كليدواژه :
رمان , روان شناسي , عليّت , واقع گرايي , اگزيستانسياليسم , كوندرا , آلبر كامو , رمان بيگانه
چكيده فارسي :
هدف مقالۀ حاضر فهم رمان در تقابل با واقع‌گراييِ روان‌شناختي است. مطالعۀ مورديِ اين پژوهش، رمان بيگانه اثرِ آلبر كامو است: چگونه اين اثر، يك رمانِ ضد روان‌شناختي است؟ در اين مقاله، دريافت كوندرا از رمان و روانشناسي مفروض گرفته شده است. رمان‌هاي روان‌شناختي بر ضرورت علّيتِ رواني متكي است: پيوند زدنِ امور پراكنده به يكديگر يا مرتبط ساختنِ امور نامرتبط. انسجامِ پيرنگ بدون پذيرش چنين عليّتي ناممكن است. برعكس، رمان بيگانه بر امور «خارج از موضوع» و «بيرون از قانون» متمركز است: مورسو بيگانه است چون از نظام آهنين پيرنگ تبعيت نمي‌كند. با ظهور اگزيستانسياليسم، رمان هم از حيث «شكل» و هم «محتوا» دچار تحول بنيادين شدند. كامو به عنوان فيلسوف اگزيستانسياليست، بجاي تحليل شخصيت بر تحليل موقعيت وجودي تأكيد مي‌كند. آنجا كه روانشناسي به دنبالِ وضوح و تمايز است، رمانِ كامو از ابهام و توجيه‌ناپذيريِ واقعيت مي‌گويد، در برابرِ پيوستگي از گسست، در برابرِ ثباتِ هويت از سياليت و تفاوت مي‌نويسد. رمان، قلمرو رخدادهاي پيشبيني ناپذير است؛ جايي كه به تعبير كامو «امر بي‌معنا/ پوچ» زندگي را به پيش مي‌راند. روانشناسي،اما، به دنبال كشف معنا و انگيزه‌هاي عقلاني در پسِ امورِ تصادفي است. اگر روانشناسي مدعي توصيف واقعيت است، كامو هرگونه واقع‌گرايي را ناممكن مي‌داند. افزون بر كاكرد سياسي، يكي از پيامدهاي عدمِ تقليلِ رمان به روانشناسي در حوزۀ نقد ادبي، امتناع از ارجاع متن به عناصر برون‌متني همچون زندگينامۀ مؤلف است. مسأله روشن است: رمان آنچه گفتنش لازم بوده، گفته است. نيازي به دانستني بيش از آن نيست.
چكيده لاتين :
Introduction: The main objective of this s tudy is to unders tand how the novel can be read agains t psychological reality. As a case s tudy, this paper addresses the S tranger by Camus. Embedded in Kundera’s reading on the linkage between psychology on novel and psychology, the main ques tion here is that how this novel
can be read as what acts agains t psychology.
His torically, how to address “characters or personages” has been obvious as a
recent issue in novel s tudies. The main issue in psychology as a science is also
“personage”. Unlike enjoying the same unit of analysis, the main objective of
this s tudy is to highlight the possible boundaries between novel approaches to
the personages versus psychological approaches to the same issue. The s tranger
by Albert Camus, an exis tentialis t philosopher is viewed as a good and precise example to disclose such boundaries made. Not only in its form but also in its
content, this novel avoids any psychological analysis. This paper hence attempts
to show this as its main issue. The current s tudy is theoretically embedded in
Kundera’s concepts. In kundera’s reading, at an early age novelis ts intentionally
avoid being linked with psychology. The nineteenth-century was the only era when
the novel was dominated by psychology. In Kundera’s reading, this era was read
as a kind of misleading in its path. Kundera reckoned that exis tentialism could
bring philosophy much closer to novels and coin a new paradigm in the novel
world. Indeed, this paradigmatic shift was a kind of transition from “so-called
psychological reality”. This s tudy is to explain how Camus as an exis tentialis t
thinker could make a dis tance from what is called a“Psychologizing novel”.
The main ques tion in this s tudy is to disclose how The s tranger by Camus made the
longes t dis tance from psychological reality. To answer such a ques tion, it is needed
to compare and contras t the concept of “reality” in a novel with psychological
readings on it. In addition, unveiling Camus’s take on the possibility of “realism”
and an answer to the ques tion that art in general and novel in specific can be read
based on a realis tic framework is of significance in this s tudy . As a result, the main
issue here is that how a novel’s take on reality can give rise to making reforms in
“narrative forms” and going beyond classic plot as conceptualized in Camus’s
exis tentialis tic s tance. In encountering such unaddressed issues in novel s tudies,
we can find possible answers on how exis tentialism could pave some innovative
ways in the novel world.
Findings
Some of the main findings of the s tudy are the same as follows:
Meursault, the main character or protagonis t of the novel is faced with some
psychological ques tions in court. These ques tions are to find out the psychological
aspects of the personalities and disclose the mos t private issues in relationships.
Meursault’s resis tance agains t the court is a kind of resis tance agains t the interwoven linkage between the judiciary sys tem and the psychology world. This
contras t is another interpretation for a contras t between the novel and the case
worlds.
The world of the case is the world of clarity. It is a world that makes a linkage
among the events in a causal relationship. It is to discover meaning in any event.
Rather, Meursault, one belonging to the ontology of the novel, is the protagonis t
of the world of null. This under ques tions the main trend of the case i.e. making
linkages among the unrelated affairs. It believes what leads the world has randomly
occurred, nonsense, and meaningless issues. There exis t no intersection among
them. In fact, they make no monolithic and solid end and des tiny. One of the main
results of such an approach is to under ques tion the “ classic plot”. Aris totle
argues that a plot should not be shaped in a set of unjus tifiable events. The S tranger cannot be classified in a classic plot-oriented taxonomy. In a sense
that there exis ts a new concept of “reality ” in this novel. Notably, not only is not
able to unders tand the internal world but also fails to comprehend the internal
worlds( identity of people).
Unlike psychological reality which emphasizes a unified and fixed plot, in Camus’
reading, we are faced with a set of “ I” s rather than a monolithic identity or “
I”. “ My or I des tiny” has been shaped not in a monolithic and linear plot but in
multiple and contradictory lines which are not supposed to meet each other in an
intersected place and there is no end to it.
No plot can narrate this des tiny fully and comprehensively. Indeed, the discovered
“ I” in Mary’s reading on Meursault is fully different from the “ I “ in the judge’s
eye. Which chain of events and possibilities is meaningless and meaningful in
Meursault’s life is s till a challenging debate. Mary talks about some micro-narratives which are viewed as unrelated and
insignificant in so-called macro and main narratives of the court. The main Mary’s
challenge with the court is on which narratives and criticize the classic plot. Conclusion.The current s tudy showed that how the novel i.e. the S tranger resis ts
agains t psychological realities in its form and content. Unlike psychology which
is to find out the main causes and motivations behind actions, the novel is to
discover how life is a set of unrelated and unreasonable events. Embedded in
such “ non-ontological” knowledge, there exis ts a kind of freedom and agency
as it sets the events free from what the pas t imposed on. This disclosure means
unders tanding unpredictable aspects of life which are ignored as it was dominated
by casual determinism. The present s tudy showed how exis tentialism made new
possibilities for Camus’s narratives. Different forms of narrative are not possible
regardless of philosophical and paradigmatic shifts. Indeed, forms of narrative are
not “technique”. Rather, they are “ontological”. If reality is seen as something
random and unreasonable, then the analysis of characters will be useless if it occurs
based on psychological causes. As a result, what leads narratives is “unjus tifiable action”, this is exactly what the novel discovered.
