretations!to!arrive!at!a!final!understanding.!!

An!example!of!an!open!text!would!be!Eco’s!novel!The!Name!of!the!Rose,!

which!is!open!to!a!multitude!of!interpretations!that!exist!on!different!levels.!The!

novel!can!be!read!for!its!commentary!on!monastic!and!civic!rivalry,!the!troubled!

history!of!the!papacy!in!the!14th!century,!its!lists!of!medieval!herbs,!beasts,!and!

books,!for!its!intriguing!mystery,!or!from!a!literary!critical!perspective!focusing!on!

semiotics!and!an!analysis!of!the!role!of!the!reader.!(Sallis,!1986)!However,!there!are!

certain!interpretations!that!The!Name!of!the!Rose!could!not!support.!For!example,!it!

would!be!hard!to!read!Eco’s!novel!as!a!Neogfascist!manifesto.!To!do!so!would!be!in!

obvious!contradiction!to!how!the!text!“wants”!the!reader!to!use!it.!Moreover,!it!

would!detract!from!the!reader’s!total!understanding!of!the!text.!

Eco!writes!that!open!texts!are!most!successful!when!each!interpretation!is!

reechoed!by!the!others,!and!vice!versa.!(Eco,!1980:!9)!Going!back!to!Superman%as!an!

example!of!a!closed!text,!following!unlikely!interpretations!does!not!detract!from!a!

reader’s!understanding.!A!feminist!interpretation!does!not!detract!from!the!

superhero!narrative.!Even!such!an!aberrant!reading!as!interpreting!Superman!as!a!

Neogfascist!manifesto!does!not!truly!detract!from!the!reader’s!total!understanding;!

the!total!understanding!exists!solitarily!as!a!superhero!narrative,!and!anything!else!

Daniel!McLeod!

! Page 27 of 50!

is!superfluous.!For!the!reader!of!an!open!text,!however,!following!an!aberrant!

interpretation!will,!to!use!Eco’s!metaphor,!result!in!the!reader!losing!him!or!herself!

in!the!mazeglike!structure!of!the!text;!that!is,!in!an!open!text!whose!predetermined!

meaning!rests!on!an!interplay!between!multiple!levels!of!interpretation,!a!reader’s!

aberrant!interpretations!will!not!lead!them!to!an!understanding!of!the!text!as!a!

whole.!

The!term!metatext!does!not!relate!to!levels!of!interpretation,!but!where!the!

act!of!interpretation!takes!place—at!what!ontological!level!outside!the!text.!A!

metatext!is!one!whose!“interest!is!not!in!the!story!itself,!but!in!the!commentary!that!

is!made!about!the!reader.”!(Farranoto,!2003)!It!is!thus!a!conversational!partner—in!

the!sense!that!it!relies!on!a!dialectical!relationship!with!the!reader—in!possession!of!

its!own!voice!and!will,!attempting!to!elicit!its!own!model!reader.!The!concept!of!a!

metatext!is!reliant!on!the!distinction!between!naïve!and!critical!readers,!discussed!

in!Section!7.3.!For!a!reader!to!appreciate!a!metatext,!all!the!“paths!of!reading”!must!

be!explored.!(Eco,!1970:!10)!

!

Case%3:%The%Name%of%the%Rose%(1980)%—%Umberto%Eco%

Umberto!Eco’s!breakthrough!novel!The!Name!of!the!Rose!followed!his!books!on!

semiology!The%Open%Work!(1962),%and!The%Role%of%the%Reader!(1976).!Described!as!

“semiotic!fiction”!by!Walter!E.!Stephens!(in!translator!notes!of!1983!English!

publication),!the!novel!represents!a!shift!from!Eco’s!critical!writings!about!

semiology!in!fiction!to!a!fictional!representation!of!the!semiology!of!literature.!

(Sallis,!1986)!The!first!100!pages!contain!a!reflective!metaphor!perfectly!described!

by!Eco!in!the!novel’s!post!script:!

!“My%friends%and%editors%suggested%I%abbreviate%the%first%hundred%pages,%which%they%

found%very%difficult%and%demanding.%Without%thinking%twice,%I%refused,%because,%as%

I%insisted,%if%somebody%wanted%to%enter%the%abbey%and%live%there%for%seven%days,%he%

had% to% accept% the% abbey’s% own%pace.% If% he% could%not,% he%would%never%manage% to%

read% the%whole% book.% Therefore% those% first% hundred%pages% are% like% a% penance% or%

initiation,%and%if%someone%does%not% like%them,%so%much%the%worse%for%him.%He%can%

Daniel!McLeod!

! Page 28 of 50!

stay%at%the%foot%of%the%mountain.”%(Eco,%Post]Script%to%The%Name%of%the%Rose,%1984:%

520)%

%

It!is!outside!the!scope!of!this!paper!to!examine!more!closely!the!ways!in!which!Eco!

initiates!an!act!of!penance!in!his!readers—a!comprehensive!analysis!of!the!book’s!

first!100!pages!would!likely!take!so!many!itself;!however,!the!general!response!from!

readers!is!in!accordance!with!Eco’s!friends!and!editors,!indicating!the!author’s!

success!in!achieving!his!testified!intention.!!

Reflective!metaphor!in!The!Name!of!the!Rose!does!not!lead!a!reader!directly!

to!a!final!interpretation!of!the!open!work.!Rather,!it!provides!merely!an!enlightened!

understanding!of!the!text!world!required!to!ultimately!reach!such!an!interpretation:!

by!simulating!the!characters’!mental!transformation!as!they!enter!the!abbey,!Eco!

aims!to!instill!in!his!readers!a!heightened!awareness!of!the!abbey’s!pace!necessary!

to!endure!monastic!life!inside.!Without!such!simulation,!Eco!claims!readers!“would!

never!manage!to!read!the!whole!book”,!would!never!solve!the!story’s!mystery.!Thus,!

Eco’s!uses!reflective!metaphor!as!a!stylistic!tool!to!initiate!a!state!of!concentration!

and!awareness!necessary!to!interpret!the!open!work!as!a!whole.!!

%

End%of%Case%3%

7.3! Naïve!versus!Critical!Readers!

Peter!Stockwell!writes!that!“sometimes!I!am!reading!and!sometimes!I!am!analyzing!

reading;!it!is!physically,!conceptually,!and!in!principle!impossible!to!do!both!at!the!

same!time.”!(Stockwell,!2013:!264)!Drawing!a!vital!distinction!between!“the!natural!

everyday!activity!of!reading!and!the!scholarly!and!scientific!activity!of!analysis,”!

(2013:!264)!Stockwell!claims!that!it!is!essential!not!to!confuse!the!two,!and!argues!

in!favour!of!stylisticians,!narratologists,!corpus!linguists,!and!other!such!scholars!

who!engage!in!the!descriptive!account!of!the!activity!of!reading,!over!literary!critics!

more!prone!to!engaging!in!arcane,!often!unnaturally!complex!interpretations!of!

‘esteemed’!literary!works.!For!Stockwell,!maintaining!this!distinction!is!“vital!in!

Daniel!McLeod!

! Page 29 of 50!

verifying!that!meanings!and!aesthetic!effects!are!properly!and!accurately!generated!

and!described.”!(2013:!265)!

An!issue!with!this!outlook!is!that!it!is!difficult!to!say!what!exactly!is!entailed!

in!“the!activity!of!reading”.!That!is,!what!level!of!understanding!and!analysis!does!

this!activity!naturally!include?!It!seems!obvious!that!to!form!any!sort!of!

comprehensive,!accurate!understanding!of!a!text!a!reader!must!periodically!leave!

the!text!world!to!reflect!on!what!it!is!that!makes!him!or!her!feel!a!certain!way—

happy,!sad,!or!frustrated,!etc.—towards!a!text.!Is!this!act!of!toggling!between!text!

and!discourse!world!part!of!the!“activity!of!reading”?!To!Stockwell,!the!reader!and!

the!analyst!are!two!different!selves!that!exist!on!ontologically!separate!levels:!the!

analyst!contains!the!reader,!on!whom!it!is!dependent!for!its!existence.!(2013:!264)!

Yet,!arguably,!the!reader!is!equally!dependent!on!the!analyst!for!its!own!existence:!

after!all,!is!it!possible!to!say!that!a!reading!occurred!without!an!agent!who!

recognizes!that!the!reading!has!occurred?!Whatever!the!ontological!status!of!reader!

and!analyst,!given!the!interdependence!of!the!two,!I!believe!it!is!necessary!to!

examine!the!role!of!the!analyst!and!reader!with!equal!empirical!attention.!What!

seems!most!clear!is!that!the!experience!of!reading!varies!from!reader!to!reader,!and!

therefore!some!readers!engage!in!a!deeper!level!of!analysis!and!understanding!than!

others.!Here,!Eco’s!distinction!of!naïve!versus!critical!readers!comes!into!play,!

helping!to!explain!the!differences!between!opposing!individual!readings!of!the!same!

text.!

The!textual!strategy!for!a!particular!text!dictates!whether!a!naïve!reader!or!a!

critical!reader!will!be!required.!For!an!open!text,!the!author!is!able!to!foresee!a!

model!reader’s!interpretation,!and!builds!this!generatively!into!the!text!through!a!

series!of!codes!(or!stylistic!choices).!(Eco,!1980:!3)!In!this!case,!the!reader’s!

interplay!between!interpretive!levels!is!authorially!intentioned,!designed!into!the!

text!to!elicit!a!model!reader!capable!of!understanding!the!significance!behind!the!

analysis!of!his!or!her!own!interpretive!procedures.!(Eco,!1979:!205)!Therefore,!the!

model!reader!of!an!open!text!is!a!critical!one!who!is!capable!of!perceiving!the!mazeg

like!structure!of!the!text,!and!thus!able!to!form!a!full!appreciation!of!its!significance.!

However,!an!open!text!can!be!read!either!naïvely!or!critically.!A!naïve!reading!comes!

Daniel!McLeod!

! Page 30 of 50!

first,!allowing!the!reader!to!appreciate!the!semantic!content!of!the!text.!The!critical!

reading!follows,!asking!the!reader!to!consider!the!implications!of!the!way!a!text’s!

semantic!content!is!presented—that!is,!the!significance!behind!the!various!levels!of!

interpretation!and!their!connections!to!one!another.!(Eco,!1979;!Sallis,!1986)!This!

means!that!an!open!text,!in!order!to!be!properly!understood,!requires!a!reader’s!act!

of!relatively!complex!analysis.!

What!is!troubling!in!Stockwell’s!philosophy!of!literary!reading,!useful!as!it!

may!be!to!explain!the!ethical!relationships!present!in!the!activity!of!reading,!is!the!

absolute!separation!of!reader!and!analyst.!Eco’s!categorization!of!readers!into!two!

groups,!naïve!and!critical,!acknowledges!that!an!act!of!analysis!is!inherent!in!literary!

reading—even!naïve!readers!analyze!to!a!certain!extent,!simply!less!so!than!critical!

ones,!and!even!closed!texts!are!necessarily!analyzed,!albeit!to!a!lesser!extent!than!

open!ones.!The!distinction!between!amateur!(everyday)!readers!and!professional!

(literary!critical)!ones!relies!on!the!level!of!interpretation!and!understanding!

attributed!to!each!type;!however,!as!we!have!seen,!certain!(open)!texts!elicit!their!

own!model!readers!who!are!encouraged!to!engage!critically!with!the!text!in!order!to!

form!an!understanding!of!it.!This!means!that!even!amateur!readers,!if!sparked!by!a!

particular!interest!in!a!text,!can!uncover!its!openness!through!an!analysis!of!layered!

interpretations.!Returning!to!our!question,!‘what!level!of!understanding!and!

analysis!does!the!activity!of!reading!naturally!entail?’,!it!seems!that!open!texts!

simultaneously!demand!a!higher!level!of!consideration!and!elicit!it!naturally!from!

their!potentially!amateur!readers.!

Reflective!metaphor!engages!both!the!naïve!and!critical!reader!(both!the!

amateur,!embodied!experiencer!and!the!advanced!critical!analyst).!Consequently,!it!

must!be!examined!from!both!a!cognitive!perspective!and!a!literary!critical!

perspective.!Texts!containing!reflective!metaphor!comprise!metatexts!whose!

embodied,!affectginstantiated!interpretations!cogmingle!in!critical!readers!with!

alternateglevel!(literary!critical)!interpretations,!as!readers!explore!the!“mazeglike!

structure!of!the!text”!to!arrive!at!a!complete!understanding.!Consequently,!

Stockwell’s!two!activities,!the!act!of!reading!and!the!analysis!of!the!act!of!reading,!

must!be!looked!at!together,!as!this!is!the!way!they!naturally!unfold.!

Daniel!McLeod!

! Page 31 of 50!

8.)))Stylistic)Analysis)of)‘Signs)and)Symbols’)

8.1! Introduction!

‘Signs!and!Symbols’!was!first!published!in!a!1948!issue!of!The!New!Yorker.!The!

work!is!by!far!Nabokov’s!most!studied!short!story,!“analyzed!for!its!symbolism,!its!

metafictional!aspect,!and!more!rarely!for!the!links!between!its!metafictional!and!

narrative!levels”!(Trzeciak,!2003:!65),!it!has!been!declared!by!Nabokov’s!biographer!

“one!of!the!greatest!short!stories!ever!written…!a!triumph!of!economy!and!force,!

minute!realism!and!shimmering!mystery.”!(Boyd,!1991:!117)!At!just!over!2000!

words,!‘Signs!and!Symbols’!is!a!work!of!remarkably!compressed!imagery;!the!

undertone!of!doom!pervades!nearly!every!sentence,!and!the!effect!upon!close!

reading!seems!to!be!that!suffering!is!an!absolute,!inescapable!element!of!the!

characters’!lives.!(Drescher,!2012;!Lane,!2012;!Carroll,!2012;!Trzreciak,!2003)!

Drescher!quite!appropriately!writes!that!“In!reading!Nabokov,!I!assume!that!

there!are!no!extraneous!details,!nothing!is!accidental,!odd!usages!and!repetitions!

require!particular!attention,!and!some!misleading!gambits!are!refused.”!(Drescher,!

2012:!84)!It!is!with!this!same!acuteness!of!perception!that!the!following!analysis!

will!proceed.!After!all,!according!to!Nabokov!“Literature!must!be!taken!apart!and!

broken!to!bits,!pulled!apart,!squashed—then!its!lovely!reek!will!be!smelt!in!the!

hollow!of!the!palm,!it!will!be!munched!and!rolled!upon!the!tongue!with!relish;!then,!

and!only!then,!its!rare!flavour!will!be!appreciated!at!its!true!worth!and!the!broken!

and!crushed!parts!will!again!come!together!in!your!mind!and!disclose!the!beauty!of!

a!unity!to!which!you!have!contributed!something!of!your!own!blood.”!(Nabokov,!

1980:!105)!

It!is!exactly!this!contribution!of!the!reader’s!blood!that!‘Signs!and!Symbols’!

demands,!metaphorically!of!course.!The!following!analysis!will!demonstrate!how!

the!short!story!can!best!be!interpreted!as!an!instance!of!reflective!metaphor.!That!is,!

how!the!reader!emerges!from!Nabokov’s!dour!fictional!world!of!an!American!city!in!

the!year!1947!to!reflect!upon!his!or!her!change!in!psychological!state;!the!

considerations!that!arise!from!such!reflection!can!then!be!attributed!back!onto!the!

text!to!form!an!elegant!solution!to!Nabokov’s!carefully!composed!riddle.!!

Daniel!McLeod!

! Page 32 of 50!

Familiarity!with!the!plot!of!‘Signs!and!Symbols’!is!assumed;!however,!for!

reference!a!brief!summary!can!be!found!in!Appendix!B.!Our!analysis!of!the!short!

story!will!begin!with!a!contextualization!arising!from!Nabokov’s!comments!on!art!

and!literary!criticism.!We!will!then!move!on!to!discuss!the!editorial!process!through!

an!analysis!of!Nabokov’s!correspondence!with!The!New!Yorker,!and!present!how!

evidence!provided!therein!serves!as!justification!for!both!a!naïve!and!a!critical!

reading!of!the!story.!Finally,!favouring!a!critical!reading!based!on!the!contextual!

evidence!provided,!stylistic!choices!in!the!form!of!overwhelming!symbolism—

imagery,!semantically!foregrounding!the!notion!of!doom—embedded!throughout!

the!text!at!various!levels!will!be!examined!prior!to!an!interpretation!by!means!of!

reflective!metaphor!as!to!what!such!symbolism!most!likely!represents.!Topics!

explored!earlier—including!world!switching,!embodiment,!metaphor,!empathy,!

authorial!intention,!and!the!role!of!the!reader—will!be!addressed!in!the!course!of!

this!analysis.!It!is!now!necessary!to!provide!a!brief!summary!of!Nabokov’s!acclaimed!

story.!

8.2!! Nabokov!on!Art!and!Criticism!

“In%‘real’%life%we%are%creatures%in%an%absolute%void%—%unless%we%be%artists%ourselves,%

naturally.”%–%Nabokov,%1969%

%

Nabokov!has!confessed!to!enjoying!the!composition!of!“riddles!with!elegant!

solutions.”!(Nabokov,!1973:!16)!Woven!throughout!Nabokov’s!exceptional!catalogue!

of!stories!are!countless!riddles,!and!to!each!one!readers!have!attempted!to!find!a!

meticulously!considered!solution.!‘Signs!and!Symbols’!has!evaded!a!satisfying!

solution!since!before!its!first!publication:!in!correspondence!with!The!New!Yorker,!

there!was!conflict!on!the!editorial!side!as!to!whether!the!story!was!a!parody!or!a!

piece!of!realism!(Voronina,!2011).!In!spite!of!the!vast!history!of!criticism!dedicated!

to!the!short!story—including!anthologies!of!critical!essays!(Leving,!2012),!and!

online!forums!with!ongoing!roundtable!discussions—no!one!critic!has!managed!to!

pin!down!with!conviction!what!appears!to!be!a!reasonable,!encompassing!solution.!

Nabokov’s!own!views!on!art!and!criticism!should!serve!as!a!guide!to!critics!aiming!at!

Daniel!McLeod!

! Page 33 of 50!

interpretation.!Accordingly,!we!will!now!examine!some!of!the!author’s!applicable!

beliefs.%

Durantaye!writes!in!his!book!Style%is%Matter:%the%moral%art%of%Vladimir%

Nabokov!that!Nabokov’s!directions!on!reading!are!singularly!sensuous:!“The!details!

of!a!work!must!not!only!be!isolated!and!observed!in!pure!analytical!fashion,!they!

must!be!smelt!and!tasted;!they!must!also!be!so!ecstatically!“felt”!that!the!“unity”!

produced!from!a!sensitive!reading!is!one!where!“you!have!contributed!something!of!

your!own!blood.”!(Durantaye,!2007:!56)!Thus!in!order!to!fully!appreciate!Nabokov’s!

writing,!it!appears!some!visceral,!embodied!experience!(as!Durantaye!puts!it,!“a!

physical!sensitivity”)!may!be!required.!Nabokov’s!proclaimed!as!much!in!his!

Lectures!on!Literature,!in!which!he!distinguishes!between!“the!literature!of!the!

senses…!and!the!literature!of!ideas,!which!does!not!produce!true!art!unless!it!stems!

from!the!senses.”!(Nabokov,!1977:!237)!For!Nabokov,!the!embodied!experience!of!

reading!ranks!unequivocally!above!its!abstract!mental!counterpart;!it!was!for!this!

reason!that!Nabokov!“rejected!the!demand!placed!upon!art!that!it!edify!and!educate!

its!reader.”!(Durantaye,!2007:!37)!For!him,!abstracted!mental!readings!should!be!

used!only!as!a!gateway!into!an!understanding!of!a!text’s!embodied!communications.!!

Generally!it!is!agreed!that!Nabokov’s!writing!establishes!consistent!themes!of!

parental!love!and!the!fear!of!loss,!the!fragility!and!finitude!of!human!life,!and!the!

cruelty!of!fate.!(Trzeciak,!2003)!Added!to!this!list!are!further!themes!of!madness,!

narcissism,!the!plight!of!poor!émigrés,!and!the!exploitation!of!patterns!and!symbols!

to!signify!hidden!meanings.!(Drescher,!2012;!Allan,!1994)!Such!themes!are!

relatively!obvious!in!Nabokov’s!work,!visible!at!the!surface!of!narratives!and!able!to!

be!deciphered!by!casual!readers.!While!such!themes!form!the!basis!of!much!

narrative!content,!Nabokov!often!takes!his!readers!on!a!deeper!journey!into!an!

exploration!of!the!value!of!artistic!imagination!and!its!relation!to!human!

consciousness.!(Bader,!1972)!Following!in!the!footsteps!of!Khodasevich,!a!fellow!

émigré!whom!Nabokov’s!considered!“the!greatest!Russian!poet!of!our!time”!

(Nabokov,!1973:!223),!Nabokov’s!work!explores!the!“life!of!the!artist!and!the!life!of!

a!device!in!the!consciousness!of!the!artist.”!(Khodasevich,!1937)!!

Daniel!McLeod!

! Page 34 of 50!

Nabokov!was!reputedly!contemptuous!of!the!notion!of!an!“average”!reader,!

such!as!that!of!The!New!Yorker,!a!breed!characterized!by!“his!or!her!affiliation!with!

the!middle!class,!some!academic!background,!and!whole!range!of!interest!in!

literature,!from!ardent!to!none.”!(Voronina,!2011:!44)!For!Nabokov,!such!a!reader!

did!not!exist.!(2011:!44)!Instead,!Nabokov’s!idea!of!a!model!reader!was!himself!in!

multiplicate!(Nabokov,!1973:!114),!and!he!professed!his!thoughts!that!“the!audience!

an!artist!imagines,!when!he!imagines!that!kind!of!thing,!is!a!room!filled!with!people!

wearing!his!own!mask.”!(1973:!18)!As!such,!Nabokov’s!writing!presumes!the!

existence!of!an!advanced!reader!in!possession!of!the!same!mental!acuity!and!

physical!receptiveness!with!which!he!entertained!literature!(for!truly!enlightening!

evidence,!see!Lessons%on%Literature!and!Lessons%on%Russian%Literature).!Showing!

reverberations!of!Eco’s!claim!that!an!author!deals!generatively!with!the!codes!of!a!

text!while!the!reader!deals!interpretively!with!them,!Nabokov!wrote!that!

composition!and!solution!are!created!simultaneously,!and!are!mirrors!of!each!other.!

(1973:!20)!We!can!therefore!conclude!that,!at!least!from!Nabokov’s!view,!authorial!

intention!plays!a!leading!role!in!literature;!that!is,!it!literally!leads,!or!precedes,!a!

reader’s!understanding,!anticipating!embodied!responses!and!their!mental!

examinations.!Returning!to!Drescher’s!stance!on!reading!‘Signs!and!Symbols’,!

Nabokov’s!own!views!affirm!a!nongexistence!of!extraneous!details.!The!author’s!

meticulous!care!in!composition!shows!an!attempt!to!account!for!each!possible!

eventuality!of!interpretation,!and!his!correspondence!with!Katharine!White!of!The!

New!Yorker!demonstrates!this!elegantly.!

8.3! Editorial!Process!with!The!New!Yorker!

Vladimir!Nabokov’s!correspondence!about!‘Signs!and!Symbols’!with!thengeditor!

Katherine!White!of!The!New!Yorker!yielded!the!greatest!number!of!letters!per!one!

Nabokov!story!published!with!the!magazine.!(Voronina,!2011:!44)!In!response!to!a!

question!posed!by!White!as!to!whether!‘Signs!and!Symbols’!ought!to!be!read!as!

“straight!fiction”!or!“a!parody!or!satire!on!the!gloomy!new!school!of!psychiatric!

fiction”—based!on!the!what!White!perceived!as!an!overwhelming!sense!of!doom!

and!misery,!“a!matter!of!tone,!into!which!the!reader!reads!so!much!more!than!the!

Daniel!McLeod!

! Page 35 of 50!

author!sometimes!intends”!(2011:!44)—Nabokov!responded!that!he!did!not!see!the!

work!as!parody.!He!further!added,!“…and!I!do!not!see!why!it!matters!whether!it!is!or!

is!not!one.!It!is!a!good!example!of!my!usual!style!and!outlook!and!I!do!not!find!it!

either!overwrought!or!overwritten.”!(2011:!50)!!

Throughout!the!correspondence!White!tried!repeatedly!to!sway!Nabokov’s!

opinions!regarding!the!omission!of!certain!words!and!passages,!while!Nabokov!

defended!numerous!stylistic!choices!on!the!basis!that!they!pertained!to!what!he!

described!as!“an!‘inside’,!‘inner!scheme’,!‘a!system!of!mute!responses.’”!(Nabokov,!

1989:!117).!White’s!comment!that!“it!was!when!I!came!to!edit![the!story]!that!the!

grim!details!began!to!accumulate!in!my!mind”!(2011:!51)!is!particularly!revealing!

both!of!her!increasing!visceral!reaction!to!Nabokov’s!writing!(the!sense!of!

overwhelm!that!stems!from!multiple,!increasingly!close!readings),!and!her!desire!to!

work!with!Nabokov!in!developing!a!more!appropriate!tone!for!the!story,!more!

suitable!for!publication!for!the!magazine’s!average!reader.!Notable!passages!that!

White’s!editorial!team!sought!to!omit!include:!the!tusks!of!saliva,!the!husband’s!

birthmark,!and!the!farmer’s!“simian!stoop”.!In!response!to!these!suggestions!

Nabokov!provided!the!following!response:!!

“I% am% afraid% that% I% cannot% accept% most% of% the% alterations% and% omissions.%

Frankly,% I%would% prefer% you% do% no% publish% the% story% at% all% if% it% had% to% be% so%

carefully%mutilated…%Among%the%alterations%inflicted%upon%this%story,%there%is%

not%a%single%really%necessary%one,%and%many%are%murderous.”%(2011:!62)%

!

However,!the!magazine!ultimately!did!alter!the!story!considerably!(for!a!comparison!

between!The!New!Yorker’s!publication!and!Nabokov’s!later,!remanded!version,!see!

Morris,!2011).!One!particular!instance,!in!which!the!magazine’s!publication!amends!

Nabokov’s!particularly!beautiful!sentence!filtering!the!wife’s!reflective!represented!

perception!through!the!narrative!voice,!“He!kept!clearing!his!throat!in!a!special!

resonant!way!he!had!when!he!was!upset.”!to!the!utterly!unremarkable,!“He!kept!

clearing!his!throat,!as!he!often!did!when!he!was!upset”!(Morris,!2011:!62)!

demonstrates!how!Nabokov’s!careful!precision!was!tampered!with!during!the!

Daniel!McLeod!

! Page 36 of 50!

editorial!process.!Nabokov’s!future!amendment!of!the!story!to!its!original!

conception!shows!his!resolute!belief!in!his!artistic!vision.!Returning!to!Sotirova’s!

claim!that!“authorial!revisions!must!necessarily!account!for!intention!and!rationale!

in!the!changes!introduced”,!these!reversions!arguably!serve!as!a!testament!to!

Nabokov’s!authorial!intention:!a!text!that!can!be!read!either!naïvely!or!critically.!

8.4! Naïve!and!Critical!Readings!of!‘Signs!and!Symbols’!

Similar!to!The!Name!of!the!Rose,!which!can!be!read!on!many!different!levels!(see!

Case!3),!‘Signs!and!Symbols’!can!be!seen!as!containing!numerous!stories:!that!of!an!

elderly!émigré!couple,!and!troubles!of!growing!old!in!a!new!land;!a!story!about!the!

inherent!tragedy!of!life;!a!historiographical!account!focusing!on!the!horrors!of!

WWII;!or!a!story!about!mental!illness.!Each!of!these!readings!is!valid,!with!evidence!

for!their!respective!interpretations!clearly!contained!within!the!text.!And!yet,!

Nabokov!ensures!that!each!of!these!readings!is!also!distinctly!unsatisfying—too!

many!questions!are!left!unanswered.!The!story’s!open!ending!prods!readers!to!

consider!each!potentiality—the!third!call!is!the!dim!girl!again,!an!indeterminate!

ending!focused!on!the!couple’s!suffering,!a!metaliterary!statement!on!the!

impossibility!of!certain!knowledge,!Nabokov!tempting!the!reader!into!referential!

mania—and!their!respective!implications.!!

A!naïve!reading!of!‘Signs!and!Symbols’!is!one!that!chooses!a!single!possible!

interpretation.!Naïve!readings!can!thus!be!performed!at!varying!levels!of!

consideration:!a!reader!could!proclaim,!“it’s!a!story!about!suffering”!and!proceed!

either!to!set!the!book!aside!or!investigate!the!vast!amount!of!suffering!contained!in!

the!text.!Nevertheless,!a!critical!reading!emerges!only!when!considerations!of!every!

possible!interpretation!are!gathered!together!and!the!mazeglike!structure!of!the!text!

is!thoroughly!explored.!!

A!critical!reading!of!‘Signs!and!Symbols’!assumes!all!preceding!naïve!ones,!

and!further!asks!the!question,!“Given!the!validity!of!numerous!interpretations,!taken!

together!what!does!the!story!mean?”!In!other!words,!the!critical!reader!searches!in!

depth!for!an!explanation!to!satisfy!the!story’s!open!ending.!In!such!an!undertaking,!

“many!have!focused!on!exploring!either!the!hermeneutic!or!the!metafictional!

Daniel!McLeod!

! Page 37 of 50!

implications!of!the!story’s!ample!symbolism!in!order!to!derive!meaning!for!its!open!

ending.”!(Trzeciak,!2003:!59)!We!will!now!turn!to!an!overview!of!such!symbolism,!

prior!to!exploring!an!interpretation!of!it!through!reflective!metaphor.!

8.5! The!Symbolism!of!‘Signs!and!Symbols’!

‘Signs!and!Symbols’’!pervading!sense!of!doom!is!overwhelming.!The!couple’s!lives!

are!bleak!and!miserable!and!suffering,!it!seems,!is!inescapable.!The!following!

paragraphs!will!outline!instances!of!symbolism!foregrounding!an!interpretation!of!

the!son’s!suicide.!We!will!also!consider!a!contradictory!theory!suggested!by!

Rosenzweig,!arguing!for!the!prevailing!logical!assumption!that!these!“signs”!have!no!

realgworld!connection!to!the!son’s!fate,!but!are!rather!stylistic!devices!aimed!at!

creating!a!specific!reader!response.!!

On!a!structural!level!the!story!is!divided!into!three!sections,!underscoring!the!

(presumable)!significance!of!the!number!three!throughout!the!story:!there!are!three!

telephone!calls;!three!colours!of!jelly!(yellow,!green,!red);!the!couple!live!on!the!

third!floor!in!their!third!country;!three!playing!cards!fall!on!the!floor.!(Rosenzweig,!

2012;!Trzeciak,!2003:!65)!The!first!two!sections!begin!in!pure!narration!and!end!in!

poetic!ominousness!filtered!through!the!reflective!represented!perception!of!the!

wife:!section!I!concludes!with!a!description!of!referential!mania;!section!II!concludes!

with!the!mother’s!ruminations!that!life!entails!the!acceptance!of!one!joy!after!

another.!!

According!to!Rosenzweig!“the!entire!story!is!imbued!with!the!symbolism!of!

impotence!and!doom,!so!that!we!anticipate!the!son’s!suicide!as!an!appropriate!part!

of!the!pattern!of!the!story.”!(Rosenzweig,!2012:!159)!The!third!section!is!expected!to!

conclude!on!an!equally!dramatic!note,!but!Nabokov!leaves!the!ending!intentionally!

ambiguous,!challenging!the!reader!to!provide!an!answer!as!to!the!purpose!of!the!

third!telephone!call.!Rosenzweig’s!claim!that!“we!have!been!thoroughly!conditioned!

to!impose!on!that!third!call!a!tragic!meaning”!(2012:!160)!is!consistent!with!Miall’s!

(1995)!assertion!that!feelings!play!a!central!role!in!initiating!and!directing!the!

interpretive!activities!involved!in!literary!reading.!Nabokov!manipulates!his!readers!

into!a!tragic!interpretation!of!the!last!line!through!the!reader’s!conventional!ideas!of!

Daniel!McLeod!

! Page 38 of 50!

narrative:!namely,!that!symbolism!is!purposeful.!When!in!reality,!as!Rosenzweig!

argues,!“there!is!no!reason!to!assume![the!third!call’s]!fatality!since!the!symbolism,!

of!course,!has!no!necessary!relation!to!the!son’s!fate.”!(2012:!159)!However,!given!

the!son’s!two!failed!suicide!attempts!and!the!apparent!significance!of!the!number!

three—in!addition!to!the!wife’s!explanation!of!the!girl’s!mistake!in!dialing!an!‘O’!

instead!of!a!‘0’!and!the!lapse!in!time!between!the!second!and!third!call!(see!

Hagopian,!1981)—readers!may!be!led!to!assume!the!third!telephone!call!is!related!

to!the!son’s!third!(successful)!attempt!at!suicide.!

Once!the!son’s!suicide!has!been!ruled!as!a!possibility,!many!readers!will!feel!

compelled!to!root!through!the!text!to!find!evidence!in!support!of!this!interpretation.!

Table!8–1!provides!a!full!account!of!the!story’s!symbolism.!An!analysis!of!this!table!

is!provided!in!Appendix!C.!

Daniel!McLeod!

! Page 39 of 50!

!

Daniel!McLeod!

! Page 40 of 50!

8.6! Reflective!Metaphorical!Interpretation!

From!a!text!world!perspective,!the!semantic!content!of!‘Signs!and!Symbols’,!and!

most!notably!the!foregrounding!of!doom!through!aforementioned!instances!of!

symbolism,!combine!with!a!reader’s!discourse!world!expectation!of!narrative!

structure—“the!cognitive!constraints!of!coherence,!relevance!and!significance”,!

especially!notable!in!short!stories—!in!a!construction!integration!process!reliant!on!

toggling!between!the!text!and!discourse!world!as!the!reader!demands!an!

explanation!for!the!rich!symbolism!in!light!of!the!story’s!open!ending.!At!this!point!

the!reader!(quite!visibly,!based!on!all!known!accounts!existing!in!literary!criticism!

on!‘Signs!and!Symbols’)!undergoes!a!crisis!of!understanding.!Wolfgang!Iser!writes!

that!“if!the!strategies!are!so!organized!that!they!increase!the!pressure!exerted!by!the!

“alien!association”—i.e.,!the!equivalence!of!the!signs!represented!in!a!gestalt!no!

longer!corresponds!to!the!apparent!intention—then!we!have!a!text!in!which!the!

original!implications!of!the!signs!themselves!become!the!objects!of!critical!attention.!

This!is!what!normally!happens!with!literary!texts!where!gestalten!are!so!formulated!

as!to!bring!with!them!the!seeds!of!their!own!modification!or!even!destruction.”!(Iser,!

1978:!127)!Iser!goes!on!to!say!that!through!gestalt!forming,!the!reader!actually!

participates!in!the!text,!becoming!caught!up!in!the!very!thing!he!or!she!is!producing.!

Also!integral!to!our!argument,!Stanley!Fish!argued!in!Affective%Stylistics!(1980)!for!

the!significance!of!reader!experience!during!literary!reading.!Specifically,!Fish!

pointed!“to!a!range!of!syntactical!devices!by!which!readers!are!led!to!expect!

meanings!that!are!then!contradicted.’!(Miall,!1995:!278)!Nabokov!uses!symbolism!to!

manipulate!his!readers!into!an!overginterpretation!necessary!to!achieve!his!

thematic!purpose,!literally!developing!in!his!readers!a!case!of!“referential!mania”.!

A!reader!must!turn!to!his!or!her!embodied!response!to!the!text!to!provide!an!

interpretation.!Nabokov!encourages!such!embodied,!dialectical!readerly!

involvement!in!Strong!Opinions:!“We!can!take!the!story!apart,!we!can!find!out!how!

the!bits!fit,!how!one!part!of!the!pattern!responds!to!the!other”!but!to!truly!

appreciate!it!“you!have!to!have!in!you!some!cell,!some!gene,!some!germ!that!will!

vibrate!in!answer!to!sensations!you!can!neither!define,!not!dismiss.”!(Nabokov,!

1973:!251)!

Daniel!McLeod!

! Page 41 of 50!

An!interpretation!can!be!found!through!a!reader’s!analysis!of!their!own!

change!in!psychological!state!resulting!from!a!reading!of!the!short!story.!Nabokov!

sets!his!readers!up!by!providing!significant!“gaps”!or!“blanks”!in!the!text,!which!

require!“readers’!acts!of!‘ideation’!and!the!building!of!a!schema!adequate!to!the!text!

as!a!whole.”!(Miall,!1995:!278)!Specifically,!by!creating!a!series!of!deliberately!

oblique!signs!and!symbols!in!the!text,!Nabokov!induces!a!simulation!of!the!son’s!

condition!of!referential!mania!in!his!readers!(Carroll,!1978),!forcing!them!to!

experience!the!confusion,!disorder,!and!ultimate!insanity!that!comes!from!seeing!all!

that!truly!exists.!

Once!this!simulation!is!reflected!upon!and!the!mazeglike!structure!of!the!text!

begins!to!become!a!clearly!navigable!path!of!interwoven!levels!of!interpretation,!the!

reader’s!understanding!will!develop:!only!by!considering!the!implications!of!the!

delight!and!ultimate!satisfaction!brought!upon!the!process!of!trying%to!figure!out!a!

“correct”!interpretation!or!a!true!meaning!can!the!reader!extrapolate!a!final!metag

interpretation!onto!the!short!story.!Namely,!readers!are!challenged!to!consider!the!

alternative:!compared!to!the!quiet,!gloomy!life!of!the!elderly!couple,!is!such!insanity!

not!more!desirable?!Is!an!open,!layered!understanding!of!such!a!stylistically!rich!and!

complex!text!not!more!valuable!than!a!shallow!fiction!about!a!miserable!elderly!

couple?!Surely,!suffering!in!this!world!is!inevitable—Nabokov!ensures!this!

interpretation!from!no!matter!what!angle!you!examine!his!story—but!a!

superconscious!form!of!suffering!characteristic!of!the!artistic!mind!and!replicated!in!

the!reader!through!a!close!textual!examination!of!‘Signs!and!Symbols’!is!preferable!

to!the!onegdimensional,!closed,!and!oblivious!suffering!of!the!naïve!reader!

represented!through!the!husband!and!wife’s!perceptions.!

Such!an!interpretation!depends!upon!the!acknowledgment!that!searching!for!

meaning!is!a!vastly!satisfying,!essential!human!activity.!Yuri!Leving’s!compilation!

Anatomy%of%a%Short%Story!provides!ample!evidence!to!assure!that,!at!least!in!the!case!

of!‘Signs!and!Symbols’,!locating!meaning!is!a!desirable,!often!thrilling!task—one!to!

which!the!scholars!included!have!devoted!their!lives.!!

Alexander!Dolinin!concludes!his!accomplished!analysis!of!‘Signs!and!

Symbols’!with!the!statement!that!“[Nabokov]!is!affirming!art!as!sacred!play.!In!

Daniel!McLeod!

! Page 42 of 50!

calling!our!attention!to!the!artifice!of!his!story,!he!reminds!us!of!the!superior!vision!

of!the!artist.!As!a!private!world!of!the!imagination!the!story!shares!something!with!

the!son’s!mania.!But!unlike!the!latter!it!is!redeemed!by!an!act!of!freedom—the!

artistic!expression!that!consciously!creates!the!fictive!world!of!the!story!and!the!

playful!configuration!of!its!language.!!

9.)) Closing)Remarks)

9.1! Recapitulations:!Embodied!Experience!as!an!Interpretive!Device!

If!we!assume!that!stylisticallygcreated!aesthetic!feelings!can!initiate!an!affectively!

guided!search!for!interpretations,!and!acknowledge!the!possibility!that!an!affective!

response!eliciting!a!metaphor!of!personal!identification!between!reader!and!text!

might!provide!the!metatextual!interpretation!intentioned!by!the!author,!then,!under!

certain!conditions!reflective!metaphor!is!the!process!through!which!the!author!

(generatively)!and!reader!(interpretively)!decipher!the!codes!of!the!text.!This!is!an!

entirely!new!approach!to!interpretation!that!places!the!reader’s!embodied!

experience!at!the!forefront!of!thematic!understanding;!as!the!fictional!world!blends!

with!the!discourse!world,!a!reconfiguration!of!feelings!and!beliefs!occurs!within!the!

reader.!This!is!the!ultimate!instance!of!what!Coleridge!refers!to!as!“becoming!what!

we…!behold!and!hear.”!(Coleridge,!Notebooks,!II,!2086)!This!paper!has!explored!the!

complex!web!of!interconnectivity!between!cognitive!scientific!and!literary!critical!

theories!with!respect!to!developing!a!comprehensive!working!model!of!reflective!

metaphor—embodiment,!metaphor,!emotions,!empathy,!authorial!intention,!reader!

response,!and!interpretation!have!been!closely!scrutinized!with!the!aim!of!providing!

a!detailed!breakdown!of!the!cognitive!and!stylistic!processes!involved,!starting!from!

the!source!(text)!and!working!our!way!out!towards!the!reader.!

9.2! New!Directions!

The!model’s!interdisciplinary!nature!means!that!future!discoveries!in!the!cognitive!

sciences!(and!cognitive!poetics!in!particular)!will!most!likely!provide!new!avenues!

Daniel!McLeod!

! Page 43 of 50!

for!exploration.!Future!research!can!begin!a!shift!towards!more!empirical!studies.

! As!it!stands,!all!cases!of!reflective!metaphor!discussed!in!this!paper!have!

originated!from!personal!literary!experiences—that!is,!my!own!embodied!emotions!

arising!during!readings!formed!the!basis!for!interpretation!via!reflective!metaphor,!

with!author!testimonies!and!general!reading!responses!(from!performance!reviews,!

Goodreads,!and!friends)!playing!a!more!minor!role.!Future!studies!should!aim!to!

incorporate!multiple!reader!responses,!thereby!exploring!the!relation!between!

naïve!and!critical!readings!and!successful!interpretations!by!means!of!reflective!

metaphor.!If!Eco!is!correct!in!asserting!that!open!texts!elicit!their!own!model!

readers,!then!an!empirical!study!of!reader!responses!to!an!open!text!among!a!wide!

enough!sample!should!reveal!both!critical!and!naïve!readings;!it!would!be!

interesting,!then,!to!assess!selfgreported!levels!of!empathic!connection!and!

emotional!response.!!

Taking!after!Dancygier’s!(2014)!stylistic!deconstruction!of!Larkin,!Woolf,!and!

Wordsworth,!future!analyses!should!further!endeavor!to!uncover!the!various!levels!

of!textual!basis!for!embodied!responses!to!literature.!For!instance,!in!‘Signs!and!

Symbols’!the!generation!of!readerly!affect!takes!place!at!the!semantic!level:!the!

meaning!and!meaning%implications!of!symbolic!utterances!stimulate!readers!to!

interpretation;!therefore,!a!“close”!textual!analysis!must!focus!primarily!on!the!

semantic!value!of!each!symbolic!instance.!However,!other!works!such!as!‘Vagues’!

(see!Appendix!A)!demonstrate!how!syntactic!and!lexical!choices!elicit!emotional!

response.!One!idea!for!future!studies!could!be!to!more!closely!examine!affective!

responses!elicited!at!the!syntactic!or!graphological!level,!or!phonological,!

morphological,!and!pragmatic!levels.!

Due!to!reflective!metaphor’s,!for!lack!of!a!better!term,!nongapparent!nature!it!

is!difficult!to!discover!reflective!metaphors!artificially—that!is,!one!cannot!expect!to!

set!out!to!the!library!with!the!intent!of!finding!a!reflective!metaphor!for!use!in!future!

study,!and!return!home!later!that!day!with!such!a!book!tucked!under!their!arm.!

Interpretations!come!only!after!readers!engage!emotionally!with!a!story,!then!

consider!the!metagtextual!implications!of!this!emotional!response!with!relation!to!

the!story’s!narrative!and!thematic!content.!This!is!the!reason!Nabokov’s!‘Signs!and!

Daniel!McLeod!

! Page 44 of 50!

Symbols’!was!regexamined!more!extensively!here,!despite!its!use!in!an!earlier!paper.!

For!readers,!discovering!reflective!metaphor!organically—through!a!dialectical,!

transworld!blend!of!text!and!discourse!worlds—during!the!natural!act!of!reading!is!

a!vastly!rewarding!and!enlightening!literary!event;!but!from!a!literary!linguistic!

perspective!the!concept’s!evasiveness!presents!a!real!challenge!to!future!study.!I!

have!found!that!author!testimonies,!such!as!Joanna!Walsh’s!interview!in!the!Irish!

Times!or!Umberto!Eco’s!postgscript!notes!in!The!Name!of!the!Rose,!provide!the!best!

indication!as!to!works!that!might!contain!reflective!metaphor.!It!is!also!worth!noting!

that!two!of!my!four!case!studies!were!suggested!by!outside!sources!due!to!the!

model’s!subjectively!embodied,!organic!mode!of!discovery!and!the!limitations!it!

provides.!!

9.3! In!Closing!

This!paper!has!aimed!to!integrate!the!currently!dichotomous!realms!of!embodied!

reader!response!and!studies!on!interpretation!by!analyzing!just!one!cognitive!

process!involved!in!the!act!of!reading.!Reflective!metaphor!exists,!authors!have!

asserted!as!much.!It!is!now!up!to!readers!to!venture!into!text!worlds,!simulate!their!

activity,!and!discover!the!joussaince!of!understanding!literature!through!embodied!

experience.!!

! !

Daniel!McLeod!

! Page 45 of 50!

References%%

Allan,!N.!1994.!Madness,!Death!and!Disease!in!the!Fiction!of!Vladimir!Nabokov.!Birmingham:!Department!of!Russian!Language!and!Literature.!

Berridge,!K.,!Winkielman,!P.!2003.!“What!is!an!Unconscious!Emotion?!(The!Case!for!Unconscious!“Liking”).”!Cognition%&%Emotion!17.2!181g211.!Web.!

Barsalou,!L.W.!2008.!Grounded!Cognition.!Annual!Review!of!Psychology,!59,!617g645.!

Boyd,!Brian.!1991.!Vladimir%Nabokov:%The%American%Years.!Princeton,!NJ:!Princeton!UP,!Print.!

Cataldi,!S.!1996.!Emotion,%Depth,%and%Flesh.!Albany:!State!University!of!New!York!Press.!

Carroll,!W.!"Pnin!and!"Signs!and!Symbols"!Narrative!Strategies."!Anatomy%of%a%Short%Story:%Nabokov's%Puzzles,%Codes,%"Signs%and%Symbols"!New!York:!Continuum!International!Group,!2012.!236g50.!Print.!

Churchill,!C.!2015.!Here!We!Go.!London:!Nick!Hern!Books.!

Cohen,!T.,!1999.!Identifying!with!metaphor:!metaphors!of!personal!identification.!Journal!of!Aesthetics!and!Art!Criticism!57,!399g409.!

Cupchik,!G.C.,!Oatley,!K.,!Vorderer,!P.,!1998.!Emotional!effect!of!reading!excerpts!from!short!stories!by!James!Joyce.!Poetics!25,!363g377.!

Damasio,!A.!1999.!The%Feeling%of%What%Happens:%Body%and%Emotion%in%the%Making%of%Consciousness.%New!York:!Harcourt!Brace.!Print.!

Dancygier,!B.,!2014.!“Intensity!and!Texture!in!Imagery.”!The%Cambridge%Handbook%of%Stylistics.!Cambridge:!Cambridge!UP,!2014.!212g28.!Print.!

Dole,!C.!"Five!Known!Jars."!Anatomy%of%a%Short%Story:%Nabokov's%Puzzles,%Codes,%"Signs%and%Symbols"!New!York:!Continuum!International!Group,!2012.!137g39.!Print.!

Dolinin,!A.!2006.!The!Signs!and!Symbols!in!Nabokov’s!‘Signs!and!Symbols,’!English!Version!in!Zembla![Electronic!website!of!The!Vladimir!Nabokov!Society]:http://www.libraries.psu.edu/Nabokov/dolinin.htm!!

Daniel!McLeod!

! Page 46 of 50!

Drescher,!A.!2012.!"Arbitrary!Signs!and!Symbols."!Anatomy%of%a%Short%Story:%Nabokov's%Puzzles,%Codes,%"Signs%and%Symbols"!New!York:!Continuum!International!Group,!83g94.!Print.!

Eco,!U.!1979.!The%Role%of%the%Reader:%Explorations%in%the%Semiotics%of%Texts.%London:!Hutchinson.!Print.!!

Eco,!U.!1981.!“Theory!of!Signs!and!the!Role!of!the!Reader,”!Bulletin%of%the%Midwest%Modern%Language%Association,%14,!No.!1,!25g45.!

Eco,!U.,!1988!Le%signe,!Brussels:!Labor.!

Eco,!U.!1989.!The%Open%Work.!Cambridge,!MA:!Harvard!UP.!Print.!

Farronato,!C.,!2003,!Eco's%chaosmos:%From%the%Middle%Ages%to%postmodernity,%University!of!Toronto!Press,!Toronto.!

Fish,!S.!1970.!“Literature!in!the!Reader:!Affective!Stylistics”.!New%Literary%History!2.1:!123–162.!Web.!

Gallese,!V.!1998.!“Mirror!Neurons!and!the!Simulation!Theory!of!MindgReading.”!Trends%in%Cognitive%Sciences%2.12:!493g501.!Web.!

Gallese,!V.!2003.!"The!Roots!of!Empathy:!The!Shared!Manifold!Hypothesis!and!the!Neural!Basis!of!Intersubjectivity."!Psychopathology!36.4:!171g80.!Web.!

Gibbs,!R.W.,!Franks,!H.!2002.!‘Embodied!metaphor!in!women’s!narrative!about!their!experiences!with!cancer’,!Health%Communication!14!(2):139g65!

Gibbs,!R.W.!2006.!"Metaphor!interpretation!as!embodied!simulation."!Mind%&%Language!21.3:!434g458.!

Gibbs,!R.W.!2006.!Embodiment%and%Cognitive%Science.!Cambridge:!Cambridge!UP.!Print.!

Gibbs,!R.W.!2008.!‘Feeling!Moved!by!Metaphor’,!The%Language%and%Literature%Reader.!Routledge:!209g218.!Print.!

Guillemette,!Cossette.!"The!Semiotic!Process!and!the!Classification!of!Signs."Umberto%Eco%:%/%Signo.!Signo,!n.d.!Web.!26!Aug.!2016.!

Iser,!W.!1978.!The!Act!of!Reading.!London:!Routledge!&!Kegan!Paul!Ltd.!

Jeffries,!L.!2014.!"Interpretation."!The%Cambridge%Handbook%of%Stylistics.!Cambridge:!Cambridge!UP.!467g84.!Print.!

Daniel!McLeod!

! Page 47 of 50!

Keen,!S.!2007.!Empathy%and%the%Novel.!Oxford:!Oxford!UP.!Print.!

Lane,!G.!1973.!Seymour's!suicide!again:!A!new!reading!of!J.!D.!salinger's!"A!perfect!day!for!bananafish".%Studies%in%Short%Fiction,%10(1),!27.!Retrieved!from!http://ezproxy.nottingham.ac.uk/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1297937045?accountid=8018!

Lane,!J.!2012.!"A!Funny!Thing!About!"Signs!and!Symbols""!Anatomy%of%a%Short%Story:%Nabokov's%Puzzles,%Codes,%"Signs%and%Symbols"!New!York:!Continuum!International!Group.!114g29.!Print.!

Kintsch,!W.,!van.!Dijk,!Teun,!A.!1983.!Strategies%of%Discourse%Comprehension.!New!York:!Academic.!Print.!

Kuiken,!D.,!Phillips,!L.,!Gregus,!M.,!Miall,!D.,!Verbitsky,!M.,!Tonkonogy,!A.!2004.!!"Locating!SelfgModifying!Feelings!Within!Literary!Reading."Discourse%Processes!38.2:!267g86.!Web.!

Lakoff,!G.!1987.!Women,!Fire!and!Dangerous!Things.!London:!University!of!Chicago!Press,!Ltd.!

Lakoff,!G.,!Johnson,!M.!1980.!Metaphors%We%Live%by.!Chicago:!U!of!Chicago.!Print.!

Lakoff,!G.!&!Johnson,!M.!1999.!Philosophy!in!the!Flesh:!The!Embodied!Mind!and!its!Challenge!to!Western!Thought.!New!York:!Basic!Books.!

Leung!et!al.!2012.!Embodied!Metaphors!and!Creative!“Acts”.!Washington:!Association!for!Psychological!Science.!

Leving,!Y.!2012.!Anatomy%of%a%Short%Story.!New!York:!Continuum!International!Group.!

Malin,!I.!2000.!Reading!Madly,!in!(eds.)!Steven!G.!Kellman!and!Irving!Malin!‘Torpid!Smoke:!The!Stories!of!Vladimir!Nabokov’,!(Amsterdam,!Atlanta,!Gerogia:!Rodopi,!2000),!219g27.!

Mar,!R.A.,!Oatley,!K.,!Djikic,!M.,!Mullin,!J.!2011.!"Emotion!and!Narrative!Fiction:!Interactive!Influences!Before,!During,!and!after!Reading."Cognition%&%Emotion!25.5!:!818g33.!Web.!

Martin,!T.!2012!"Ways!of!Knowing!in!"Signs!and!Symbols""!Anatomy%of%a%Short%Story:%Nabokov's%Puzzles,%Codes,%"Signs%and%Symbols"!New!York:!Continuum!International!Group.!101g13.!Print.!

Daniel!McLeod!

! Page 48 of 50!

Miall,!D.!S.!1989.!Beyond!the!schema!given:!Affective!comprehension!of!literary!narratives.!Cognition%and%Emotion,!3,!55g78!

Miall,!D.!1995.!Anticipation!and!Feeling!in!Literary!Response:!A!Neuropsychological!Perspective.!Amsterdam:!Elsevier!Science!B.V.!

Miall,!D.!1997.!"The!Body!In!Literature:!Mark!Johnson!Metaphor,!And!Feeling."Journal%of%Literary%Semantics!26.3:!n.!pag.!Web.!

Miall,!D.!2014!"Emotions,!Feelings!and!Stylistics."!The%Cambridge%Handbook%of%Stylistics.!Cambridge:!Cambridge!UP.!424g38.!Print.!

Miall,!D.,!Kuiken,!D.!2001.!Shifting!perspectives:!Readers'!feelings!and!literary!response.!In!Willie!van!Peer!and!Seymour!Chatman!(Eds.),!New%Perspectives%on%Narrative%Perspective!(pp.!289g301).!Albany,!NY:!State!University!of!New!York!Press.!

Miall,!D.,!Kuiken,!D.!2002!"A!Feeling!for!Fiction:!Becoming!What!We!Behold."Poetics!30.4:!221g41.!Web.!

Morris,!J.!"Lost!in!Revision:!The!Editing!of!"Signs!and!Symbols."!Anatomy%of%a%Short%Story:%Nabokov's%Puzzles,%Codes,%"Signs%and%Symbols"!New!York:!Continuum!International!Group,!2012.!61g62.!Print.!

Nabokov,!V.V.!1977.!Signs!and!Symbols.!Nabokov's%Dozen:%A%Collection%of%Thirteen%Stories.!Garden!City,!NY:!Doubleday.!52g58.!!

Nabokov,!V.V.,!&!Bowers,!F.!1980.!Lectures%on%Literature.!New!York:!Harcourt!Brace!Jovanovich.!

Nabokov,!V.!V.,!Nabokov,!D.,!Bruccoli,!M.J.!1989.!Vladimir%Nabokov:%Selected%Letters,%1940]1977.!San!Diego:!Harcourt!Brace!Jovanovich.!Print.!

Niedenthal,!P.M.,!Barsalou,!L.W.,!Winkielman,!P.,!KrauthgGruber,!S.,!&!Ric,!F.!2005.!Embodiment!in!Attitudes,!Social!Perception,!and!Emotion.!Personality!and!Social!Psychology!Revew,!9,!184g211.!

Oatley,!K.,!1999.!Meeting!of!mind:!dialogue,!sympathy,!and!identification,!in!reading!fiction:!Poetics!26,!429g454.!

Oatley,!K.!2002.!Emotions!and!the!story!worlds!of!fiction.!In:!Brock,!T.C.,!Strange,!J.J.,!Green,!M.C.!(Eds.),!Narrative!Impact:!Social!and!Cognitive!Foundations.!Erlbaum,!Mahwah,!NJ,!pp.!39g69!

Daniel!McLeod!

! Page 49 of 50!

Pecher,!D.,!&!Zwaan,!R.!A.!2005.!Grounding!cognition:!The!role!of!perception!and!action!in!memory,!language,!and!thinking.!Cambridge,!England:!Cambridge!University!Press.!

Rosenzweig,!P.!2012.!"The!Importance!of!Reader!Response."!Anatomy%of%a%Short%Story:%Nabokov's%Puzzles,%Codes,%"Signs%and%Symbols"!New!York:!Continuum!International!Group.!158g64.!Print.!

Sallis,!S.!1986.!"Naming!the!Rose:!Readers!and!Codes!in!Umberto!Eco's!Novel."!The%Journal%of%the%Midwest%Modern%Language%Association!19.2:!3.!Web.!

Singer,!T.!"Empathy!for!Pain!Involves!the!Affective!but!Not!Sensory!Components!of!Pain."!Science!303.5661!(2004):!1157g162.!Web.!

Sotirova,!V.!2014.!"Production!and!Intentionality."!The%Cambridge%Handbook%of%Stylistics.!Cambridge:!Cambridge!UP.!132g48.!Print.!

Steen,!G.!2014.!"Metaphor!and!Style."!The%Cambridge%Handbook%of%Stylistics.!Cambridge:!Cambridge!UP.!315g28.!Print.!

Stockwell,!P.!1999.!The!Inflexibility!of!Variance.!Reprinted!from!Language%and%Literature,!8,!2.!125g42.!!

Stockwell,!P.!2012.!“The!Reader’s!Paradox.”!Pedagogical%Stylistics:%Current%Trends%in%Language,%Literature%and%ELT.!London:!Continuum!International!Pub.!Group.!Print.!45g57.!

Stockwell,!P.!2013.!"The!Positioned!Reader."!Language%and%Literature!22.3:!263g77.!Web.!

Trzeciak,!J.!2003!""Signs!and!Symbols"!and!Silentology."!Nabokov%at%Cornell.!N.p.:!Cornell!U.!58g67.!Print.!

Voronina,!O.!2012.!"Vladimir!Nabokov's!Correspondence!with!The!New!Yorker!regarding!"Signs!and!Symbol,"!1946g8."!Anatomy%of%a%Short%Story.!New!York:!Continuum!International!Group.!42g60.!!

Wellek,!R.!1960.!Style!in!Literature,!closing!statement.!In:!T.A.!Sebeok!(ed.),!Style!in!language,!408g419.!New!York:!Wiley.!

Wilshire,!B.!1982.!The!Dramaturgical!Model!of!Behavior:!Its!Strengths!and!Weaknesses*.!Symbolic!Interaction,!5:!287–298.!

Daniel!McLeod!

! Page 50 of 50!

Whiteley,!S.!2014.!"Ethics."!The%Cambridge%Handbook%of%Stylistics.!Cambridge:!Cambridge!UP!393g407.!Print.!

Wood,!M.!1994.!The!Magician’s!Doubts:!Nabokov!and!the!Risks!of!Fiction.!London:!Chatto!and!Windus.!

Zajonc,!R.!B.,!Murphy,!S.,!Inglehart,!M.!1989.!"Feeling!and!Facial!Efference:!Implications!of!the!Vascular!Theory!of!Emotion."!Psychological%Review!96.3:!395g416.!Web.!

Zunshine,!L.!2006.!Why%We%Read%Fiction:%Theory%of%Mind%and%the%Novel.!Columbus:!Ohio!State!UP.!Print.!

!

!

!

Appendix(A(–(Stylistic(Analysis(of(‘Vagues’((2016)(

(i(

‘Vagues’)–)Stylistic)Analysis(

(

“There(are(many(people(in(the(oyster(restaurant(and(they(all(have(different(relations(

to(each(other,(which(warrant(small(adjustments:((1)(they(ask(each(other(courteously(

whether(they(wouldn’t(prefer(to(sit(in(places(in(which(they(are(not(sitting,((2)(but(in(

which(the(others(would(prefer(them(to(sit.((3)(Sometimes(entire(parties(get(up(and(

the(suggested(adjustments(are(made;((4)(sometimes(they(only(half(get(up(and(sit(

down(again.((5)(Some(of(the(tables(in(the(restaurant(face(the(beach(and(have(high(

stools(along(one(side(so(that(diners(can(see(the(sea.((6)(Others(have(high(stools(on(

both(sides(so(that(some(diners(face(the(sea(and(others,(the(restaurant,(but(both,(each(

other’s(faces.((7)(Because(of(the(angle(of(the(sun(and(of(the(straw(shades(over(the(

tables,(the(people(who(face(the(sea(are(also(more(likely(to(be(in(the(shade.((8)(Not(

everyone(can(face(the(sea,((9)(not(everyone(can(be(in(the(shade.”((13)(

(

Joanna(Walsh(said(in(a(recent(interview,(“I#like,#sometimes,#to#play#with#things#“in#real#

time”,#for#example#in#my#story,#Vagues,#there’s#a#lot#of#repetition#as#the#bored#narrator#

scans#her#environment,#then#scans#it#again.#I’m#not#only#writing#about#tedium,#I’m#

trying#to#explore#and#replicate#the#feeling#of#that#experience#for#the#reader.”#(Walsh,(

2016)(Walsh’s(use(of(repetition(builds(a(reflective(metaphor(generatively(into(the(

text,(to(be(deciphered(by(readers.(According(to(Walsh,(the(intent(was(to(simulate(the(

narrator’s(boredom(in(her(readers.(The(reader’s(point(of(view(is(focalized(through(

the(narrating(character’s(unfiltered(perception(as(she(scans(and(reYscans(the(scene(

around(her,(remarking(on(each(detail.(A(stylistic(analysis(of(the(entire(short(story(is(

beyond(the(scope(of(this(Appendix;(however,(the(opening(page(of(Joanna(Walsh’s(

short(story(‘Vagues’(demonstrates(efficiently(her(use(of(repetition,(which(continues(

persistently(throughout(the(entire(10(page(story.(The(following(brief(analysis(will(

aim(at(concisely(summarizing(parallelism(present(at(syntactic,(lexical,(and(

phonological(levels(within(this(first(paragraph.((

(

(

(

Appendix(A(–(Stylistic(Analysis(of(‘Vagues’((2016)(

(ii(

1.)Syntactic)Level)

Syntactic(repetition(proliferates(in(this(opening(page.(In((1)(the(modal(“would”(

precedes(main(verb(“prefer”(+(to(inf.(“to(sit”(+(prepositional(phrase(“in(places”,(

which(contains(the(prepositional(phrase(including(relative(pronoun(“in(which”(+(

“they(are(not(already(sitting”.(This(is(repeated(partially(in((2)(following(conjunctive(

“but”,(where(the(prepositional(phrase(with(relative(pronoun(“in(which”(precedes(the(

nominal(“the(others”,(followed(by(modal(“would”(+(main(verb(“prefer”;(pronominal(

“them”(+(to(infinitive(“to(sit”(then(follow.(The(level(of(repetition(is(unnecessary(here(

to(achieve(ordinary(communicative(value:(in((1)(“to(sit(in(places(in(which(they(are(

not(sitting”(is(more(typically(worded(as(“to(sit(in(different(places”.(The(unusual(

syntactic(composition(foregrounds(certain(phrasal(construction(which(are(

consequently(repeated,(foregrounding(them(further.(Thus,(we(see(the(verb(“to(sit”(

three(times(in(this(short(space,(instead(of(just(twice.((3)(begins(with(adverbial(

“sometimes”(followed(by(adjectival(“entire”(and(nominal(“parties”;(the(phrasal(verb(

“get(up”(comes(next,(followed(by(“and(the(suggested(adjustments(are(made”.((4)(

opens(with(adverbial(“sometimes”;(the(pronominal(“they”(refers(back(to(“entire(

parties”(of((3).(The(phrasal(verb(“get(up”(is(repeated(in((4);(however,(in(comparison(

with((3)(the(parties(“only(half(get(up(and(sit(down(again.(Thus((4)(provides(an(

alternative(situation,(but(mirrors(the(syntactic(structure,(conveying(the(feeling(that,(

to(the(narrator,(despite(the(change(there(is(an(element(of(sameness.(In(grammar,(the(

semiYcolon(is(used(to(connect(two(independent(sentences(that(could(stand(alone,(but(

which(the(author(wishes(to(be(more(strongly(connected.(One(could(argue(that(the(

use(of(a(semiYcolon(to(connect((3)(and((4)(indicates(graphologically(this(notion(of(

sameness.((5)(and((6)(impart(a(similar(impression(through(comparable(syntactic(

means:(syntactic(repetition(represents(mirror(image(alternative(situations,(

conveying(the(underlying(sentiment(that(the(differences(are(uninteresting(to(the(

narrator.(As(Walsh(claims,(the(narrator(is(bored(as(she(scans(her(environment.((8)(

and((9)(are(almost(syntactically(identical.(Negative(“not”(modifies(nominal(

“everyone”;(modal(verb(“can”(precedes(a(main(verb((in((8),(“face”;(in((9),(“be”)(

introducing(a(perceived(benefit(of(alternative(seating(positions,(either(“the(sea”(or(

“the(shade”.(To(reitterate,(the(narrator(does(not(care(in(the(slightest(whether(she(

Appendix(A(–(Stylistic(Analysis(of(‘Vagues’((2016)(

(iii(

faces(the(sea(or(sits(in(the(shade.(This(becomes(apparent(as(the(story(progresses;(

however,(the(narrator’s(acute(lack(of(interest,(which(details(the(environment(closely(

in(order(to(disregard(it(more(intensely,(comes(through(remarkably(through(

syntactic(repetition(in(just(this(small(introductory(paragraph.(

(

2.)Lexical)Level)

Table(2–1(Lexical(Repetition(

(Word(

(Number(of(Times(Repeated(

(Y(would( 2(Y(adjustments( 2(Y(which( 3(Y(prefer( 2(Y(get(up( 2(Y(sit((to(sit,(sitting)( 3(Y(some(+(sometimes( 4(Y(face( 5(Y(diners( 2(Y(others( 6(Y(both( 2(Y(sea( 4(Y(not(everyone( 2(Y(shade((shades)( 3(Y(restaurant( 3(Y(have(high(stools( 2(Y(side( 2(Y(tables( 2((

As(can(be(seen(purely(from(table(2–1,(the(level(of(syntactic(repetition(in(the(opening(

paragraph(of(‘Vagues’(is(atypical.(Of(its(169(words,(63(are(included(in(sets(of(lexical(

repetition—this(is(not(including(conjunctions,(determiners,(pronouns,(or(auxiliary(

“be”(verbs.(Similar(to(syntactic(repetition,(lexical(repetition(foregrounds(by(means(of(

its(deviance(from(conventional(wording:(many(utterances(of(words(within(sets(of(

lexical(repetition(are(unnecessary,(and(thus(unusual—they(do(not(serve(the(maxim(

of(manner,(which(states(that(communicative(acts(strive(to(be(as(clear,(brief,(and(

orderly(as(one(can(make(them.(More(accurately,(the(syntactic(repetition(entails(

Appendix(A(–(Stylistic(Analysis(of(‘Vagues’((2016)(

(iv(

lexical(repetition(in(many(cases.(For(example,(consider((6):(“Others(have(high(stools(

on(both(sides(so(that(some(diners(face(the(sea(and(others,(the(restaurant,(but(both,(

each(other’s(faces.”(In(this(sentence(we(have(a(high(number(of(repeated(words((14(

or(23(words(are(involved(in(sets(of(repetition).(The(accuracy(of(this(observation(is(

suspect(to(consideration;(no(normal(person(remarks(with(such(precision(potential(

view(of(diners(sitting(in(different(places.(The(syntactic(and(lexical(repetition(stems(

from(an(acuteness(of(perception,(the(narrator’s(heightened(focus(her(surrounding(

environment,(which(ordinary(people(do(not(experience,(and(thus(ordinary(

descriptions(do(not(replicate(the(syntax.(It(stands(to(reason(that(if(someone(remarks(

endlessly(on(various(aspects(of(their(surrounding(environment(an(interYrelation(will(

emerge(between(elements,(and(a(precise(documentation(of(the(environment(will(

contain(syntactic(and(lexical(repetition((or,(at(the(very(least,(implied(lexical(

repetition,(as(antecedents(are(replaced(with(referents).((

(

3.)Phonological)Level)

Phonological(repetition(is(largely(a(result(of(syntactic(and(lexical(repetition.(

However,(there(are(several(instances(in(this(first(paragraph(in(which(phonological(

repetition(is(not(contained(within(these(other(levels.(Notably,(in((1)(and((2)(

alliteration(of(/w/(is(found(in:(“which(warrant…(whether(they(wouldn’t…(in(which…(

but(in(which(the(others(would…”(For(American(English(speakers(here(is(a(halfYrhym(

in((3)(and((4)(with(diphthong(/eI/(in(“made”(and(“again”(Homophones(“see”(and(

“sea”(follow(in(quick(succession(at(the(end(of((5),(and(compound(with(phonetic(

repetition(contained(in(lexical(repetition(set(of(“sea”((repeated(4(times).(Alliteration(

of(/b/(is(arguably(present(in((6)(and((7),(especially(towards(the(end,(in:(“but(both,(

each(other’s(faces.(Because…”(There(is(further(alliteration(of(sibilant(/s/(in((7)’s(

“sun”(and(“straw”.(Finally,((7),((8),(and((9)(exhibit(an(interesting(interplay(of(

internal(rhymes,(consisting(of(alternating(/ei/(and(/e:/(vowel(sounds:((7)(…(shades(

over(the(tables,(the(people(who(face(the(sea(are(also(more(likely(to(be(in(the(shade.(

(8)(Not(everyone(can(face(the(sea,((9)(not(everyone(can(be(in(the(shade.”(Phonetic(

repetition(serves(to(create(a(sense(of(fluency(in(the(narration—everything(is(related,(

everything(follows(easily(from(something(else.((

Appendix(A(–(Stylistic(Analysis(of(‘Vagues’((2016)(

(v(

*([NP(they](+([VP([[Mod.(would(+(Neg.(not](+([MV(prefer(+(to(inf.(to#sit]](+([PP([P(in#+([NP([N#places]](+(PP([(P(in(+(Pn.(which(+(NP(

[Pn.(they([VP([[Be(are](+([Neg.(not(+(Pres.(Prog.(sitting]]]](/(Conj.(But#+(PP([P(in(+(PN(which(+(VP([[NP([N(the#others]](+(Mod.(

would](+(VP([MV#prefer(+(NP([[PN(them](+([to(inf.(to#sit]]](

Appendix(B(–(Summary(of(‘Signs(and(Symbols’(

( i(

!

Summary!of!‘Signs!and!Symbols’!

“‘Signs(and(Symbols’(is(set(in(an(American(city,(presumably(New(York(or(Chicago,(in(the(years(closely(following(WWII.(The(story(focuses(on(an(elderly(émigré(couple(of(Jewish(Russian(heritage(who(attempt(to(visit(their(only(son(on(his(birthday,(after(struggling(to(find(a(suitable(gift(for(him,(a(boy(who(is(“incurably(deranged(in(his(mind.”((Nabokov,(1948)(The(son(suffers(from(a(form(of(schizophrenia(termed(referential(mania,(in(which(“the(patient(imagines(that(everything(happening(around(him(is(a(veiled(reference(to(his(personality(and(existence.(He(excludes(real(people(from(the(conspiracy(–(because(he(considers(himself(to(be(so(much(more(intelligent(than(other(men.”((Nabokov,(1948)(As(such,(“manTmade(objects(were(to(him(either(hives(of(evil,(vibrant(with(a(malignant(activity(that(he(alone(could(perceive,(or(gross(comforts(for(which(no(use(could(be(found(in(his(abstract(world.”(Finally,(the(couple(settle(on(an(innocent(trifle:(“a(basket(with(ten(different(fruit(jellies(in(ten(little(jars.”(However,(upon(visiting(the(sanatorium(the(couple(is(informed(that(the(boy(has(tried(to(commit(suicide(for(a(second(time(and(is(unfit(for(visiting.(The(couple(return(home(with(their(gift—the(sanatorium(being(“so(miserably(understaffed”,(with(things(getting(“mislaid(or(mixed(up(so(easily(that(they(decide(not(to(leave(their(present(in(the(office(but(to(bring(it(to(him(next(time(they(came.”(The(two(return(to(their(gloomy(lives(as(socially(unTintegrated(émigrés(reliant(on(a(rich(relative(for(financial(support,(until(late(at(night(the(old(man(bursts(in(on(his(wife,(who(is(still(awake,(looking(through(a(photo(album(of(old(memories,(and(exclaims(that(they(must(“get(him(out(of(there(quick”(or(else(“be(responsible.(Responsible!”(The(couple(settle(down(to(an(impromptu(late(night(tea,(planning(how(to(accommodate(their(mentally(ill(son(in(the(small(apartment(when(they(are(interrupted(by(series(of(telephone(calls.(The(first(two(telephone(calls(are(wrong(numbers—“a(girl’s(dull(little(voice”(that(asks(to(speak(with(an(unknown(Charlie.(The(wife(informs(the(girl(of(what(she(is(doing(wrong:(“[she(is](turning(the(letter(O(instead(of(the(zero.”(The(couple(return(to(their(tea,(with(the(husband(clumsily(reading(out(the(names(on(the(labels(of(the(jars(of(jelly(bought(for(their(son,(when(the(phone(rings(a(third(time.(The(story(ends(with(the(final(call(unanswered.”(

Appendix(C(–(‘Signs(and(Symbols’(Full(Text((Signs and Symbols

Vladimir Nabokov

I

For the fourth time in as many years they were confronted with the problem of what birthday present to bring a young man who was incurably deranged in his mind. He had no desires. Man-made objects were to him either hives of evil, vibrant with a malignant activity that he alone could perceive, or gross comforts for which no use could be found in his abstract world. After eliminating a number of articles that might offend him or frighten him (anything in the gadget line for instance was taboo), his parents chose a dainty and innocent trifle: a basket with ten different fruit jellies in ten little jars.

At the time of his birth they had been married already for a long time; a score of years had elapsed, and now they were quite old. Her drab gray hair was done anyhow. She wore cheap black dresses. Unlike other women of her age (such as Mrs. Sol, their next-door neighbor, whose face was all pink and mauve with paint and whose hat was a cluster of brookside flowers), she presented a naked white countenance to the fault- finding light of spring days. Her husband, who in the old country had been a fairly successful businessman, was now wholly dependent on his brother Isaac, a real American of almost forty years standing. They seldom saw him and had nicknamed him “the Prince."

That Friday everything went wrong. The underground train lost its life current between two stations, and for a quarter of an hour one could hear nothing but the dutiful beating of one's heart and the rustling of newspapers. The bus they had to take next kept them waiting for ages; and when it did come, it was crammed with garrulous high-school children. It was raining hard as they walked up the brown path leading to the sanitarium. There they waited again; and instead of their boy shuffling into the room as he usually did (his poor face blotched with acne, ill- shaven, sullen, and confused), a nurse they knew, and did not care for, appeared at last and brightly explained that he had again attempted to take his life. He was all right, she said, but a visit might disturb him. The place was so miserably understaffed, and things got mislaid or mixed up so easily, that they decided not to leave their present in the office but to bring it to him next time they came.

She waited for her husband to open his umbrella and then took his arm. He kept clearing his throat in a special resonant way he had when he was upset. They reached the bus-stop shelter on the other side of the street and he closed his umbrella. A few feet away, under a swaying and dripping tree, a tiny half-dead

Appendix(C(–(‘Signs(and(Symbols’(Full(Text((unfledged bird was helplessly twitching in a puddle.

During the long ride to the subway station, she and her husband did not exchange a word; and every time she glanced at his old hands (swollen veins, brown-spotted skin), clasped and twitching upon the handle of his umbrella, she felt the mounting pressure of tears. As she looked around trying to hook her mind onto something, it gave her a kind of soft shock, a mixture of compassion and wonder, to notice that one of the passengers, a girl with dark hair and grubby red toenails, was weeping on the shoulder of an older woman. Whom did that woman resemble? She resembled Rebecca Borisovna, whose daughter had married one of the Soloveichik - in Minsk, years ago.

The last time he had tried to do it, his method had been, in the doctor's words, a masterpiece of inventiveness; he would have succeeded, had not an envious fellow patient thought he was learning to fly - and stopped him. What he really wanted to do was to tear a hole in his world and escape.

The system of his delusions had been the subject of an elaborate paper in a scientific monthly, but long before that she and her husband had puzzled it out for themselves. "Referential mania," Herman Brink had called it. In these very rare cases the patient imagines that everything happening around him is a veiled reference to his personality and existence. He excludes real people from the conspiracy - because he considers himself to be so much more intelligent than other men. Phenomenal nature shadows him wherever he goes. Clouds in the staring sky transmit to one another, by means of slow signs, incredibly detailed information regarding him. His inmost thoughts are discussed at nightfall, in manual alphabet, by darkly gesticulating trees. Pebbles or stains or sun flecks form patterns representing in some awful way messages which he must intercept. Everything is a cipher and of everything he is the theme. Some of the spies are detached observers, such are glass surfaces and still pools; others, such as coats in store windows, are prejudiced witnesses, lynchers at heart; others again (running water, storms) are hysterical to the point of insanity, have a distorted opinion of him and grotesquely misinterpret his actions. He must be always on his guard and devote every minute and module of life to the decoding of the undulation of things. The very air he exhales is indexed and filed away. If only the interest he provokes were limited to his immediate surroundings - but alas it is not! With distance the torrents of wild scandal increase in volume and volubility. The silhouettes of his blood corpuscles, magnified a million times, flit over vast plains; and still farther, great mountains of unbearable solidity and height sum up in terms of granite and groaning firs the ultimate truth of his being.

II

When they emerged from the thunder and foul air of the subway, the last dregs of

Appendix(C(–(‘Signs(and(Symbols’(Full(Text((the day were mixed with the street lights. She wanted to buy some fish for supper, so she handed him the basket of jelly jars, telling him to go home. He walked up to the third landing and then remembered he had given her his keys earlier in the day.

In silence he sat down on the steps and in silence rose when some ten minutes later she came, heavily trudging upstairs, wanly smiling, shaking her head in deprecation of her silliness. They entered their two-room flat and he at once went to the mirror. Straining the corners of his mouth apart by means of his thumbs, with a horrible masklike grimace, he removed his new hopelessly uncomfortable dental plate and severed the long tusks of saliva connecting him to it. He read his Russian-language newspaper while she laid the table. Still reading, he ate the pale victuals that needed no teeth. She knew his moods and was also silent.

When he had gone to bed, she remained in the living room with her pack of soiled cards and her old albums. Across the narrow yard where the rain tinkled in the dark against some battered ash cans, windows were blandly alight and in one of them a black-trousered man with his bare elbows raised could be seen lying supine on a untidy bed. She pulled the blind down and examined the photographs. As a baby he looked more surprised than most babies. From a fold in the album, a German maid they had had in Leipzig and her fat-faced fiance fell out. Minsk, the Revolution, Leipzig, Berlin, Leipzig, a slanting house front badly out of focus. Four years old, in a park: moodily, shyly, with puckered forehead, looking away from an eager squirrel as he would from any other stranger. Aunt Rosa, a fussy, angular, wild-eyed old lady, who had lived in a tremulous world of bad news, bankruptcies, train accidents, cancerous growths--until the Germans put her to death, together with all the people she had worried about. Age six - that was when he drew wonderful birds with human hands and feet, and suffered from insomnia like a grown-up man. His cousin, now a famous chess player. He again, aged about eight, already difficult to understand, afraid of the wallpaper in the passage, afraid of a certain picture in a book which merely showed an idyllic landscape with rocks on a hillside and an old cart wheel hanging from the branch of a leafless tree. Aged ten: the year they left Europe. The shame, the pity, the humiliating difficulties, the ugly, vicious, backward children he was with in that special school. And then came a time in his life, coinciding with a long convalescence after pneumonia, when those little phobias of his which his parents had stubbornly regarded as the eccentricities of a prodigiously gifted child hardened as it were into a dense tangle of logically interacting illusions, making him totally inaccessible to normal minds.

This, and much more, she accepted - for after all living did mean accepting the loss of one joy after another, not even joys in her case – mere possibilities of improvement. She thought of the endless waves of pain that for some reason or other she and her husband had to endure; of the invisible giants hurting her boy in

Appendix(C(–(‘Signs(and(Symbols’(Full(Text((some unimaginable fashion; of the incalculable amount of tenderness contained in the world; of the fate of this tenderness, which is either crushed, or wasted, or transformed into madness; of neglected children humming to themselves in unswept corners; of beautiful weeds that cannot hide from the farmer and helplessly have to watch the shadow of his simian stoop leave mangled flowers in its wake, as the monstrous darkness approaches.

III

It was past midnight when from the living room she heard her husband moan; and presently he staggered in, wearing over his nightgown the old overcoat with astrakhan collar which he much preferred to the nice blue bathrobe he had.

"I can't sleep," he cried. "Why," she asked, "why can't you sleep? You were tired." "I can't sleep because I am dying," he said and lay down on the couch. "Is it your stomach? Do you want me to call Dr. Solov?" "No doctors, no doctors," he moaned, "To the devil with doctors! We must get him out of there quick.

Otherwise we'll be responsible. Responsible!" he repeated and hurled himself into a sitting position, both feet on the floor, thumping his forehead with his clenched fist.

"All right," she said quietly, "we shall bring him home tomorrow morning." "I would like some tea," said her husband and retired to the bathroom. Bending with difficulty, she retrieved some playing cards and a photograph or two that had slipped from the couch to the floor: knave of hearts, nine of spades, ace of spades, Elsa and her bestial beau. He returned in high spirits, saying in a loud voice:

"I have it all figured out. We will give him the bedroom. Each of us will spend part of the night near him and the other part on this couch. By turns. We will have the doctor see him at least twice a week. It does not matter what the Prince says. He won't have to say much anyway because it will come out cheaper."

The telephone rang. It was an unusual hour for their telephone to ring. His left slipper had come off and he groped for it with his heel and toe as he stood in the middle of the room, and childishly, toothlessly, gaped at his wife. Having more English than he did, it was she who attended to calls.

"Can I speak to Charlie," said a girl's dull little voice. "What number you want? No. That is not the right number." The receiver was gently cradled. Her hand went to her old tired heart. He smiled a quick smile and immediately resumed his excited monologue. They would fetch him as soon

as it was day. Knives would have to be kept in a locked drawer. Even at his worst he presented no danger to other people.

Appendix(C(–(‘Signs(and(Symbols’(Full(Text((The telephone rang a second time. The same toneless anxious young voice asked for Charlie.

"You have the incorrect number. I will tell you what you are doing: you are turning the letter O instead of the zero."

They sat down to their unexpected festive midnight tea. The birthday present stood on the table. He sipped noisily; his face was flushed; every now and then he imparted a circular motion to his raised glass so as to make the sugar dissolve more thoroughly . The vein on the side of his bald head where there was a large birthmark stood out conspicuously and, although he had shaved that morning, a silvery bristle showed on his chin. While she poured him another glass of tea, he put on his spectacles and re-examined with pleasure the luminous yellow, green, red little jars. His clumsy moist lips spelled out their eloquent labels: apricot, grape, beech plum, quince. He had got to crab apple, when the telephone rang again.

(

Appendix(D(–(Analysis(of(Symbolism(in(‘Signs(and(Symbols’((

(i(

Analysis(of(Symbolism(in(Nabokov’s(‘Signs(and(Symbols’(((The(following(examples(corresponded(to(the(numbered(list(found(in(table(8–1(on(page(39.(((1.(“She(wore(cheap(black(dresses”:((

• black(dresses(are(associated(with(funerals,(foregrounding(the(notion(of(death(and(mourning((

• the(couple’s(financial(despair(is(shown(in(the(clothes(they(wear,(which(are(cheap(and(dour(in(appearance(

• simple(past(tense(“she(wore”(indicates(the(wife(had(no(other,(more(uplifting(clothing,(metaphorically(entailing(no(alternative(to(her(suffering(

(2.(“Mrs.(Sol”…(“the(Soloveichik”…(“Dr.(Solov”:(

• these(three(names(“share(elements(of(a(root(that(is(the(Russian(word(for(nightingale,(and(thus(are(linked(to(the(“halfMdead(unfledged(bird.”((Lane,(2012:(118)(This(is(an(instance(of(meaningless(symbolism:(there(is(no(apparent(significance(between(the(three(characters(and(the(bird’s(suffering(an(imminent(death(other(than(possibly(to(convey(the(notion(a(widespread(inescapability(of(suffering.(This(is(a(rather(weak(connection.(

(3.(“she(presented(a(naked(white(countenance(to(the(faultMfinding(light(of(spring(days”(

• in(contrast(to(Mrs.(Sol(“whose(face(was(all(pink(and(mauve(with(paint(and(whose(hat(was(a(cluster(of(brookside(flowers”((Nabokov,(1948),(the(wife(can(be(seen(as(bearing(the(reality(of(suffering(that(exists(in(the(world.(She(makes(no(attempt(to(mask(her(pain;(indeed(she(has(no(financial(means(of(doing(so.((

(4.(“That(Friday(everything(went(wrong”(

• Nabokov(develops(a(trend(of(everything(going(wrong.(Throughout(the(entire(story,(there(is(not(one(instance(of(joy(that(is(unmarred(by(ill(fate.((

(5.(“The(underground(train(lost(its(life(current(between(two(stations”(

• another(allusion(to(death,(foreshadowing(the(son’s(suicide((6.(“The(bus(they(had(to(take(next(kept(them(waiting(for(ages”(

• throughout(the(story,(the(couple(are(repeatedly(waiting(something:(for(the(bus;(for(the(husband(to(open(the(umbrella;(on(the(bus,(during(the(“long(ride(to(the(subway(station”;(at(the(sanatrium,(waiting(for(their(son(to(come(“shuffling(into(the(room”((Nabokov,(1948);(the(husband(waits(for(the(wife(to(return(with(the(key.(The(overt(instances(of(waiting(mentioned(repeatedly(throughout(the(story(underscore(a(feeling(of(anticipation,(the(notion(that(something(is(approaching.((see(17)(

(7.(“It(was(raining(hard”(

• the(rain(underscores(the(couple’s(misery((8.((“The(place(was(so(miserably(understaffed”(

Appendix(D(–(Analysis(of(Symbolism(in(‘Signs(and(Symbols’((

(ii(

• qualitatively(negative(lexis(of(adverbial(“miserably”(strengthened(by(intensifier(“so”(to(modify(the(qualitatively(negative(verbal(“understaffed”(constitutes(an(intensely(oppressive(sentence.(

• syntax((informal(“the(place”(to(refer(to(sanitarium(+(intensifying(“so”)(combined(with(the(parents’(decision(“not(to(leave(their(present(in(the(office”(following(closely(in(same(sentence(gives(the(impression(that(this(is(the(free(indirect(speech/thought(of(the(wife(and/or(husband(

(9.(“A(few(feet(away,(under(a(swaying(and(dripping(tree,(a(tiny(halfMdead(unfledged(bird(was(helplessly(twitching(in(a(puddle.”(

• mentioned(in(Quinn’s(article(as(an(indication(of(the(story’s(pattern(of(doom((Quinn,(2004:(99)(

• potentially(foreshadows(the(unfledged(son’s(suicide.(“a(symbolic(parallel(to(the(sick(boy’s(situation(and(the(parent’s(perception(of(him.”((Dolinin,(2006(261)(

• connects(to(the(father((see(10)((10.(“…every(time(she(glanced(at(his(hands((swollen(veins,(brown(spotted(skin),(clasped(and(twitching(upon(the(handle(of(his(umbrella,(she(felt(the(mounting(pressure(of(tears”(

• “twitching”(refers(back(to(the(“tiny(halfMdead(unfledged(bird…(helplessly(twitching(in(a(puddle”((see(9).(Thus,(the(husband(is(associated(with(death.(This(connection(serves(to(complicate(an(initial(interpretation(of(the(foregrounded(image(of(the(dying(bird(corresponding(to(the(foreshadowing(of(the(son’s(suicide,(and(constitutes(another(deadMend(instance(of(symbolism(

(11.(“one(of(the(passengers,(a(girl(with(dark(hair(and(grubby(red(toenails,(was(weeping(on(the(shoulder(of(an(older(woman”(

• foregrounding(misery;(focalized(through(the(wife’s(perspective,(this(is(an(instance(of(psychonarration(that(serves(to(further(enforce(her(gloomy(life(

(12.(“the(thunder(and(foul(air(of(the(subway,(the(last(dregs(of(the(day(were(mixed(with(street(lights(

• thunder(is(associated(storms,(or(an(upset(of(calm,(and(the(foul(air(is(potentially(focalized(through(the(couple(

• darkness(is(approaching((evoking(image(schema(DARK(vs.(LIGHT,(implying(negative(quality)—even(the(light(of(daytime(is(described(in(the(qualitatively(negative(lexical(phrase(“last(dregs(of(day”(

(13.((The(husband(returns(home(while(his(wife(buys(fish,(only(to(remember(“that(he(had(given(her(his(keys(earlier(in(the(day”(

• (see(6)((14.(“windows(were(blandly(alight(and(in(one(of(them(a(blackMtrousered(man(with(his(bare(elbows(raised(could(be(seen(lying(supine(on(a(untidy(bed”(

• a(man(wearing(black(and(lying(supine(evokes(the(image(of(a(man(in(grief,(elbows(raised(in(exasperation.(In(correspondence(between(Nabokov(and(White(an(earlier(version(of(this(sentence(included,(“With(his(bare(arms(clasped(under(his(head”,(evoking(this(same(image(

(15.(““His(cousin,(now(a(famous(chess(player”(

Appendix(D(–(Analysis(of(Symbolism(in(‘Signs(and(Symbols’((

(iii(

• Nabokov(has(a(practice(of(using(principal(characters(in(some(works(as(background(characters(in(others.(This(cousin(is(likely(an(allusion(to(Luzhin,(from(The(Defense,(“who(is(also(a(victim(of(referential(mania(and(who(commits(suicide(by(defenstration”((Donolin,(2006:(289)(thus(another(instance(of(foregrounding(death(symbolically(

(16.(““…afraid(of(a(certain(picture(which(merely(showed(an(idyllic(landscape(with(rocks(on(a(hillside(and(an(old(cart(wheel(hanging(from(the(branch(of(a(leafless(tree”(

• The(picture(is(‘The(Triumph(of(Death’,(by(Peter(Breughel(the(Elder((Drescher,(2007;(Martin,(1991)(and(the(cart(wheel(is(an(instrument(of(torture.(The(parents’(inability(to(perceive(can(be(seen(as(indicating(their(obliviousness(compared(to(their(son,(who(understands(the(painting(for(what(it(is.((Carroll,(1974)(Brian(Quinn(writes(that(“[in](some(ways,(it(might(appear(that(due(to(the(widespread(murder,(torture,(and(loss(of(human(dignity(that(took(place(in(the(1930s(and(1940s(in(Europe,(it(may(well(have(been(quite(natural(for(some(people(to(drift(into(insanity(to(escape(the(“insane(reality”(of(the(world(around(them.”((Quinn,(2004)(Elsewhere(I(have(argued(that(this(realization(of(contrast(between(the(son’s(perception(and(that(of(his(parents’(challenges(our(notions(of(sanity/insanity,(provoking(the(reader(to(question(what(it(means(to(be(insane(in(a(world(that(is(overwhelmed(with(suffering(

(17.(“this,(and(so(much(more,(she(accepted…(as(the(monstrous(darkness(approaches”(

• this(passage(lyrically(foregrounds(the(inevitability(of(suffering;(it(is(focalized(through(the(wife’s(reflective(consciousness.((

• highlights(many(of(Nabokov’s(themes,(including:(the(cruelty(of(fate;(parents’(love(for(their(children(and(their(dread(of(losing(them(

• implicitly,(comprising(a(symbol(in(itselt,(it(highlights(the(theme(of(an(exploitation(of(patterns(and(symbols(to(signify(hidden(meanings.(Namely,(the(passage(acts(as(yet(another(instance(foreshadowing(the(son’s(suicide—“the(monstrous(darkness(approaches(is(likely(death,(the(ultimate(unknowability(and(thus(ultimate(darkness(

(18.(“Bending(with(difficulty”(

• refers(back(to(the(farmer’s(“simian(stoop”,(possibly(implicating(the(mother(in(the(death(of(her(son((see(Carroll((1978)(for(argument(that(Nabokov’s(creation(of(referential(mania(in(his(readers(establishes(an(“ethical(responsibility”(and(implicates(them,(along(with(the(husband(and(wife,(in(the(boy’s(death(

(19.(“Knave(of(hearts”(

• the(Knave(symbolizes(“an(unscrupulous(man”((Merrian(Webster);(of(Hearts(traces(back(to(themes(of(parental(love(and(the(fear(of(loss,(as(well(as(the(fragility(and(finitude(of(life(

• avid(readers(of(Nabokov(will(know(that(he(translated(Lewis(Carroll’s(Alice’s(Adventures(in(Wonderland(into(Russian.(No(apparent(link(between(the(Knave(of(Hearts(and((

(20.(“ace(of(spades”(

• “The(succession(of(three(cards(ending(in(an(ace(suggest(the(analogous(pattern(to(Pushkin’s(story([The(Queen(of(Spades]”((Lane,(1986:(121).(This(subtle(feature(acts(as(further(enforcement(of(Nabokov’s(thematization(of(madness,(as(in(The(Queen(of(

Appendix(D(–(Analysis(of(Symbolism(in(‘Signs(and(Symbols’((

(iv(

Hearts(the(protagonist(Hermann(goes(mad(after(drawing(the(Ace,(and(is(committed(to(an(asylum.(

(21.(“Elsa(and(her(bestial(beau”(

• “suggest(Lizaveta(and(her(suitor(Hermann,(and(it(is(noteworthy(that(Nabokov(also(gives(the(name(Herman(to(the(psychiatrist…(“(As(mentioned(in((20)(“The(‘bestial(beau’(Hermann(in(Pushkin’s(story(becomes(obsessed(with(the(three(cards(that(seal(his(fate,(and(the(description(of(his(thoughts(is(a(perfect(example(of(referential(mania.”((Lane,(1986:(121)(

(22.(“you(are(turning(the(letter(O(instead(of(the(0.”(

• Carroll(claims(that(there(is(“no(hieroglyphic(difference(between(the(letter(and(the(number”.((Carroll,(1978:(247)(Consequently,(Carroll(connects(this(sentence(to(an(earlier(line(in(the(story:(“Everything(is(a(cipher(and(of(everything(he(is(the(theme.”(Carroll(goes(on(to(argue(that(“Nabokov(has(places(us(in(the(position(of(the(boy(here—is(O(a(letter(or(a(number?(Does(it(matter?(Is(this(confusion(a(cipher—a(clue(to(a(hidden(meaning?(Or(is(it(just(a(null,(a(zero,(without(substance?(It(could(be(either.”((1978:(247)(

• Hagopian(rightly(counters(that(“in(fact(on(a(telephone(dial(there(is(a(significant(hieroglyphic(difference:(the(letter(O(is(a(perfect(circle,(whereas(the(number(zero(is(a(vertical(oval.(Even(more(important(is(the(fact(that(the(O(appears(in(the(sixth(hole(on(the(dial(and(the(zero(appears(in(the(tenth!”((Hagopian,(1981:(302)(

• the(wife’s(correction(of(the(girl’s(mistake(is(more(likely(successful.(Further,(as(Hagopian(argues(later(on(in(his(essay,(there(is(a(significant(period(of(time(in(between(the(second(and(third(call,(whereas(the(second(call(rapidly(preceded(the(first.(

• A(counterargument(to(this(could(be(that(the(girl(on(the(other(end(is(described(as(having(a(“dull(little(voice”.(Most(scholars(assume(that(the(girl(is(young(and(not(too(bright,(making(it(entirely(possible(that(she(would(misunderstand(the(wife’s(instructions(and(call(a(third(time.(Ultimately,(the(story’s(conclusion(is(irresolvably,(intentionally(open(ended.(

(23.(“…reMexamined(with(pleasure(the(luminous(yellow,(green,(red(little(jars”(

• yellow(signifies(the(delay(at(the(hospital(and(the(caution(that(all(is(not(well,(alerted(by(news(of(the(son’s(suicide(attempt.(Green(signifies(the(husband’s(brief(moment(of(enthusiasm(and(the(couple’s(decision(to(take(action(by(removing(their(son(from(the(sanitarium.(Red(precedes(the(final(call,(foreshadowing(death(symbolically(as(ceasement(of(movement.((see(Lane,(1986:(122)(

(24.(“apricot,(grape,(beech(plum,(quince.(He(had(got(to(crab(apple,(when(the(telephone(rang(again.”(

• Drescher((2007)(writes(that(the(misreading(of(beach(plum(as(beech(plum(is(an(instance(of(typographical(free(indirect(discourse.(“Beech,”(he(says,(“recalls(Buchen,(beech(trees.(Likewise,(plum(associates(to(Pflaume(and(Pflaumenbaum,(literally(‘flame’(and(‘burning(tree’.(Unable(to(free(his(thoughts(from(the(past,(beach(plum(jelly(returns([the(husband](to(thoughts(of(Buchenwald,(the(beech(forest(site(of(the(Ettersdorf(camp.”((92)((

• Trzeciak(comments(further(that(the(Linnean(polynomial(for(the(crab(apple(is(Malus(pumilla(paradisiaca(and(the(common(Russian(name(is,(literally,(Paradise(Apple.(

Appendix(D(–(Analysis(of(Symbolism(in(‘Signs(and(Symbols’((

(v(

“This(apparently(innocuous(gift(echoes(the(story(of(Adam(and(Eve…(the(fruit(jars(bear(a(distant,(vague(resemblance(to(the(forbidden(fruit,(a(symbol(of(the(origin(of(human(suffering.”((Trzreciak,(2003:(67)(

• “Brian(Boyd(has(ascertained(that(Nabokov(was(partial(to(the(Gerber’s(brand(of(fruit(jellies.([Trzeciak’s](research(has(shown(that(unlike(apricot,(grape,(beech(plum,(and(quince,(crab(apple(was(not(one(of(Gerber’s(assorted(fruit(jellies.”((Trzeciak,(2003:(66)(If(one(removes(crab(apple((whose(name(the(husband(has(not(mouthed),(the(four(jelly(names(form(an(anagram:(by(rearranging(the(final(letters(from(each(name,(one(can(form(the(word(“theme”.((Dole,(1987)(

(((((((((((((