论文部分内容阅读
【Abstract】This paper examines the plot structures of Conrad’s “Amy Foster” and Almayer’s Folly. They don’t follow the rule of conventional plot structure； rather， they are Conrad’s elaborate experiments of modernist construction， which features layers of flashbacks. The benefit of such arrangement is the vigorous interaction between the text and the readers.
【Key words】modernist plot construction； flashback， frame story； double plot； role of readers
【作者簡介】林晓曼，惠州学院外国语学院。
As a forerunner of modernism， Joseph Conrad doesn’t confine his writings to a fixed plot structure. Both “Amy Foster” and Almayer’s Folly are good representations of Conrad’s special plot arrangements. Unlike conventional plot structure that normally contains exposition， rising action， climax， failing action and resolution in a chronological order， the above two writings are more like Conrad’s elaborate experiments of modernist construction， which successfully encourages the interaction between readers and the texts.
Although “Amy Foster” was published six years later than Almayer’s Folly， it manages to maintain one of Conrad’s favorite writing techniques – flashback， and it’s not only a simple flashback， but flashback within flashback. Its first several paragraphs are in present tense when the first narrator talks about his friend Kennedy and the village where he lives. But with an introducing phrase “[a] good many years ago now”， the time suddenly changes into the past when the first narrator is told the story of Amy Foster and the castaway. In this way， it seems that he isn’t planning to tell Amy’s story at first， and it’s only when he thinks of Kennedy’s intelligence – “of a scientific order， of an investigating habit， and of that unappeasable curiosity” – that it reminds him of the old story. Therefore， the rest of the short story is a flashback to illustrate the first narrator’s opinion about his friend’s intelligence – how Kennedy is investigating and curious enough to gather the information. However， it’s not enough to simply say that the rest of the short story is a flashback， because the way Kennedy recounts Yanko’s story isn’t in a chronological order： there are flashbacks there， too. For instance， Kennedy talks about how Yanko has been feeling on the emigrant-ship before he gives a flashback of the three men who go to Yanko’s town to recruit workers. Another example is that after Kennedy explains his knowledge about the “bogus ‘Emigration Agencies’”， he goes back to describe his witness to the ship “on a dark， threatening afternoon”. In fact， flashback is often seen in the telling of Yanko’s identity， which will make readers get lost if they are not careful enough. This is also true in Almayer’s Folly. There is a flashback in chapter one， and from chapter two to the end of chapter five， flashbacks are given to state the background of the characters. More significantly， chronological order isn’t applied in these flashbacks all the time. Specifically speaking， at the end of the second paragraph in chapter four， readers learn in advance that as a result of Dain’s reconciliation， Lakamba changes his attitude towards Almayer. Afterwards the rest of the chapter narrates back to Dain and his business and how he conciliates Lakamba and Almayer. A similar example of “past of the past” can also be found in chapter five as the next-to-last meeting of Dain and Nina before Dain leaves for the gunpowder trade is narrated as a flashback within a flashback： “[o]n the eve of the day when Babalatchi’s suspicious were confirmed by ocular demonstration， Dain and Nina had remained longer than usual in their shady retreat.” It’s true that this kind of plot arrangement is confusing and challenging； however， it shows perfectly how our human mind works. When we see something meaningful to us， we tend to think about the past， and when we think about the past， what has happened before the past tends to jump into our mind too.
【Key words】modernist plot construction； flashback， frame story； double plot； role of readers
【作者簡介】林晓曼，惠州学院外国语学院。
As a forerunner of modernism， Joseph Conrad doesn’t confine his writings to a fixed plot structure. Both “Amy Foster” and Almayer’s Folly are good representations of Conrad’s special plot arrangements. Unlike conventional plot structure that normally contains exposition， rising action， climax， failing action and resolution in a chronological order， the above two writings are more like Conrad’s elaborate experiments of modernist construction， which successfully encourages the interaction between readers and the texts.
Although “Amy Foster” was published six years later than Almayer’s Folly， it manages to maintain one of Conrad’s favorite writing techniques – flashback， and it’s not only a simple flashback， but flashback within flashback. Its first several paragraphs are in present tense when the first narrator talks about his friend Kennedy and the village where he lives. But with an introducing phrase “[a] good many years ago now”， the time suddenly changes into the past when the first narrator is told the story of Amy Foster and the castaway. In this way， it seems that he isn’t planning to tell Amy’s story at first， and it’s only when he thinks of Kennedy’s intelligence – “of a scientific order， of an investigating habit， and of that unappeasable curiosity” – that it reminds him of the old story. Therefore， the rest of the short story is a flashback to illustrate the first narrator’s opinion about his friend’s intelligence – how Kennedy is investigating and curious enough to gather the information. However， it’s not enough to simply say that the rest of the short story is a flashback， because the way Kennedy recounts Yanko’s story isn’t in a chronological order： there are flashbacks there， too. For instance， Kennedy talks about how Yanko has been feeling on the emigrant-ship before he gives a flashback of the three men who go to Yanko’s town to recruit workers. Another example is that after Kennedy explains his knowledge about the “bogus ‘Emigration Agencies’”， he goes back to describe his witness to the ship “on a dark， threatening afternoon”. In fact， flashback is often seen in the telling of Yanko’s identity， which will make readers get lost if they are not careful enough. This is also true in Almayer’s Folly. There is a flashback in chapter one， and from chapter two to the end of chapter five， flashbacks are given to state the background of the characters. More significantly， chronological order isn’t applied in these flashbacks all the time. Specifically speaking， at the end of the second paragraph in chapter four， readers learn in advance that as a result of Dain’s reconciliation， Lakamba changes his attitude towards Almayer. Afterwards the rest of the chapter narrates back to Dain and his business and how he conciliates Lakamba and Almayer. A similar example of “past of the past” can also be found in chapter five as the next-to-last meeting of Dain and Nina before Dain leaves for the gunpowder trade is narrated as a flashback within a flashback： “[o]n the eve of the day when Babalatchi’s suspicious were confirmed by ocular demonstration， Dain and Nina had remained longer than usual in their shady retreat.” It’s true that this kind of plot arrangement is confusing and challenging； however， it shows perfectly how our human mind works. When we see something meaningful to us， we tend to think about the past， and when we think about the past， what has happened before the past tends to jump into our mind too.