论文部分内容阅读
【Abstract】Kazuo Ishiguro’s novel When We Were Orphans follows a new historicist style throughout the narration. During the experience of reading， the reader， accompanying with the protagonist， also goes through a journey of the new historicist style in which one makes a subtle contact with the history built on the complex， instable and elusive memory.
【Key words】When We Were Orphans； New Historicism； Kazuo Ishiguro
Reading Kazuo Ishiguro is always a compound experience， not only because of his Japanese-British novelist identity which allows multiple civilizations to interact in his work， but also because of the kept changing narrative styles the reader encounters all through the story. When We Were Orphans is a typical example in which varies kinds of literary genres and traditions can be traced. In the process of chasing the lost parents， both the reader and the protagonist are undergoing a journey of a new historicist style， in which one not just finds out the truth about the events of the past， but more importantly， redefines the essence of history.
Ⅰ. Dual Meaning of the Word “History”
Like all the critical approaches to the study of literary history， the prime task of the new historicism is to examine the relationship between literature and history， or to be precise， “how literature reflected， shaped and represented history.” （Brannigan， 417） However， before we make any further exploration， we had better first know about the two layers of meaning for the word “history” hold by the poststructuralist in the 1960s and 1970s. They point out that there is a distinction between “the events of the past” and “telling a story about the events of the past”. They make it clear that that history is always “narrated”， and therefore the first sense is untenable. The past can never be available to us in pure form， but always in the form of representations. All the discussion and debating are based upon a fact that literature does not behave passively towards history：it does not reflect history as a mirror but shapes and constitutes historical change. （Brannigan， 418） Therefore， tracing back to the past and finding out the “truth” is to some extent “an impossible mission”. However， it happens in When We Were Orphans that the adventure of Christopher Banks is just a course of fulfilling such a mission.
Christopher starts his journey with the belief built upon the story of the past established by his mother’s narration and his own memory. He never doubts these beliefs until the penultimate chapter， when Uncle Philip makes it clear that most of his notion about the past is just some misunderstandings his mother intentionally makes and some wishful thinking on his own part. When the truths are disclosed， he sees the difference between “the real events of the past” and the “story people tells about the past”. It is the disillusion moment in which one learns about the real past and faces the already built misrepresentative history. In other words， throughout the journey of enquiring the facts of the past， Christopher discovers the two sides of the history and finishes the convert of his notion from a traditional historical point of view to the new historicist stand. As a result， we have Christopher Banks， an old-style detective who holds and represents the traditional values and historical notions， believes once a murderer is unmasked， a kidnapping is solved， or an important case is settled， everything will go back to the used ordered way. He believes， like many traditional historicists， “some universal significance” （Brannigan， 417） and encounters the typical dilemma of the history which seeks for a new historicist style’s way out.
Ⅱ. The Unavailable Past
While defining some basic ideas of the new historicism， critics have summarized several common assumptions of the theory， and one important notion is about “the unavailable past”. It claims that “no discourse， imaginative or archival， gives access to unchanging truths nor expresses inalterable nature.” （Brannigan， 421） For one thing， actual past occurrences are unavailable to us， therefore we have only the access to the narratives of history；for another， these narratives are constructed in particular environment and thus influenced by different social， cultural， and political circumstances. As to “history”， there is no single unified entity， but discontinuous and contradictory history fragments which make the narration unreliable and the authenticity of the past doubtful.
Readers of When We Were Orphans can never get rid of the cloud of suspicion throughout the reading process. From the very beginning， the author never stops reminding us of the poor memory of Christopher and the doubtful authenticity of his narration. With the increasing occurrence of the narrator’s forgetfulness and the perceptible imaginative factors in his story， the reader inevitably develops a habitual suspicion in the reading even if the narration begins with an affirmative statement “I remember”.
As the story proceeds， the unreliability of the narration continues bewilders the reader and even goes beyond the rational boundaries and appears to be ridiculous. In short， there is an unavailable past dangled in the development of the episode， the impression of the reader， and also the statement of the author. We can never reach a definite conclusion， nor can we make a judgment on true or false， because from the perspective of new historicism， compared with entangled in investigating an untouchable past， it makes much sense to see how literature acts as an creative force and an inseparable part in the making of history.
Ⅲ. Solution：Model of Power
There is a tendency in the new historicist criticism to reduce all representations of history to a model of power relations. It is interesting that in When We Were Orphans， the construction of the entire story and the final solution of the whole affair fit close with the logic of new historicism. Like all the new historicists， Christopher Banks believes the model of power relations. To Christopher this power is the crux of the past history and the explanation of all the problems. He asks for a victory of searching for the answer and fighting against the power which， he believes， is the force that determines his parents’ fate and causes their disappearance. He deems there is an evil force with which he could have a front confrontation， and when it turns out to be a futile task， he still seeks for the truth in the remote past until he finally meets Uncle Philip and gets all the puzzles solved. He discovers that his lifelong mission， “chasing through long years the shadows of vanished parents” （Ishiguro， 313） and “[saving] the world from ruin” （306） was dominated by the inescapable fate of one caught in the toils of historical turbulence.
When Christopher finally changes from an ambitious detective to a venerable content elder， the power that takes half of his lifetime to discover turns out to be an unattainable universal strength. If for new historicists， the work is to study “the function and condition of texts within a net work of power relations” （Brannigan， 426）， in When We Were Orphans， the task is to investigate how this power relations dominates the individual. The pessimistic and deterministic color of the new historicist interpretation of history is also reflected in the novel where ultimately， one can find no way out but to compromise with fate.
IV. Conclusion
Kazuo Ishiguro has been frequently compared with Jane Austen when he first makes a figure in the British literary world. Brought to England by his parents in 1960 at the age of six， Ishiguro unconsciously gains a position as an outsider in both cultures like Austen. Roaming about in the conventions of both his adopted land Britain and his hometown Japan， such an identity frees him from taking a bias from a certain ideology and allows him the right to do his own observations. Therefore， in When We Were Orphans， he was not interested in themes about parental responsibility， the truth in the past history， or the self-reestablishment of one’s identity in a new world. Instead， he focuses on exploring people’s inner worlds and examining how the unreliable memory fragments piece together the shards of reality. He makes a deliberate attempt to deceive the reader. Following his narration， we keep shifting between the two modes of history and trying to get in touch with the unavailable past. In the process of tracking down the shadows of vanished parents and facing the world as orphans， the protagonist makes every effort to get to the root of the matter and finally ends in disillusionment. In answering all the suspense put forth in the former part of the book， the author chooses a most unexpected tranquil comforting ending. To sum up， it begins as a detective story and ends up as a sentimental novel. However， Ishiguro does not simply make some melancholic lament in his work. The novel follows a new historicist style not only because of its application of many ideas of this theory， but also the fact that during the experience of reading the novel， the reader， accompanying the protagonist， also goes on a journey of the new historicist style in which one makes a subtle contact with history from the complex， instable and elusive memory. And this may be the novel’s most meaningful contribution.
References：
[1]Brannigan，John.“Introduction：History，Power and Politics in the Literary Artifact.” In：Wolfreys，Julian.（ed.）.Literary Theories：A Reader
【Key words】When We Were Orphans； New Historicism； Kazuo Ishiguro
Reading Kazuo Ishiguro is always a compound experience， not only because of his Japanese-British novelist identity which allows multiple civilizations to interact in his work， but also because of the kept changing narrative styles the reader encounters all through the story. When We Were Orphans is a typical example in which varies kinds of literary genres and traditions can be traced. In the process of chasing the lost parents， both the reader and the protagonist are undergoing a journey of a new historicist style， in which one not just finds out the truth about the events of the past， but more importantly， redefines the essence of history.
Ⅰ. Dual Meaning of the Word “History”
Like all the critical approaches to the study of literary history， the prime task of the new historicism is to examine the relationship between literature and history， or to be precise， “how literature reflected， shaped and represented history.” （Brannigan， 417） However， before we make any further exploration， we had better first know about the two layers of meaning for the word “history” hold by the poststructuralist in the 1960s and 1970s. They point out that there is a distinction between “the events of the past” and “telling a story about the events of the past”. They make it clear that that history is always “narrated”， and therefore the first sense is untenable. The past can never be available to us in pure form， but always in the form of representations. All the discussion and debating are based upon a fact that literature does not behave passively towards history：it does not reflect history as a mirror but shapes and constitutes historical change. （Brannigan， 418） Therefore， tracing back to the past and finding out the “truth” is to some extent “an impossible mission”. However， it happens in When We Were Orphans that the adventure of Christopher Banks is just a course of fulfilling such a mission.
Christopher starts his journey with the belief built upon the story of the past established by his mother’s narration and his own memory. He never doubts these beliefs until the penultimate chapter， when Uncle Philip makes it clear that most of his notion about the past is just some misunderstandings his mother intentionally makes and some wishful thinking on his own part. When the truths are disclosed， he sees the difference between “the real events of the past” and the “story people tells about the past”. It is the disillusion moment in which one learns about the real past and faces the already built misrepresentative history. In other words， throughout the journey of enquiring the facts of the past， Christopher discovers the two sides of the history and finishes the convert of his notion from a traditional historical point of view to the new historicist stand. As a result， we have Christopher Banks， an old-style detective who holds and represents the traditional values and historical notions， believes once a murderer is unmasked， a kidnapping is solved， or an important case is settled， everything will go back to the used ordered way. He believes， like many traditional historicists， “some universal significance” （Brannigan， 417） and encounters the typical dilemma of the history which seeks for a new historicist style’s way out.
Ⅱ. The Unavailable Past
While defining some basic ideas of the new historicism， critics have summarized several common assumptions of the theory， and one important notion is about “the unavailable past”. It claims that “no discourse， imaginative or archival， gives access to unchanging truths nor expresses inalterable nature.” （Brannigan， 421） For one thing， actual past occurrences are unavailable to us， therefore we have only the access to the narratives of history；for another， these narratives are constructed in particular environment and thus influenced by different social， cultural， and political circumstances. As to “history”， there is no single unified entity， but discontinuous and contradictory history fragments which make the narration unreliable and the authenticity of the past doubtful.
Readers of When We Were Orphans can never get rid of the cloud of suspicion throughout the reading process. From the very beginning， the author never stops reminding us of the poor memory of Christopher and the doubtful authenticity of his narration. With the increasing occurrence of the narrator’s forgetfulness and the perceptible imaginative factors in his story， the reader inevitably develops a habitual suspicion in the reading even if the narration begins with an affirmative statement “I remember”.
As the story proceeds， the unreliability of the narration continues bewilders the reader and even goes beyond the rational boundaries and appears to be ridiculous. In short， there is an unavailable past dangled in the development of the episode， the impression of the reader， and also the statement of the author. We can never reach a definite conclusion， nor can we make a judgment on true or false， because from the perspective of new historicism， compared with entangled in investigating an untouchable past， it makes much sense to see how literature acts as an creative force and an inseparable part in the making of history.
Ⅲ. Solution：Model of Power
There is a tendency in the new historicist criticism to reduce all representations of history to a model of power relations. It is interesting that in When We Were Orphans， the construction of the entire story and the final solution of the whole affair fit close with the logic of new historicism. Like all the new historicists， Christopher Banks believes the model of power relations. To Christopher this power is the crux of the past history and the explanation of all the problems. He asks for a victory of searching for the answer and fighting against the power which， he believes， is the force that determines his parents’ fate and causes their disappearance. He deems there is an evil force with which he could have a front confrontation， and when it turns out to be a futile task， he still seeks for the truth in the remote past until he finally meets Uncle Philip and gets all the puzzles solved. He discovers that his lifelong mission， “chasing through long years the shadows of vanished parents” （Ishiguro， 313） and “[saving] the world from ruin” （306） was dominated by the inescapable fate of one caught in the toils of historical turbulence.
When Christopher finally changes from an ambitious detective to a venerable content elder， the power that takes half of his lifetime to discover turns out to be an unattainable universal strength. If for new historicists， the work is to study “the function and condition of texts within a net work of power relations” （Brannigan， 426）， in When We Were Orphans， the task is to investigate how this power relations dominates the individual. The pessimistic and deterministic color of the new historicist interpretation of history is also reflected in the novel where ultimately， one can find no way out but to compromise with fate.
IV. Conclusion
Kazuo Ishiguro has been frequently compared with Jane Austen when he first makes a figure in the British literary world. Brought to England by his parents in 1960 at the age of six， Ishiguro unconsciously gains a position as an outsider in both cultures like Austen. Roaming about in the conventions of both his adopted land Britain and his hometown Japan， such an identity frees him from taking a bias from a certain ideology and allows him the right to do his own observations. Therefore， in When We Were Orphans， he was not interested in themes about parental responsibility， the truth in the past history， or the self-reestablishment of one’s identity in a new world. Instead， he focuses on exploring people’s inner worlds and examining how the unreliable memory fragments piece together the shards of reality. He makes a deliberate attempt to deceive the reader. Following his narration， we keep shifting between the two modes of history and trying to get in touch with the unavailable past. In the process of tracking down the shadows of vanished parents and facing the world as orphans， the protagonist makes every effort to get to the root of the matter and finally ends in disillusionment. In answering all the suspense put forth in the former part of the book， the author chooses a most unexpected tranquil comforting ending. To sum up， it begins as a detective story and ends up as a sentimental novel. However， Ishiguro does not simply make some melancholic lament in his work. The novel follows a new historicist style not only because of its application of many ideas of this theory， but also the fact that during the experience of reading the novel， the reader， accompanying the protagonist， also goes on a journey of the new historicist style in which one makes a subtle contact with history from the complex， instable and elusive memory. And this may be the novel’s most meaningful contribution.
References：
[1]Brannigan，John.“Introduction：History，Power and Politics in the Literary Artifact.” In：Wolfreys，Julian.（ed.）.Literary Theories：A Reader