Advertisement

Theorrhoea contra Realism

  • Michael Grant

Abstract

In this reading, from Theorrhoea and After (1999), Tallis addresses the various arguments elaborated by theorists against realism. The weakest of these is that it is methodologically passé, though a second idea, that reality is no longer realistic, is not much better. A more considerable argument is the ideological position deriving from Althusser, which sees realism as a form that pretends to present reality objectively and by so doing naturalises what is in fact a social and historical construct. The impossibility of realistic fiction has also been argued for on the grounds that stories have a structure different from that of life. However, the most popular arguments against realism derive from post-Saussurean linguistics, and they depend on the false belief that Saussure showed that reference is not possible. One can go further than this, and claim that all structured awareness of reality is mediated by language and therefore reality is only available to consciousness in so far as it is intra-linguistic — a form of linguistic idealism. In opposing these positions, Tallis is led to confront what he describes as the ‘topsy-turvy world’ of Derrida. Here, language is purely a matter of signifiers that never touch extra-linguistic reality: for Derrida, as for Lacan, discourse is an endless chain of signifiers, attempting vainly to fill the lack corresponding to the absent origin, an absence that is only revealed the more completely the more eagerly one seeks for it in language. Tallis is challenging one of the basic assumptions underpinning a great deal of semiotic and postmodern thought: the idea of the free ‘play’ of the signifier. It is a confusion based on the entirely erroneous notion that meaning something and existing are alternative states. As Vincent Descombes has noted, the whole set of ideas derives from Hegel’s famous dictum, that the word is the murderer of the thing. The result is a muddle, in which it is argued that, since the use of signs is necessary to represent what is absent, the absence of what is signified is necessary for the use of signs. Tallis concludes that the case against the realist novel fails absolutely.

Keywords

Colour Term Linguistic Sign True Story Popular Argument Contemporary Reality 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 1.
    Robert Scholes, The Fabulators (New York, 1967), p. 6.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Michael Boyd, The Reflexive Novel: Fiction as Critique (Toronto: Lewisburg Bucknell University Press, 1983), p. 9.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Christopher Nash, World-Games: The Tradition of Anti-Realist Revolt (London: Methuen, 1987).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Raymond Tallis, In Defence of Realism (London: Edward Arnold, 1988; second edition, Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1998).Google Scholar
  5. 6.
    A.D. Nuttall, A New Mimesis (London: Methuen, 1983), pp. vii–viii.Google Scholar
  6. 7.
    Jonathan Culler, Structuralist Poetics (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1975), p. 193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 8.
    Gerald Graff, Literature Against Itself: Literary Ideas in Modern Society (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1979), p. 10.Google Scholar
  8. 9.
    J.G. Merquior, From Prague to Paris: A Critique of Structuralist and Post-Structuralist Thought (London: Verso, 1986), p. 260.Google Scholar
  9. 10.
    Catherine Belsey, Critical Practice (London: Methuen, 1980).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 12.
    Pierre Macherey, A Theory of Literary Production, translated by Geoffrey Wall (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1978), p. 133.Google Scholar
  11. 14.
    Jean-Paul Sartre, Nausea, translated by Robert Baldick (London: Penguin, 1965), pp. 61–2. The arguments alluded to here are addressed in greater detail in In Defence of Realism, op. cit., Chapter 2, ‘As if There Could Possibly be Such Things as True Stories’.Google Scholar
  12. 15.
    Richard Rorty, ‘Professionalised Philosophy and Transcendental Culture’, Georgia Review, 1976, 30: 763–4.Google Scholar
  13. 16.
    Ferdinand de Saussure, Course in General Linguistics, translated by Wade Baskin (London: Fontana; Glasgow: Collins, 1974).Google Scholar
  14. 18.
    Robert Scholes, ‘The Fictional Criticism of the Future’, TriQuarterly, 34 (Fall, 1975). Paul de Man famously claimed that ‘it is not a priori certain that literature is a reliable source of information about anything but its own language’ (‘The Resistance to Theory’ in The Resistance to Theory (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1986), p. 11).Google Scholar
  15. 19.
    Jacques Derrida, Of Grammatology, translated by Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1976), p. 158.Google Scholar
  16. 21.
    Geoffrey Leech, Semantics (Harmondsworth: Penguin Books, 1974), p. 29.Google Scholar
  17. 22.
    See Steven Pinker, The Language Instinct: The New Science of Language and the Mind (Harmondsworth: Penguin Books, 1994).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 23.
    Terence Hawkes, Structuralism and Semiotics (London: Methuen, 1977), pp. 16–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 26.
    Jacques Derrida, ‘Différance’. The translation I have used is from Speech and Phenomena and Other Essays on Husserl’s Theory of Signs, translated by David B. Allison (Evanston, Ill.: Northwestern University Press, 1973), p. 139.Google Scholar
  20. 27.
    Jonathan Culler, On Deconstruction: Theory and Criticism after Structuralism (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1983), p. 188.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Raymond Tallis 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael Grant
    • 1
  1. 1.Rutherford CollegeThe University of KentCanterburyUK

Personalised recommendations