In planetarium there is no narrator, no plot and barely any characterisation. Language alone bears the weights of the novel's subject. Discuss.

Authors Avatar

In planetarium there is no narrator, no plot and barely any characterisation. Language alone bears the weights of the novel’s subject. Discuss.

INTRO: Need to define the subject of the novel in order to see how “the weight” is supported → subject seems to be the complexity of relationships and the difficulties one faces when creating and asserting one’s own true identity in the context of those relationship.

Sarraute explores this on the level of microscopic psychological currents- the “subterranean areas” of understanding- the tropism.

Fundamental conflict of tropism and language. To understand tropism is to experience a similar sensation. Cannot articulate the sensation through words as their meaning and traditional use (the forming of a coherent pattern) deducts from that of sensation. → Need to alter language to explain complex reality and the inter- interpretative psychology behind those relationships.

This understanding of the world in terms of tropisms and the effect it has on the language inevitably affects the development of the plot, the characterisation and the narrator within the novel.

LANGUAGE- aimed towards the expression of (in Sarraute’s words) “these movements of which we are hardly cognisant, that slip through on the frontiers of our consciousness in the form of unidentifiable, extremely rapid sensations” (Tropisms 1939) They are, according to her, the very substance of life because they are instinctive.

These sensations superior to language “quelque chose passé de lui à elle, d’ a peine perceptible..un moment plus rapide, plus clair que les mots et qu’elle resiste aussitôt”

Join now!

→ in order to express these adequately she operates through metaphor (in psychology linked to unconscious intellect) adequate expression of the subterranean movement of the persons psyche. Drama that is seen to exist beneath the friendly surface of the novel is corresponded precisely in this fashion. E. g. Military metaphors when the characters analyse each other’s intentions contrast with the outward politeness – the whole flat business: first of all brother: “qaund elle a reconnu l’ ennemi, un envoyé de l’ennemi venue à l’éclaireur pour etudier le terrain, preparer l’attaque”. Also Alain refers to himself and Gisele as “conquistadores” ...

This is a preview of the whole essay