Which Narrative? The Case of the Narrative Subject in Fifteenth-Century Altarpieces

The development of the altarpiece towards the end of the late medieval period added a new decorous and conspicuously visual element to the church interior. The altarpiece became the prime location for iconic – i.e. non-narrative – images, but almost from the beginning narrative images were part of the altarpiece in the form of small-scale pictures placed underneath or next to an iconic image in the centre. In the fifteenth century the format of the altarpiece gradually changed, and simultaneously with the development of the unified picture field some new narrative subjects began to appear on the central panel as the main subject of the altarpiece. During the course of the fifteenth century, narrative subjects became increasingly frequent and accepted subjects for altarpieces. In this article I will focus on the problem of the narrative altarpiece, a seeming contradiction of terms. As narrative subjects were transferred from their usual location to the central field of the altarpiece, traditionally reserved for the iconic image, the narrative was included in a new context and expected to assume the function of the altarpiece. How did a narrative image function in this context, and what kind of audience did it serve? Since the questions involved in the issue are complex, I will focus on the biblical narrative of The Visitation as a case study, and use two well-known Florentine altarpieces from the fifteenth century as examples of the interpretative choices open to the viewers of these altarpieces.

The Narrative Turn in the French Novel of the 1970s

The most important French literary movement of the 1950s and 1960s, the nouveau roman, radically questioned the idea of the novel as storytelling, claiming that narratives create a false illusion of the world’s intelligibility. However, in the 1970s storytelling finds its way back into the French novel – a shift that has been characterized as the “return of the narrative”. In my article, I argue that the “narrative turn” in the French novel of the 1970s can be seen as a turn towards a fundamentally hermeneutic view of the narrative mediatedness of our relation to the world. From a hermeneutic perspective, the nouveaux romanciers – insofar as they reject the narrative in order to disclose the discontinuous, fragmentary and chaotic nature of reality – hang onto the positivistic idea that “real” is only that which is independent of human meaning-giving processes. By contrast, the hermeneutists, such as Paul Ricoeur, consider also the human experience of the world to be real, and largely narrative in form. This view is shared by the principal novelists associated with the narrative turn, such as Michel Tournier to whom man is a “mythological animal”. However, after the nouveau roman , narratives have lost their innocence: they no longer appear as “natural” but are conscious of their own narrativity, historicity, and the way they represent only one possible – inevitably ethically and politically charged – perspective into reality. By making storytelling thematic and by telling “counter-stories” that question prevailing models of sense-making, Tournier and other “new storytellers” strive to promote critical reflection on the stories on the basis of which we orient to the world and narrate our lives – both as individuals and as communities.

Towards a Conceptual History of Narrative

The article outlines a conceptual history of narrative, in particular the changes over the movement called “narrative turn” in the social sciences. According to Quentin Skinner, conceptual changes may take place on three separate levels: by changing the criteria of the concept, by changing the range of reference, and by changing the appraisal of the concept. Recent theorizing on narrative epitomizes all of these levels, but unevenly. In spite of the rhetoric of interdisciplinarity, two almost totally separate traditions of narrative theory persist: the narratological and the narrative-turn theories. Paradoxically, the narrative turn literature has radicalized the range of reference of narrative by attaching the concept to life and identity, but has left the criteria of the concept practically intact. This has extended the reign of a simplified Aristotelian concept of narrative as a chain of beginnings, middles, and ends. The narratological tradition of theorizing, instead, has debated extensively on the correct criteria of the concept, but enlarged the range of reference rather in the direction of cognition.

Sociolinguistic Implications of Narratology: Focalization and ‘Double Deixis’ in Conversational Storytelling

Over the last few decades, literary narratology has branched out into a wide array of ‘post-classical’ narratologies that have borrowed concepts from cognitive psychology, sociology, anthropology, history, linguistics, and other disciplines. The question arises to what extent ‘classical’ narratological concepts can also be successfully exported to other disciplines which have an interest in narrative. In this article, I apply the concept of ‘focalization’ as well as David Herman’s insights into doubly-deictic ‘you’ in second-person narratives to an interview narrative and further materials from my empirical sociolinguistic study on general practitioners’ narrative discourse on intimate partner abuse. I consider how the narrative positioning of the GP as storyteller and ‘protagonist’ of his story corresponds with his social and professional positioning with regard to his patients in the context of intimate partner violence cases and vis-à-vis the interviewer during the research interview. Focalization and double deixis are shown to become part of a narrative strategy whereby the narrator distances himself from his own personal self in the narrative and at the same time tries to align the interviewer with his viewpoint.

On the Epistemology of Narrative Theory: Narratology and Other Theories of Fictional Narrative

In this article, I propose to analyze narrative theory from an epistemological standpoint. To do so, I will draw upon both Genettian narratology and what I would call, following Shigeyuki Kuroda, “non-communicational” theories of fictional narrative. In spite of their very unequal popularity, I consider these theories as objective, or, in other words, as debatable and ripe for rational analyses; one can choose between them. The article is made up of three parts. The first part concerns the object of narrative theory, or the narrative as a constructed object, both in narratology (where narrative is likened to a narrative discourse) and in non-communicational narrative theories (where fictional narrative and discourse are mutually exclusive categories). The second part takes up the question of how the claims of these theories do or do not lend themselves to falsification. In particular, Gérard Genette’s claim that “every narrative is, explicitly or not, ‘in the first person’”, will be considered, through the lens of Ann Banfield’s theory of free indirect style. In the third part the reductionism of narrative theory will be dealt with. This leads to a reflection on the role of narrative theory in the analysis of fictional narratives.

Concepts of Narrative

Transposed to media like film, drama, opera, music, and the visual arts, “narrative” is no longer characterized by either temporality or an act of telling, both required by earlier narratological theories. Transposed to other disciplines, “narrative” is often a substitute for “assumption”, “hypothesis”, a disguised ideological stance, a cognitive scheme, and even life itself. The potential for broadening the concept lay dormant in narratology, both in the double use of “narrative” for the medium-free fabula and for the medium-bound sjuzet, and in changing interpretations of “event”. Some advantages of the broad use of “narrative” are an evocation of commonalities among media and disciplines, an invitation to re-think the term within the originating discipline, a constructivist challenge to positivistic and foundational views, an emphasis on a plurality of competing “truths”, and an empowerment of minority voices. Conversely, disadvantages of the broad use are an illusion of sameness whenever the term is used and the obliteration of specificity. In a Wittgensteinian spirit, the essay agrees that concepts of narrative are mutually related by “family resemblance”, but wishes to probe the resemblances further. It thus postulates two necessary features: double temporality and a transmitting (or mediating) agency, and an additional cluster of variable optional characteristics. When the necessary features are not dominant, the configuration may have “narrative elements” but is not “a narrative”.