A Critical Context For The Carver Chronotope

http://www.utpjournals.press/doi/pdf/10.3138/CRAS-027-01-04 - Friday, June 03, 2016 6:55:33 PM - IP Address:185.46.84.
145
Canadian
Reviewof AmericanStudies/Revue
canadienne
d'Rudes
am&'icainex
Volume27, Number1, 1997,pp.77-91 77
A CriticalContextfortheCarverChronotope
G.P. Lainsbury
Raymond Carver(1938-88)isoftencredited
withsingle-handedlyinspiring
a renaissance
of the shortstoryin America,and with givingvoiceto a
submerged population,who beforehis time had not beenadequately
recognizedin the culturalspaceof Americanliterature.
• Carverdevotedhis
wholecareerasa writerto workingwithintwo genres-theshortstoryand
the lyric poem-both of which are, within the contextof late twentieth-
centuryliteratureand culture,assuredly minor artisticgenres.And yet, in
spiteof workingwithin thesemarginalgenres,Carversomehow managed to
createsomemajorartisticand culturaleffects.His writinghasthe abilityto
affectindividualreaders,includingmanywhodo notusuallyreadliterature,'-
and is a lightningrod for culturalandaesthetic debatesurroundingissuesof
the writer's role in contemporary North Americanlife.
The institutionalreceptionof Carver'swork breaksdowninto two main
camps.The first group respondsvery positivelyto Carver'swork, and
consists mainlyof thosewriterswhoaregroupedwith Carverasminimalists,
neo-realists,dirty realists,etc.--RichardFord, FrederickBarthelme, Bobbie
Ann Mason, and JayneAnn Phillips,to namebut a few. Associated with
theseliterarypractitioners are a numberof academics• aswell asa popular
readership.Admirers of Carver's writing tend to cite the clarity and
straightforwardness of his prose,his ability to investthe ordinarywith
extraordinaryintensity,aswell asthe implicitvalorization of anexperiential
groundfor writing overa theoreticalone,asthe sourceof its power.
http://www.utpjournals.press/doi/pdf/10.3138/CRAS-027-01-04 - Friday, June 03, 2016 6:55:33 PM - IP Address:185.46.84.145
Canadian Review of American Studres

78 Revue cana&enne d'g,tudes amg,ncames
Thosewho dislike,or distrust,Carver'swork breakdownfurther into two

maingroups.Firstthere arethosewho find Carver'svisionof Americamuch
too bleak and pessimistic.
This would includeboth editorswho would not
take a chanceon publishinghis first collection,Will YouPleaseBe Quiet,
Please? (1978),in the 1970s,
3 andcriticswith a right-wingpoliticalagenda
who, onceCarverbecamea literarystar,thoughthiswork did not fit in with
the ideologicalagendaof Americain the 1980s.
Far more deservingof seriousconsiderationis the criticismof Carver's
work whichcomesfrom the left wing of the political-academic spectrum,
from those critics concernedwith the problem of ideology and its
propagationthroughthe mediumof literature.In his book The Political
Unconscious: NarrativeasSociallySymbolicAct, FredricJameson arguesfor
a criticalpositionwhich hasimplications
for a preferredobjectof studyas
well as a preferredmethodof study.Jamesonproclaimsthat ideology
critique
can no longerbe contentwith its demystifying vocationto unmaskand

to demonstrate the waysin which a cultural artifact fulfils a specific
ideological mission, in legitimating a given power structure, in
perpetuatingandreproducingthe latter,andin generatingspecificforms
of falseconsciousness (or ideologyin the narrowersense).It mustnot
ceaseto practicethis essentiallynegativehermeneuticfunction... but
must also seek, through and beyond this demonstrationof the
instrumentalfunction of a given cultural object, to project its
simultaneously Utopianpowerasthe symbolicaffirmationof a specific
historicaland classform of collectiveunity. (1981, 291)
Jamesoncallsfor a criticismwhich goesbeyondmerelydemonstrating the

existenceof the ideologicalmattercarriedsuspended in the language-stream
of a literarywork, for a criticismwhich projectsa utopian,counterideology
to standin activeresistance to the hegemonicideologicaldiscourseof late
capitalism.
It is not veryfar fromJameson's ideaof an interventionistcriticismto the
ideaof an interventionist literature,wherea utopianalternativeto the status
quois projected bythe literarywork itself,justwaitingfor the criticto arrive
G.P. Dunsbury/ 79
to bringit to itsfullestexpression.
Thisistheposition
fromwhichthemost
astute,negativecriticsof Carver launchtheir variousattackson hiswork.
For instance,FrankLentricchia,
in an essayintroducing
an issueof The
SouthAtlanticQuarterlydevoted
to thenovelsof DonDeLillo,dismissesthe
workof writerssuchasCarveras"aminor,apolitical,
domesticfictionof the
triumphsandagonies of autonomous privateindividuals
operating in 'the
privatesector'"(1990, 241). Lentricchia
argues
thatthe"main"lineofAmer-
icanliterature,"fromEmerson
to Pynchon
andDeLillo. . . is political"
(244), while the domesticrealismof Carverand hisminimalistcohortsis
"thesofthumanistunderbellyof American literature"(244).In otherwords,
LentricchiabelievesCarveris a dupeof latecapitalism, a writerwhosework
somehow servesto reinforce
the hegemonic ideologicaldiscourse of latecap-
•talismratherthan engagingin a disruptiveandutopiancounterdiscourse.
Anothercritic who takesa similartackin hisapproachto Carveris Alan
Wilde, who, in the chapter "Shootingfor Smallness:Realismand Mid-
fiction," from his book-lengthstudy of contemporaryAmericanfiction,
denouncesas "catatonic"the contemporaryrealismthat takes Raymond
Carver to be its exemplar.Wilde arguesthat the "catatonic
realists,"by
takingrealityfor granted,affirmthe realityof the age,and"through their
charactersand in their own voices[reveal]not the direct imagebut the
reversesideof humanistcontrol:the experience, terrifyingandreductive,
of
beingcontrolled"(1987, 111).Wildethinksthatthefailureof thenarrative
in contemporaryrealism to try andmakesense of theworldforthereader,
andthus"toacquiesce in itsapparent disorder
[,] isto conflatethepersonal
andthe metaphysical andin makingthe intractability of the universe
the
measure of possibility
at all levelsof existence,
to assume the pointlessness
of any action whatsoever"(114).
At leastDavid Kaufmannwill admitbotha positiveanda negativesideto
Carver'swriting:"It reduces suffering
to entertainment [whilecreating]a
new. . . modeof publicityandcirculation for theexpression of needs"
(1991, 112).Kaufmann thinksthatminimalist fictionsuchasCarver's does
somethingin termsofthecritique ofideology, if notenough forhisliking,
and locatesthe causeof its lackingat the sentence level.He claimsthat
Canadian Review of American Studies

õ0 Revue canadienne d'g,tudes amdrtcaines
parataxis,"a disjunctivestyle markedby its avoidanceof grammatical

subordination"(93), isthe mostsalientfeatureof minimalistfiction,in which
"theinabilityto subordinate,to organizematerialin anythingother than
chronologicalorder,getsfoldedbackinto a largerinabilityto conceptualize
andarticulate"(99). "Thecoolsurfaces" whichdistinguish this kind of wri-
ting
mark a deliberatedenial of sentimentalityand affect. Parataxis. . .

separateswill from action and desire from will. It magnifiesthe
importanceof the interpretationwhich it doesnot, or cannotprovide.
It rendersenigmaticthe world it appearsto describe.... It can serve
to obscure,if not destroy,a story'spathos,thusencouraging
the readers
to view the sorrowsof othersas an aestheticor asan epistemological
problem. (101-102)
The failure to provide an interpretationof eventsthrough authorial

controlof the narrativeplacesthe onusof understanding squarelyon the
reader,which,accordingto DianeStevenson, presumesa consensus, "aclass
code,a consumer code"(1985, 88). Accordingto Stevenson, the minimalists
are guiltyof reifyingthe middleclass:"Leftto its own devices. . . surface
will pointto something beyond,will implysomethingotherandabsent,and
asa consequence isa far moreserioustranscendentalism thanoutrighttrans-
cendentalism" (88). Stevensonassumes that a middle-classaudience,left with
noauthorialpresence to steerthe processof signification,will inevitablycon-
struct interpretationsout of the reified valuesof the consumefistculture
which definethe boundariesof their consciousness. Eventhe gradualmove-
menttowardendingsthat reflecta cautioushope for redemptionof some
sort in the later storiesof RaymondCarver are, accordingto Kaufmann,
"onlyciphers,promissory notesfor a deferredfuture, imageswhosecontent
hasyet to be inscribed"(1991, 112). While Kaufmannthinksthis movement
isin the rightgeneraldirection,hestillasserts thatthe near-epiphanic ending
of a late Carver story is "ideologicalin that it supportsthe existentby
remainingwithin it. Thesefiguresof solidarityarisefrom and are caught
within the veryhorizonswhosedepletionthey protestagainst"(112). These
G.P. Lamsbu
.ry/ 8!
storiestry too "gingerly. . . to figureutopia"(112) to pleasethe likesof

David Kaufmannand company.
What theseutopiancriticstake for grantedare a numberof assumptions
aboutwhat constitutes literaryvalue,mainlyconcerning their reificationof
the •vriter figureas a politicallyengagedsocialprophet,a Shelleyeau legi-
slatorof the species. It is byno meansa giventhat thisparticularconstruc~
tion of the writer-figure is the only appropriateone for a contemporary
writer to choose,and, in fact,it couldbe arguedthat thiswriteflyrole,like
all the otherkindsof rolesan individualhumanbeingcanchooseto takeon,
isonlycapable of beingarticulated in a particular
socialandhistoricalepoch.
The utopiancriticsdenigrateCarver'schoiceof a kindof literarypractice
(genre,style,etc.)ratherthancriticizing
theworkdoneon itsownterms.
The criticswho celebrateCarver'swork constructan alternativeinterpretive
system,onebasedon the vaiorization
of artisticintegrity
ratherthanon
analytical
intelligence
andideology
critique.The pro-Carver criticsassign
valuenot to the extentto whicha writeroperates
asanagentof ideological
investigation
andsocialchange,
butratherto thedegree
towhichthewriter
is true both to the work itself and to the kind of world it purportsto
represent.
4
The utopiancriticsarelikethosepersons
(whoNikolaiStepanovich,
in
Chekhov's "ABoringStory,"saysare"narrow-minded
andembittered")
who
"canbeara grudgeagainst
ordinary
people fornotbeingheroes"
(Chekhov
1964,51). Theutopiancritics
wantwriters
whoareheroesof theintellect,
and Carverwasneitheran intellectualnor a hero.In fact,hisstock-in-trade
isgenerally
acknowledgedtobehisordinariness
andhiseschewal
ofheroics?
AsJames
Atlasputsit inhisreview
ofWhatWeTalkAbout
WhenWeTalk
AboutLove,"thebarrenidiomof ourtimeisan idiomof refusal,
a repu-
diationof theideaof greatness"
(1981,98).Carver
refuses
tosaymorethan
heknows, andhedoesnotprofess to knowmuchin thewaysthatphilo-
sophers,
historians,
andacademic literary
critics
do.Forthisreason,
Carver's
choice
of a minorliterarygenre
in whichto dothebulkof hisworkmakes
perfect
sense.AsKasia Boddy pointsoutinanessay onCarver andChekhov
as "companion-souIs:"

82 Revue canadienne d'g,tudes amg,ricmnes
It is no coincidence to find that both Chekhov and Carver renounce the

integrationand causalnarrativestructureof the traditional novel in
favourof the open-endedness and indeterminacy of the shortstoryas
a meansof expressing the experienceof sheeraccidentthat dominates
the livesof their protagonists.(1991, 108)
So Wilde is right, at leastas far as his assertionthat the kind of fiction

practised
by Carverandhiscohortsis aboutthe degreeto whichhumanlives
arecontrolledby outsideforcesin a late capitalistsociety.But the heroism
he associates with the desire to exert control over one's environment is
suspect,if not naive,and ignoresthe possibilities of pure contingenq.
Wilde'scritiquereflectshisbeliefii•_the humanistideathat knowledgeleads
to understanding,and understanding to control.But, as Boddyobserves,
Carver,like Chekhov,lacks"apolitical,religiousand philosophical world-
view,"and doesnot "believein anythingthat [cannot]be apprehended by
oneor moreof [the]fivesenses" (108-109).6Carver'sallegiances lie with the
concreteoverthe abstract,the materialover the metaphysical.
Boddy'sassertions concerning the open-endedness of the shortstoryas
formarealsonaive.Variouspoststructural theorists
havedemonstrated that
the integrationand structureof the traditionalnovel is an illusionof
language,and that languageitself lacksthe kind of coherence which
humanistideologyhasalwayspresumed it had.Contraryto Boddy'sline of
thought,mostliterarytheorists consider theshortstoryasformto be much
more concernedwith the idea of closurethan the traditional novel, which
because
of its epicsprawlalwaysleavessomequestions
unanswered,
some
narrative threads unaccounted for in the weave. And if we take into account
thecontemporary novelistics
of ThomasPynchon, the ideasof closureand
unityseemrusticindeed.Nevertheless,
Boddyisjustifiedin focusingon the
elementsof contingency
anddeterminism thatareexpressed in theworkof
Carverand Chekhov.In fact, Carvergoesso far asto explainhischoiceof
a literarygenreto workwithinasbeingdetermined
bythecircumstances
of
his life. In "TheParisReviewInterview,"Carvertells Mona Simpsonand
Lewis Buzbee that
G.P. Lamsbu•y
/ 83
after yearsof workingcrapjobsandraisingkidsandtryingto write, I

realizedI neededto write thingsI couldfinishand be donewith in a
hurry. There was no way I couldundertakea novel,a two- or three-
yearstretchof work on a singleproject.I neededto writesomething I
couldget somekind of payofffrom immediately .... I wasbeginning
to seethat my life was not... what I wantedit to be. (1990, 37)
Carverpresentshisdecision
to concentrate
on shortformsasa hardchoice
madein the grimfaceof necessity,
andasa wayof reconciling
hisintensely
felt need to be a writer with the awareness
"that the life [he] was in was
vastlydifferentfromthe livesof the writers[he]mostadmired
. . . who
&dn't spendtheir Saturdays at the laundromat andeverywakinghour
subject
to theneeds
andcaprices
of theirchildren"
(1989,33).v
Furtheron in the essay"Fires,"Carverconstructs
a somewhat
loftier
rationalefor not committingto a novel:
To write a novel,it seemed

to me,a writershouldbelivingin a world
that makessense,a worldthat the writercanbelievein, drawa bead
on, andthenwriteaboutaccurately.
A worldthatwill, for a while
anyway,stayfixedinoneplace.
Along
withthistherehas
to bea belief
in the essential
correctness
of that world.A beliefthattheknownworld
hasreasons
for existing,
andisworthwritingabout,isnotlikelyto go
upinsmoke intheprocess.
Thiswasn'tthecase
withtheworldI knew
andwaslivingin. My worldwasonethatseemedto change
gearsand
directions,
alongwith itsrules,everyday.(1989,35)
Thisrationale
mightbeconstrued
asCarver's
ironicgesture
towards
those
criticswhowanteda moreconceptual
rejection
of thenovel.Andyetthere
isstillsomethingin thisstatement
entirely
faithful
to theworkof a writer
whoaspired to connect withreaders
throughstrategies
of representation,
rather thanconstructingfabulous
structures
whichborelittleresemblance
to
a recognizable
reality.Carverthought
hecould notmake enoughsense
out
of the worldhe livedin to basea novel-length
workon it, andhedidnot

•4 Revue canadienned'gtudeaambricaine.•
haveenoughfaithin hiscreativepowersto attemptto will an evenpartly

coherent version of the world into existence.
Asa writer, Carverwasacutelyawareof hislimitations,and possessed a
strongliteraryconscienceor superego.JayMclnerneytalksaboutCarver's
"respectfor the language"
as"humilityborderingon dread"(1993, 120), and
EwingCampbellseesCarver'sself-limiting,hiscompulsion to remainwithin
the comfortzoneof minimalisttechnique,as derivingfrom "an obsessive
desireto avoid great glares"(1991, 13). John W. Aidridgecharacterizes
Carverasa writer whose"effortlessmasteryis frequentlyrevealedto be the
resultof an extremelymodestintention" (1992, 56). No doubt Carver's
background hadsomething to dowith the modestyof hisliteraryintentions.
As the sonof a saw-filer,raisedin the backwoodsof Washingtonstateand
educatedat smallstateuniversities,Carver was denied the kind of comfort-
able indoctrinationinto middle-classreality that most Americanwriters
benefitfrom, not to mention the senseof confidenceand self-controlwhich
comesfrom growingup in a stableenvironment.No doubt he felt himself
to be an interloperin both the literarylimelightand the hallsof academe.
WhenAidridgedescribes Carver'swork ascominginto being"against the
resistance of an enormousinternalpressureto be silent,"and "asthe verbal
indexperhapsof somedeeplylodgedvisceralconvictionthat there is very
little of any worth to be said about the sorry state of humanexistence"
(1992, 56), he is on to something,even if his own entrenchedposition
obscures hisview.*Aidridgedoesnot recognize that Carverisour foremost
poet of the despairborn of incomprehension, and that readersrespondto
whatWilde callsthe catatonicvoicein Carver'sfiction asa "defense against
desireand despairalike" (1987, 112). In the interviewconductedby Larry
McCafferyandSindaGregoryin 1984, Carvermakesexplicitthe connection
betweenthe incomprehension he felt aboutthe "incorrect,"irrationalworld
he lived in as a young father and writer, and the psychicstate of utter
despairand hopelessness (1990, 100). And yet Carver wasableto translate
hisownsenseof despairinto the language of a fictionutterlyappropriateto
the time in which he lived, and to the livesof the people he witnessed
aroundhim.Furtheron in thisinterview,Carverstates,"essentially, I am one
of thoseconfused, befuddledpeople,I comefrompeoplelike that, thoseare
G.?. Lamsbu•/ 85
the peopleI've workedwith and earnedmy livingbesidefor years"(112).

Carver'sbackgroundand upbringinghelpto determinehisproclivityfor
playinghis literarycardscloseto the chest.Comingfroma lower-class
economicenvironment,and growing up without the kinds of cultural
advantages
which membersof the middle-class take as their birthright,
Carverremainedtrue to the minirealistic
advicewhichhisfathergavehim
when he first told his father that he wanted to be a writer: "Write about
stuffyou know about"(1989, 19).
In the eyesof many,Carverwill remaina minorwriterbecause
he chose
to write in minorgenres,andbecause
the rangeof hissubject
matteris so
limited.To counterthis line of thinking,it isusefulto juxtaposestatements
bytwoeminent literarythinkers.
Thefirst,byFrankKermode,
suggests
the
degreeto whichmajoreffectscanbeachieved withminimalist
techniques.
Kermodestatesthat Carver'sis a "fictionsosparein mannerthat it takes
timebeforeonerealizeshowcompletely a wholecultureanda wholemoral
conditionarebeingrepresented
byeventhemostseemingly
slightsketch"
(1983,5). Thesecond
statement,
bytheRussian
literary
theorist
Mikhail
Bakhtin,suggests
whatthe novelcanachieve:
In the novel,the entireworldandall of life aregivenin the cross-

sectionof theintegrityof theepoch. Theevents depictedin thenovel
shouldsomehow substitute for the total life of the epoch.In their
capacity
to represent
thereal-life
wholeliestheirartistic
essentiality.
(1986, 43)
KermodeandBakhtinseemto betalkingaboutverysimilareffectsarising
fromliteraryworkdonein different genres
of fiction.Based
on this
similarity
ofeffect,
I propose
thatit ispossible
tothinkofCarver's
workas
engaging
inwhatBakhtinterms"novelistic
discourse"
ifweconsider
histotal
output
asa kindofloosely
structured,
polyphonic
novel,capturing
themany
voicesof an American
underclass,
ratherthanasmanymodulations
of a
single
monologic
voice,asMiriamMartyClarkdoesin hershortessay,
"Raymond
Carver's
Monologic
Imagination"
(1991).
Canadtan Revtew of American Studms

86 Revue canadienne d'gtudesambricaines
Thinkingof Carver'soutputasonelargenovel(perhapscalled"Raymond
Carver'sAmerica, ....Hopelessville
USA,"or "CarverCountry"--thelattertwo
tagsalreadybeingin circulationamongstCarvercritics)is not asstrangeas
it mightat firstseem.After all, Bakhtindefinesthe novel"asa diversityof
socialspeechtypes. . . and a diversityof individualvoices,artistically
organized"(198la, 262). MichaelHolquist, in hisintroductionto TheDialo-
gic Imagination,statesthat "'novelization'is fundamentallyanti-canonical"
and that "'novel' is the name Bakhtin givesto whatever force is at work
within a givenliterarysystemto revealthe limits,the artificialconstraintsof
that system"(1981, xxxi). In "Discourse in the Novel," Bakhtinrefinesthe
ideascited abovefrom the essayon the bildungsroman: "The socialand
historicalvoicespopulatinglanguage... are organizedin the novel into a
structuredstylisticsystemthat expresses the differentiatedsocio-ideological
positionof the authoramid the heteroglossia of his epoch"(1981a, 300).
Furthermore, "the novel begins by presuminga verbal and semantic
decenteringof the ideologicalworld, a certainlinguistichomelessness of
literary consciousness,which no longer possesses a sacrosanct and unitary
linguisticmediumfor containingideologicalthought"(367). Carver writes
in a minorlanguage, the vernacularof the dispossessed,mainlywhite, lower
middle- and working-classes, those who inhabit a decenteredAmerica,
"devoidof itsunifyingmyths"(Clarke1990, 106).This languageisthe active
siteof the strugglebetweenits usersand the technocratic-business elite, the
very field of ideologicalcontention.
Carver'swork, consideredas a totality, constituteswhat Bakhtin calls a
chronotope,
a formallyconstitutivecategoryof literature... [within which]spatial

and temporal indicatorsare fused into one carefullythought-out,
concretewhole. Time, as it were, thickens,takes on flesh, becomes
artisticallyvisible;likewise,spacebecomeschargedand responsiveto
the movements of time, plot and history. (1981c, 84)
The Carverchronotopeis the concreteembodimentin language,working

throughtechniques
of novelistic
or post-novelistic
discourse,
of whatBakhtin
G.P. Lmnsbu•.'y
/ 87
calls"the zone of maximalcontactwith the present(with contemporary

reality)in all itsopenendedness"(198lb, 11). It isthe chronotope of a liter-
arywork that definesits artisticunity,whichin turn mediates its "relation-
shipto an actualreality"(1981c,243).
The Carver chronotopemakesartisticallyvisible a discretehistorical
momentin the ongoingprojectthat the worldknowsasAmerica.Whereas
the work of writers such as Thomas Pynchonand Donald Barthehne
embodies "theexplosivecontradictions"of the1960sinall itsfragmentation,
surrealism, andcarnivalatmosphere (Dickstein1991,507),theCarverchron-
otopeembodies
thedownbeatmoodofAmerica
in the1970s:post-Vietnam,
post-Watergate,
post-energy
crisis.
Theseventies
werea timeofwidespread
culturalmalaisein America,a momentwhenthe greatcollective
promiseof
theNew Worldappeared to befailing.It isa timeof disenchantment,
when
thosewhohadprofitedfromtheunprecedented expansionoftheAmerican
economy afterthe secondworldwar startedto seethe possibility of
declining
expectations.
Christopher
Lasch,
in hisbookTheMinimalSell;
describes
the art appropriate to sucha historical
momentas"ananti-artor
minimalart . . . [referring]to a widespread
conviction
thatart cansurvive
onlybyadrastic
restriction
ofitsfieldofvision"
(1984,131).Theembattled,
heroicself-assertion
of a Pynchon
provesimpossible
to sustain;
instead
literary art turns to
an immersion
in the ordinary,a deliberate
eftacement
of the artist's
personality,
a rejection
of clarifying
contexts
thatshowrelationships
amongobjectsor events,
a refusalto findpatterns
of anykind,an
insistence
ontherandom
qualityof existence,
aninsistence
that'each
thingcanbeandisseparate
fromeach
andevery
other.'(132)
MortonMarcus,
a friendof Carver's
in theearlydays,
describes
Carver's
storiesas"scenarios
of ourworstdreams
abouttherealityof ourneighbors'
existences,
scenarios
about thespiritual
barrennessattheheartofAmerican
lifewhichthemajority
ofuswereliving"(1993,57).In retrospect,
Marcus
locates
theawfulnegative powerof Carver'sstories
in thewaythatthe
Americatheyimagine
"hasbecomethetruthot•ourlives-the
unemployment,

88 Revue canadienne d'g,tudes ambrtcaines
the fearof homelesshess...the terror of beingpoor or disenfranchised ill

thislandof milk andacid"(58). PostwarAmericans were told to put their
faithin materialism, andwhenprosperity beganto wanetheyfoundtheyhad
no spiritualresources to sustainthem.
GeorgLukacsdefinesthe novelas "the epic of an age in which the
extensive totalityof life is no longerdirectlygiven,in whichthe immanence
of meaningin life hasbecomea problem,yet whichstill thinksin termsof
totality"(1971, 56). The Carverchronotopegoesbeyondthe assertionof a
totalizingimpulse to confronttheradicalsense of incomprehension of people
caughtill the transformationof Americafrom an industrialeconomyto a
post-industrial economy.The Carverchronotopeis the epic of an era of
diminishment, wherethe unity providedby the figure of the hero, a being
endowedwith a senseof self-possession andpurpose,is no longera plausible
structuralprinciplefor a writer concerned with a true representation of the
spiritof histime.And yet the Carverchronotopedoesnot presentthe late
capitalistmimesisof the demographer--the dispassionate,statisticalanalysis
of the consumerbehavioursand attributesof late-twentiethcenturyNorth
Americans--forthat would be to servethe agendaof the corporateelite
whichlargelydeterminesthe fate of postmodernhumanity.Instead,Carver
presents the poetictruth of the contentof the individuallivesthat makeup
thesestatistical,abstractpopulations,and investsthem with whateversmall
dignitieshisstatusasa writer canconferon them.
Endnotes
1. Asthetitleimplies, thisessayprovidesa critical-theoretical

contextfor understandingthe
entitythatI call%heCarverChronotope." The essay isan adaptationof thefirstchapter
fromIny doctoraldissertation (SimonFraserUniversity,1996), the remainderof which
setsout, in a verydeliberateanddetailedfashion,to elaborateon the claimsmadehere.
2 LewisBuzbeerelates a storyabouthowa truckdriverstumbled uponCarver'sbook•hat
WeTalk AboutWhenWe 27•IkAboutLove.After readingthe book,the man explained
that,"whilehenormallydidn'tread,he hadbeenintrigued by the book'stitle andread
thebookfrombeginning to end,unableto stop"(1993, 114).
3. Douglas Ungerrecalls how"nopublisher anywhere in thecountrywouldaccept[Carver's
first]book.... The collection representedfourteenyearsof work. Editorsfoundthe
storiestoo depressing,or not in tunewith what the culturewantedto read"(quoted•n
Halpert 1991,270).
G.P. Lainsbu•y/ 89
4. FrederickBarthelme distinguishesbet•veen realism,which"standsfor a wholesystem of

literaryartifice,andrepresentation, whichstands foronlyonepartof thesystem" (quoted
in Karlsson1990, 145). Barthelme rejectsthe kindof traditionalrealistepistemology
described by FredricJameson in hisForewordto Jean-Francois Lyotard'sThePostmodem
Condition,one"whichconceives of representation asthe reproduction,for subjectivity,
of an objectivitythat liesoutsideit... a mirrortheoryof knowledge andart"(1984,vfi•).
Karlsson describes the minimalist attack on realism as "an invisible subversion" wluch
invokesworldswhichare "conspicuously
realand,paradoxically,
remarkably
artificial"
(1990, 145).
5. Significantly,
the title for the posthumous bookwhichbringstogetherhisprevionsly
uncollected
writingsis No Heroic.e,Please(1992).
6. BoddyhereisquotingtheChekhov represented
in oneof Carver's
finalpublished
stones,
"Errand"(1968).The linesquotedaboveserveto differentiatetheaesthetics
of Chekhov
fromTolstoy,whoin thestoryhascometo visitChekhov on hisdeathbed(Carver1988,
•83).
7 All references
toFiresareto tileVintageContemporariesEdition,firstpublished
in 1989.
Firesxvasfirstpublished
in 1983by CapraPress, andthiseditionwaspickedup andre-
issued by Random House(Vintage) in 1984.The 1989editioncontains thesamepoems
and storiesas the 1983 edition,althoughthereare changes in the essaysincluded.
I
chooseto referto the 1989 editionbecause it is moreeasilyaccessible
thanthe 1983
edition.
8. RussellBanks(1992) refutesAldridge's
argumentin a reviewin TheAtlanticMonthly
entitled"ADyspeptic
Viewof NinetiesFiction."
Works Cited
Aldrtdge,
JohnW. 1992.Talents
andTechnicians:
Litera•y
ChicandtheNewAs'sembly-Lme
Fiction. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons.
Atlas,James.1981."Less
isLess,"
Atlantic Monthly(june):96-98.
Bakhtin,M.M. 1981a."Discourse in theNovel."In TheDialogicImagination,
translated
by
CarylEmerson andMichaelHolquist.Austin:TexasUP.
•. 198lb. "Epic
andNovel."
In TheDialogic
Imagination,
translated
byCaryl
Emerson
and
MichaelHolquist.Austin:TexasLIP.
ß 1981c."Formsof Time and of the Chronotope
of the Novel."In The Dialogtc
Imagination,
translated
byCarylEmerson
andMichael
Holquist.
Austin:
Texas
LIP.
•. 1986."TheBildungsroman
andiItsSignificance
intileHistory
ofRealism."
In Speech
Genres
,redOtherLateEssays,
translated
byVernW. McGee.Austin:
Texas
Banks,
Russell.
1992."ADyspeptic
ViewofNineties
Fiction,"
Atlantic
Monthly
(May):120-27.
Boddy,
Kasia.
1992."Companion-Souls
of theShort
Story:
Anton
Chekhov
andRaymond
Carver,"Scottish-Slavonic
Review18 (Spring):105-12.
Bnzbee,
Lewis.
1993."NewHopefortheDead."
InRemembering
Ray:
A Composite
Biography
ofRaymond
Cawer,
edited
byWilliam
L.StullandManreen
P.Carroll.
Santa
Barbara:
Capra Press
Canadmn Review of American Studies

90 Revue canachenned'geudesambrtcaines
Campbell,
Ewing.1991."Raymond
Carver's
Therapeutics
of Passion,"Jour•mI
of theShortStory
in Englisb16 (Spring):9-18.
Carver,Raymond.1988.WbereI'm CallingFrom:New andSelected Stories.
New York:Atlannc
Monthly Press.
•. 1989.Fires:Essays,Poems,Stories.
New York: Vintage.
Chekhov, Anton.1964.LadywithLapdog andOtherStories.
TranslatedbyDavidMagarshack.
Markham,ON: Penguin.
Clark, Miriam Marty. 1991. "Raymond Carver'sMonologicImagination,"MottentFiction
Studies37, no. 2 (Summer):240-47.
Clarke,Graham.1990."Investing theGlimpse:Raymond CarverandtheSyntaxof Silence."In
TheNewAmerican Writing:Essays
onAmericanLiteratureSince1970,editedby Graham
Clarke. New York: 5t Martin's Press.
D•ckstein,Morris. 1991. "The Pursuitof the Ordinary,"Pa•tisanReview58, no. 3 (Summer):
506-13.
Halpert,Sam.1991."Glimpses: RaymondCarver,"ParisReview118 (Spring):260-303.
Holquist,Michael.1981. Introductionto The DialogicImagination:Four Essays,by M. M.
Bakhtin.Austin:TexasUniversityPress.
Jameson,Fredric.1981.The PoliticalUnconscious:Nmrativeas SociallySymbolic Act. Ithaca:
CornellUniversityPress.
1984. Forewordto ThePostmodern Condition:A Reporton Knowledge, byJean-Francms
Lyotard.Minneapolis: Minnesota University
Press.
Karlsson,
Ann-Marie.1990."TheHyperrealistic ShortStory:A Postmodern TwilightZone."In
Criticismin theTwilightZone.'Postmodern
Perspectiveson Literattireand Politics,edited
by DanutaZadworna-Fjellstad. Stockholm:Almqvist& Wiskell.
Kaufinann,David. 1991. '•fuppie Postmodernism,"Arizona Qua•terly 47, no. 2 (Summer):
93-116.
Kermode,Frank.1983.Editorial,"DirtyRealism:New Writing FromAmerica,"Granta 10.
Lasch,Christopher.
1984.TheMh•imaISelfi'
Psychic
Su•vivaI
in TroubledTines.NewYork:W. W
Norton and Co.
Lentricchia,Frank. 1990. "The AmericanWriter as Bad Citizen--Introducing
Don DeLillo,"
SouthAtlanticQuarterly89, no.2 (Spring):239-44.
Lukacs,Georg.1971.TheTheoryo[the Novel,translatedby Anna Bostock.Cambridge:MIT
Press.
Marcus, Morton. 1993. "All-AmericanNightmares."

In Remembering Ray: A Compostte
Biographyo[RaymondCraver,editedby WilliamL. Stulland MaureenP. Carroll.Santa
Barbara:Capra Press.
McCafiery,Larry and Sinda Gregory.1990. "An Interviewwith RaymondCarver."In
Conversations withRaymondCarver,editedby MarshallBruceGentryandWilliamL.
Stull.Jackson:Mississippi
UniversityPress.
McInerney,Jay. 1993. "RaymondCarver, Mentor."In Remembering Ray.'A Composite
Biographyo[Raymond Craver,editedby WilliamL. 5tulland MaureenP. Carroll.Santa
Barbara:CapraPress.
Stropson,
Mona and LewisBuzbee.1990. "RaymondCarver:•7JeParisReviewIntewiew."In
Conversations
with RaymondCawer,editedby MarshallBruceGentryand William L.
Stull.Jackson:
Mtss•ssipp•
Umvers•ty
Press.
G.P. Lamsbu•y
/ 91
Stevenson,
Diane. 1985. "MinimalistFictionandCriticalDoctrine,"Mississippi
Re,dew40/41
(Winter): 83-89.
Wtlde,Alan. 1987. "Shootingfor Smallness:Realismand Midfiction."In MiddleG•ounds.
Philadelphia:Pennsylvania
University Press.

A Critical Context For The Carver Chronotope

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

A Critical Context For The Carver Chronotope

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

http://www.utpjournals.press/doi/pdf/10.3138/CRAS-027-01-04 - Friday, June 03, 2016 6:55:33 PM - IP Address:185.46.84.

Canadian Review of American Studres

Thosewho dislike,or distrust,Carver'swork breakdownfurther into two

can no longerbe contentwith its demystifying vocationto unmaskand

Jamesoncallsfor a criticismwhich goesbeyondmerelydemonstrating the

Canadian Review of American Studies

parataxis,"a disjunctivestyle markedby its avoidanceof grammatical

mark a deliberatedenial of sentimentalityand affect. Parataxis. . .

The failure to provide an interpretationof eventsthrough authorial

storiestry too "gingerly. . . to figureutopia"(112) to pleasethe likesof

Canadian Review of American Studies

It is no coincidence to find that both Chekhov and Carver renounce the

So Wilde is right, at leastas far as his assertionthat the kind of fiction

after yearsof workingcrapjobsandraisingkidsandtryingto write, I

To write a novel,it seemed

Canadian Review of American Studies

haveenoughfaithin hiscreativepowersto attemptto will an evenpartly

the peopleI've workedwith and earnedmy livingbesidefor years"(112).

In the novel,the entireworldandall of life aregivenin the cross-

Canadtan Revtew of American Studms

a formallyconstitutivecategoryof literature... [within which]spatial

The Carverchronotopeis the concreteembodimentin language,working

calls"the zone of maximalcontactwith the present(with contemporary

Canadian Review of American Studies

the fearof homelesshess...the terror of beingpoor or disenfranchised ill

1. Asthetitleimplies, thisessayprovidesa critical-theoretical

4. FrederickBarthelme distinguishesbet•veen realism,which"standsfor a wholesystem of

Canadmn Review of American Studies

Marcus, Morton. 1993. "All-AmericanNightmares."

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi