In her narrative she often shifts back in time, remembering her childhood and adolescence. By the end of her narrative, we learn that she could not cope with the aftermath of the Holocaust and commits suicide. The third story in the novel is narrated by an omniscient narrator and is about a group of Jews in fifteenth-century Portofulle who are accused of killing a Christian child for religious reasons and who are, therefore, sentenced to death by the Christian society. The forth story is again told by a first-person narrator who does not have a name. The source text of this story is Shakespeare's play Othello. The fifth story is told by Stephen Stern once again who narrates the story of Malka, a black jewish woman who lives in Israel and is being faced with discriminations. The novel begins and ends with the voice of Stephen Stern. The narratives in The Nature of Blood shift back and forth like a “kaleidoscope” (De la Concha Munoz 7) and the story line narrated by Eva Stern is especially confusing. There are many memories and also fantastical ideas which are told to us by Eva and are blending with one another and the reality, her narrative voice is broken and fragmentary (De la Concha Munoz 9). In the Portotobuffole story line the narrative voice divides itself into double meanings. “Expressions such as “it was widely known” (52), “one had to understand” (59), “the Jews were widely known to” (52), “there was no doubt that” (59), “nearly everyone remembered” (59), attest to the unspecific, yet powerful force of anonymous authority” (De la Concha Munoz 8). The narrator in this story line only seems neutral, but the expressions mentioned above indicate to the reader that this narration is an ironic one.
In the essay “The End of History. Or, Is it? Circularity Versus Progress in Caryl Phillips’ The Nature of Blood” Ángeles De la Concha Munoz points out that Phillips’ narrative consists of “very different sources: historical, literary, and fictional, with disparate places and times. It is the palimpsest which provides, in the end, the thread from distant historical times, social backgrounds and countries” (6). Additionally, the narratives of the different narrators in the novel consist of many gaps in time and space. These gaps in the narratives, however, are just as important as the described events in the novel. They are a crucial narrating technique in order for the reader to make sense of the story (6-7).
De la Concha Munoz also argues that new voices which were silent before in the historical discourse have the possibility to tell their stories in The Nature of Blood. In De la Concha Munoz's view Phillips lets the voices of ethnic and gender minorities add new perspectives and narratives to the historical discourse which is dominantly white and male. Phillips’ novel challenges the monological discourse of history in the direction of a more polyphonic one (4). Phillips retells historical events, such as the trauma of the Holocaust, through a narrator, Eva, who is both jewish and female. Thus, her voice adds a new perspective to the historical discourse. “Instead of the neutral or absent (in either case monological) voice of the historical narrative, we get a polyphony, where each voice is positied in relation to every other while remaining perfectly distinct: a plurality of centres of consciousness, irreducable to a common denominator or a unifying view” (De la Concha Munoz 7-8).
In the Othello story line of The Nature of Blood most of the action takes place in Venice. The Othello-like narrator is describing his surroundings in Venice, while there is no sign of Othello describing Venice in Shakespeare's play. Most part of the action in Othello takes place in Cyprus, while the Othello part in The Nature of Blood mostly takes place in Venice; only towards the end of this section does the Othello-like character leave for Cyprus. It appears that the Othello part in this novel is serving as a kind of prequel to Shakespeare's original text and, thus, adding new details to Shakespeare's narrative. Phillips is describing the encounter between Othello and Desdemona in great detail, while Shakespeare keeps this passage brief and focuses more on the narrative of Iago persuading Othello that Desdemona is being unfaithful to him. Phillips’s emphasis is on the arrival of his character to Venice, an experience of transcultured subjectivity entailing the abandonment of a foreign past and the uncertain embrace of a European future” (Sell 206). In the play we first meet Othello through descriptions of his enemies, Iago and Roderigo, who refer to him as “thicklips” (I. i. 66), “Barbary horse” (I. i. 111), or “lascivious Moor” (I. i. 126) we do not get any descriptions of the Othello-figure by other characters because he is the one who tells the plot himself. In the play Othello is not identified by his name first, but rather compared to an animal-like creature, such as a horse. Afterwards, however, we actually identify him as an eloquent and skillful speaker. It is interesting to see how language influences the opinion of the reader. First Othello is only described to us with racist and unflattering phrases, which do not set a positive light upon him. Thus, the reader expects to see this specific version of Othello as described by Iago and Roderigo. However, after Othello speaks with much grace and eloquence when he addresses the signory of Venice with elegant phrasing after being confronted with marrying Desdemona, we identify him as an intelligent and cultivated man.
Most potent, grave, and reverend signiors,
My very noble and approved good masters,
That I have ta’en away this old man’s daughter,
It is most true; true, I have married her (I. iii. 76-79)
In The Nature of Blood, however, we only have the opinion of the Othello-like character of himself and what he thinks what the Venetians thinks of him, but we never learn through their language what the Venetian society actually thinks of him, unlike in Shakespeare's play. “The gondolier nodded a terse greeting, which I took to indicate his disapproval of having to propel his vessel to my unfashionable lodgings in order to convey a passenger whom he no doubt deemed unworthy of transportation” (Phillips 123). In this passage, the Othello-figure only describes his thoughts on the gondolier's attitude, but the gondolier himself never gets to speak. Thus, we can only see the perception of the Othello-like character and we will never know what the gondolier actually thinks of the Othello-character because he does not have a voice in this novel.
In Shakespeare's Othello language plays a very important part. With his words, Iago manages to persuade Othello that Desdemona is not faithful to him. He is projecting a virtual reality upon Othello. Iago's technique of convincing Othello of Desdemona's dishonesty is a very clever one. He uses as little words as possible, so that Othello becomes even more interested in what Iago has to say about Desdemona.
IAGO. My noble lord—
OTHELLO. What dost thou say, Iago?
IAGO. Did Michael Cassio, when you woo’d my lady, Know of your love?
OTHELLO. He did, from first to last: why dost thou ask?
IAGO. But for a satisfaction of my thought; No further harm.
OTHELLO. Why of thy thought, Iago?
IAGO. I did not think he had been acquainted with her.
OTHELLO. O, yes; and went between us very oft.
IAGO. Indeed!
OTHELLO. Indeed! ay, indeed: discern’st thou aught in that? Is he not honest?
IAGO. Honest, my lord!
OTHELLO. Honest! ay, honest.
IAGO. My lord, for aught I know.
OTHELLO. What dost thou think?
IAGO. Think, my lord!
OTHELLO. Think, my lord! By heaven, he echoes me,
As if there were some monster in his thought
Too hideous to be shown. Thou dost mean something:
I heard thee say even now, thou likedst not that,
When Cassio left my wife: what didst not like?
And when I told thee he was of my counsel
In my whole course of wooing, thou criedst “Indeed!”
And didst contract and purse thy brow together,
As if thou then hadst shut up in thy brain
Some horrible conceit. If thou dost love me,
Show me thy thought. (III. iii. 93-116)
The less Iago says, the more interested Othello becomes. Iago responds to Othello's words by echoing him and repeating his words. This technique may have different effects on Othello. Iago might emphasize certain words, which he thinks are most important in influencing Othello. He also might just parrot Othello, or cause thoughts of doubt in him. Additionally, Iago tries to empty out the meaning of Othello's words and is undermining him. In fact, Othello becomes very impatient after Iago has echoed him several times and wants to hear what is really going on in Iago's mind. Iago is also defusing Othello's language and it becomes more aggressive and vulgar towards the end of the play: “OTHELLO. Damn her, lewd minx! O, damn her!” (III. iii. 476) In The Nature of Blood we do not have the same effect of language. Iago is completely absent in the novel and, therefore, cannot influence the language of the Othello-like figure. Thus, his language remains constant throughout the novel. The Othello-like character in The Nature of Blood appears to be not as skillful in the language of Venice as Shakespeare's Othello. This is indicated by his reception of a letter by the Desdemona-like figure. He is not capable to decipher her handwriting is is forced to seek for help in order for him to understand the letter.
Unfortunately, the writing was close and difficult to read, as clearly it had been written in great haste. [...] I looked and looked again at the letter, but it defeated me comprehensively. I retired to bed in torment, thoroughly frustrated by my inability to interpret the lady's script. [...] I offered up the letter to the Jew and he immediately understood what I expected of him. [...] It was then, after a moment's thought, that I asked if I might dictate to him a letter of reply set down in his finest hand, but he had already anticipated my request” (Phillips 141- 142).
This passage suggests that the Othello-character is not as skillful in the language of the Venetians as he thinks he is. He blames the handwriting of the Desdemona-figure for his inability to read the letter, but later asks a Jew to help him to write down an answer. It is not clear whether he does not know how to write or whether he is just not in the mood to write down an answer because it is too difficult for him. Either way, this passage lets the reader assume that the narrative of the Othello-like character is not completely reliable. It remains unclear whether the Othello-like character is able to write in the language of the Venetians, but by reading this passage one can assume that the he is not completely comfortable in reading and writing in the language of Venice, much unlike Othello in Shakespeare.
Unlike in Shakespeare's play in which everybody gets to speak, in Phillips’s novel only the Othello-figure has a voice, while the other characters in this section stay silent. This way, the narrative gets a more personal and individual point of view which is contributed to the Othello-like character. One might argue that the speech of the Othello-like character in the novel is not very eloquent, while in Shakespeare's play Othello is a very skillful speaker; Bradley A.C. even calls him “the greatest poet of them all” (251). In fact, Shakespeare's play is mostly written in blank verse. This verse is unrhymed and has a certain rhythm to it which is called iambic pentameter. It consists of ten syllables per line and every other syllable is stressed.
Her fáther lóv'd me, óft invíted mé
Still quéstion'd mé the stóry óf my lífe (I. iii. 28-29)
Shakespeare often used blank verse in his plays because he thought that it was similar to the rhythm of the spoken English at that time and also sounded more heroic and noble than normal prose. Therefore, blank verse supports the eloquence of the speech in Othello. Stephen Clingman points out that the “wooden” (155) language of the Othello-like character in The Nature of Blood is something that he is putting on on the outside, like the Venetian clothes. He wants to belong to the Venetian society, but he is not capable to adapt the exact language of the Venetians and is partly aware of it. His speech is “the inevitably artificial sign of the dignity he feels should rightly be his, necessarily mistranslated and deformed in the language of the culturally alien 'visible'” (Clingman 155-156). Clingman also argues that the identity of the Othello-figure is “staged” (156) just like Shakespeare's play. Therefore, it is not the real Othello-figure that is presented to us and the Venetian society in the novel, but a representation of him. “In Othello's person, his entry into this different language is a form of self-alienation, a kind of mimicry in which he himself is only outwardly represented. He is a "mimic man" of a certain kind, struggling to balance his inward sense of authenticity with the kind of weightless non-recognition afforded him by Venice” (Clingman 156). The Othello-like character distances himself from his real self and tries to adopt the Venetian customs. But because of this mimicry he loses his authenticity and can also lose himself because the Venetian society does not recognize him as one of them.
In his essay “A New Wor(l)d Order: Language in the Fiction of the New Caribbean Diaspora” Bénédicte Ledent comments on the language of Caryl Phillips. He states that Phillips’ novels are “written in Standard English, in an elegant, apparently simple prose. Yet this smooth surface conceals a more complex discourse, in the same way as the surface of the Atlantic Ocean hides a violent history, embodied by the many victims of the Middle Passage” (17-18). That is to say that even though Phillips's language might appear simple, it still contains the issues that many Caribbean writers deal with. In addition to that, Ledent asserts that the goal of many Caribbean writers, including Phillips, is not to achieve linguistic, but rather an emotional authenticity (Ledent 21). Ledent also claims that the “short verbless sentences” in The Nature of Blood suggest
the suffering caused by the slave-trade and the Holocaust; about the presence of such formal features as repetition and contrapuntal structure which may echo Creole (O’Callaghan, 1984). But even more important, I believe, is the way Phillips dramatizes the linguistic dilemma of the Caribbean by showing the central role played by language (or its absence) in human relationships. Quite significantly, many of his displaced characters speak in a clearly borrowed voice, neither Standard English nor Caribbean dialect, but a reconstructed English. While this language may indicate, as C. L. Innes rightly points out, “loss of speech, and distortions of self” (Innes, 1995: 26), it concurrently transcends the original linguistic binarism and suggests that imagination combined with an exploration of the past can be a way of accommodating the speech confusion of the Caribbean exiles who, unlike other immigrants, “have to learn a new form of the same language” (Mc Crum, 1986: 350). What is more, Phillips’s fiction no longer portrays Calibans, that is individuals who are, in George Lamming’s words, “colonised by language, and excluded by language” (Lamming, 1960: 15), but rather ambivalent Othello-like figures who, though more educated and sophisticated than Caliban, still find it hard to fully master the language of the “European Tribe” (22-23).
The Nature of Blood is also a work of intertextuality, a term coined by Julia Kristeva in the 1960s referring to the influence of one text towards the meaning of another and their interrelationship. Jonathan Sell affirms that Shakespeare's texts often top and even annihilate the original text which served as the source for Shakespeare's plays. Phillips, on the other hand, does not want to achieve this kind of effect with his texts. It appears that in the Othello story line he does not want to refer back to Shakespeare's Othello, but rather to the story about a moorish general by Giovanbattista Giraldi Cinthio, which was the source text for Shakespeare's play (Sell 205-206).
Othello: A play by William Shakespeare. Probably written between 1602 and 104, and first performed in 1604. The principal source for the play is Giraldi Cinthio's Hecatommithi, a collection of Italian stories first published in Venice in 1566, and used by a number of Elizabethan and Jacobean dramatists as source material for their plots. Out of one key sentence in Cinthio's story, Shakespeare wrote the early scenes of the play. “It happened that a Virtuous Lady of wondrous beauty called Disdemona, impelled not by female appetite but by the Moor's Good qualities, fell in love with him, and he, vanquished by the Lady's beauty and noble mind, likewise was enamoured of her'” (Phillips 166-167).
This fragment, which is written like an encyclopedia entry, is Phillips' only mention of Othello. Like in Cinthio's story, Phillips' Othello-figure also does not have a name. Phillips, thus, wants to refer back to the original story, rather than Shakespeare's play. He also mentions Shakespeare as one of many playwrights who took Cinthio's story as an inspiration for their plays, thus, again putting more emphasis on Cinthio's story and trying to restore the story of the black general to its “original, nonintertextual condition” (Sell 206). Phillips' emphasis on the original Cinthio text also becomes clear through his covering of only the first act of Shakespeare's play.
Now Shakespeare’s tragic unfolding of events is a marvellous amplification of Cinthio’s artless and perfunctory story; yet in this passage, Phillips suggests that the greater literary achievement is Cinthio’s, capable of capturing in “one key sentence” an essential quid which Shakespeare watered down into one act and a bit. It is all as if Phillips wishes to disinherit Shakespeare of his pre-textual monopoly on the “Othello” story by erasing the Moor’s name and excising the tragedy (Sell 206).
Phillips' Othello part is different from Shakespeare's play. The greatest difference being Phillips' invention of a family for his Othello-figure.“That night I lay in bed and cast my mind back to the wife and child that I had left behind in my native country. I did not think of myself as having spurned them, for they were in my heart and would evermore remain there” (Phillips 135). This detail contradicts Shakespeare's play. The Othello-like character in Phillips' novel gets a whole new motive for marrying Desdemona. In the play Othello falls in love with Desdemona, while in Phillips' case the reader gets the impression that the Othello-character does not marry Desdemona out of love, but simply out of an “unethical strategy for marrying into Venetian society” (Sell 207). Because of this fact one can also look differently at Othello in Shakespeare's play. One might think that Shakespeare's Othello also had the goal of marrying Desdemona because he wanted to be accepted by the Venetians as one of their own. Thus, Othello might be read and interpreted differently after reading the Othello section of The Nature of Blood.
To summarize, language in The Nature of Blood and Othello is treated differently. In Shakespeare's play language plays a very important role. Especially, in the case of Iago language plays a crucial part. Without his skillful and very effective techniques of convincing Othello of Desdemona's unfaithfulness, Iago would not succeed in persuading Othello. It is his language that is so strong that convinces Othello in the end. Othello, too, is a great speaker and his words are also very strong and poignant. In The Nature of Blood, however, language is used in a different way. It is more simple than Shakespeare's and rather aims to create emotional authenticity. The Othello-character in Phillips's novel is not a skillful speaker as Othello which demonstrates that he has problems adapting to Venetian life. This fact lets the reader see Othello from a different angle. Phillips's Othello, thus, varies from Shakespeare's, which is displayed by language. The Othello-figure in The Nature of Blood is insecure which his “wooden” language points out, while Shakespeare's Othello is much more confident. Consequently, Phillips creates a different version of Othello which is shown not only by the actions of the character, but also through his use of language.
Xenia Suschkow
Works Cited:
Bradley, A.C. “From Shakespearean Tragedy.” Othello. St. Paul: EMC/Paradigm Publishing, 2005. 250-256. Print.
Clingman, Stephen. “Forms of History and Identity in the Nature of Blood.” Salmagundi 143 (2004): 141-166. Print.
De La Concha Munoz, Angeles. “The End of History? Or is it? Circularity versus Progress in Caryl Phillips' The Nature of Blood.” Miscelánea 22 (2000): 1-19. Print.
Ledent, Benedicte. “A New Wor(l)d Order: Language in the Fiction of the New Caribbean Diaspora.” Revista Alicantina de Estudios Ingleses 16 (2003): 6-28. Print.
Phillips, Caryl. The Nature of Blood. London:Vintage, 2008. Print.
Sell, Jonathan. “Intertexuality as Mimesis: The Deviant Phraseology of Caryl Phillips's Othello” Odisea 9 (2008): 201-211. Print.
Shakespeare, William. Othello. St. Paul: EMC/Paradigm Publishing, 2005. Print.
No comments:
Post a Comment