Structuralism (2)

1. Structuralism (2) De Saussure Q & A Structuralist Anthropology: Levi Strauss , Example 1, 安卓珍妮，“Should Wizard Hit Mommy” Structuralist Narratology: V. Propp, Examples 1, 2, 3& “Should Wizard Hit Mommy” A. J. GreimasExample 1 & “Should Wizard Hit Mommy” Readings for next week

2. Structuralism (2) 1. Structuralism--Basic Concepts 2. Structuralist Reading of Narratives 3. Semiotics and "The Myth Today" 4. From Structuralism to Poststructuralism: Binary Opposition & Deconstruction

3. Q & A (1): de Saussure, Language and Reality • What does it mean to say that language system is arbitrary, conventional and differential? • Does our language shape or reflect our perception of the world? • Does it make a difference to call your mother’s sister 姨媽, aunt or Jenny? • If we do not have the word, 緣, will we feel that meeting someone is a matter of fortunate pre-destination? • Is there any eternal or universal essence of “mother” or “maternal love”? Can we define them without using language (as a system of relations and difference)?

4. Q & A (2): de Saussure’s Major ideas? 1. The synchronic vs. the diachronic; langue vs. parole 2.Language is a system of difference.Meaning occurs in binary opposition between two signs. (e.g. toy, boy) 3.sign = signifier and signified; the connection between them is arbitrary.

5. Q & A (3): Form and Structure? Form is inseparable from meaning; (composed of all the literary elements in a text) Structure is what makes meaning possible. (e.g. [b] vs. [p]; subj+predicate; cooked vs. raw, etc.)

6. Claude Levi-Strauss 1. Studies culture as a sign system; e.g. eating customs, taboos related to menstruation, initiation rites, kinship relations. (e.g. ring in Chinese society; 戒指) 2. Kinship system: structures how things or people are “exchanged” within a culture. e.g. women in exchange for dowry. 3. We think in terms of binaries. (e.g. raw vs. cooked; good vs. bad) 4. Myth: basic units – mythemes, e.g. in Oedipus myth: overrelating and underrating of blood relations

7. Claude Levi-Strauss on Oedipus the King overrelating of blood relations: Oedipus marries his mother; Antigone buries her brother, despite prohibition; native-born underrating of blood relations: Oedipus kills his father, Laios; escape being native-born The heroic: Oedipus kills the Sphinx The supernatural/pre-destined: Oedipus=swollen foot; prophecy

8. Claude Levi-Strauss on Myth “Mythical thought always progresses from the awareness of oppositions toward their resolution.” (Structural Anthropology 224) • His approach: not to find how men think in myths, but ‘how myths think in men, unbeknown to them’ (qtd. Hawkes 41) • Myth always works simultaneously on two axes. . .like an orchestral score “

9. Levi Strauss: examples (2) “安卓珍妮” The play (interaction) of genres and genders. Biological history + romance  feminist utopia Male lover, male authorities, masculinity; different forms of sex wars + female lover, femininity female androgyny The binaries need definition and they change positions.

10. Levi Strauss: examples (2) “安卓珍妮” binaries (ref. 梅﹚: 1. Beginning of Quest

11. Levi Strauss: examples (2) “安卓珍妮” binaries 2. Conflict/Complication:

12. Levi Strauss: examples (2) “安卓珍妮” binaries 3. Intensification  climax

13. Levi Strauss: examples (2) “安卓珍妮” binaries 4. 2nd Quest; more struggle and battle

14. Levi Strauss: examples (2) “安卓珍妮” binaries 5. resolution (death, writing and waiting) feminist utopia 安文

15. Levi Strauss: examples (3) “Should Wizard Hit Mommy” preliminary understanding: Setting: a nuclear family; Characters: Jack, Jo and Clare Story within the story: Roger, mother, owl, wizard and Roger’s friends. Two sets of relationship between Jack and Jo—father/daughter, author/reader Why is Jack caught in the middle? The middle of what?

16. Levi Strauss: examples (3) “Should Wizard Hit Mommy” Jack and Jo—father/daughter, author/reader

17. Structuralist narratology: Vladimir Propp syntax as the basic model: Subject + predicate = Actor + function Propp: 7 actors, or "spheres of action" (villain, hero, false hero, donor[provider], helper, dispatcher, princess [and her father]) and 31 functions. * Actors are not characters; they are narrative functions, or types of actions of the characters. One character can be different “actors” at different moments. (e.g. Cinderella & Snow White, The Long Enchantment.)

18. A family in lack  Queen (bathing) + Toad (H)  A princess King in pride (False Hero; only twelve golden plates) feast the 11 Wise Women bless (donor) vs. the 13th curses (villain), 12th Wise Woman “not death but 100-year sleep” (helper) 11 gifts fulfilled, 1 curse shunned Propp: examples (1) Briar Rose

19. Propp: examples (1) Briar Rose • The King and Queen’s absence (dispatcher)  • the15-year-old princess out looking into the rooms  • old tower and the spindle  The spindle’s sound ‘merry’ but brings the curse on the princess: shefalls into sleep. • Every being in the kingdom sleeps too. (the princess + the kingdom)

20. Propp: examples (1) Briar Rose • Only thorny hedges grow, which kill a lot of princes (false heroes) in their attempts to rescue the princess; • 100 year pass, a king’s son comes and hears about the story; he is not afraid; he wants to “go and see the beautiful Briar-rose." • “When the King's son came near to the thorn-hedge, it was nothing but large and beautiful flowers ”

21. Propp: examples (1) Briar Rose • There she lay, so beautiful that he could not turn his eyes away; and he stooped down and gave her a kiss. But as soon as he kissed her, Briar-rose opened her eyes and awoke, and looked at him quite sweetly. • Without the “helper” (the 12th Wise Woman), prince cannot rescue Briar Rose. • Is the princess • Punished for her curiosity? 2) only waiting to be rescued? 3) just confirmed for her beauty?

22. Propp: examples (1-2) The Long Enchantment • How is this animation different from the traditional tale? • It is the horse but not the princess that falls asleep; • villain? – wizard offers the pear for no reason; • Rescuer: not a prince, but the horse first and then Flora • “My spell would break if for your sake a friend would dare to eat a pear.” • The fairy godmother cannot help. Promises that the pony will survive and waken after 1000 years. But then the wizard will still return. • The king—helpless; burning all the pear trees only building a memorial

23. Example I: “The Long Enchantment” • Structuralist • Sender of message: Pony Receiver: Flora • Subject (Heroine) of a Quest: Flora Object: Pony • Helper:Flora & Pony Themselves • Opponent: Wizard? Not a Fairy Not a Prince

24. Example I: “The Long Enchantment” 2. Sociological/Ecological: • Flora’s class background? • Why is the pear so important? • Who is the real villain? 3. Deconstruction: • The Wizard’s message. What does the pear represent in this text? A thing in nature? Delicious food?

25. Example 2: “Atlanta” Mytheme: marriage of a princess From Greek myth – • Undesirable – forsaken and raised during her childhood by a bear. • Love hunting; does not love men; oracle—her marriage will end in disaster; wins a lot of contests; • Her father wants her back  marry her • With Aphrodite’s help, Melanion runs his race with Atlanta carrying the apples with him and wins over her. But he forgets to thank A. • Zeus (the infuriated god) turns them both into lions.

26. Example 2: “Atlanta” Mytheme: marriage of a princess From Greek myth – the roles of the King and the Gods –not really helpers; have their selfish desires and prejudices.

27. Example 2: “Atlanta” Modern version: Neither of them wants to get married.

28. Propp: examples (3) James Bond’s 007 films: actor: female helpers (usu. appearing in double, one from the enemy’s side and one as Bond’s comrade); 1 major function: sex (with which usu. the films begin and end). 楊紫瓊 in 明日帝國(TOMORROW NEVER DIES)) – helper but not a lover; rescued and becomes a lover at the end.

29. Propp: examples (4): “Should Wizard Hit Mommy? ” villain, hero, false hero, donor[provider], helper, dispatcher, princess [and her father]

30. Propp: examples (4): “Should Wizard Hit Mommy? ”

31. Propp: examples (4): “Should Wizard Hit Mommy? ”

32. Propp's seven 'spheres of action‘ Greimas’s three pairs of binary oppositions, including: six roles (actants) 1. Subject/Object, 2. Sender/ Receiver 3. Helper/Opponent- Propp & Greimas (1) and three basic patterns: 1. Wanting(Desire, search, or aim), 2. Exchange(communication) 3. Contradiction(Auxiliary support or hindrance).

33. Propp's 31 functions  further abstracted into Greimas’s 3 structures; for example: Propp: “One member of a family either lacks something or desires to have something.” Propp & Greimas (2) Disequilibrium contract broken, disjunction or Performative (out for a task)

34. A. J. Greimas’s universal grammar three pairs of actants: Helper/Opponent, Sender/Receiver, Subject/Object three basic patterns of action (or syntagm): contractive (breaking/setting contract, alienation, reintegration ), disjunctive (departure, arrival), and performative(trial, task).  deep semantic structure of human thinking and narrative.

35. "the semiotic rectangle” elementary structure of signification a binary opposition & their negation A - A (e.g.hetero- marriage) (Adultery) - BB contradiction Pre-supposition Simple negation (e.g. incest taboo/homophobia) (e.g. incest/homosexuality)

36. "the semiotic rectangle” elementary structure of signification a binary opposition & their negation A - A (e.g.hetero- marriage) (Adultery) - BB Neutralized by divorce Pre-supposition Complicated by Platonic love (e.g. incest taboo/homophobia) (e.g. incest/homosexuality)

37. Story 1. Father (Sender) + Jo (Receiver)  2. Father (Performative) (Contractual) + Jo (O)  3. Father (S) + Jo asleep (O) Typical S within the story: 1. Roger (S) + ? (Opponent/Sender)  2. Roger (Disjunctive-depart)(Performative) + Owl/Wizard (H)  3. Roger (S) + ?(O) 4. Roger (S)(Disjunctive-return)+ Mother/Home (O) Father (Disjunctive-return) “Should Wizard Hit Mommy? ” with Greimasian paradigm

38. Story 1. Father (Sender) + Jo (Receiver)  2. Father (Performative) (Contractual) + getting Jo to sleep (Ob)  3. Father author (S) + Jo reader (Opponent)(Contractual)  4. Father threatens (Performative)/+ Jo quiet (Ob) 5.Father going downstairs (Disjunctive)(Contractual –with both the past mother and the present wife) Last S within the story: 1. Roger (S) + smell (Opponent)  2. Roger (Disjunctive-depart)(Performative) + Owl/Wizard (H)  3. Roger (S) + Rose(O) 4. Roger (S)(Disjunctive-return)+ Mother (not Object, but Opponent) 5. Mother (S Helper) + old Roger (O)  Wizard (Helper)old Roger (O) 6. Jo’s – Roger (S) + Mother (Opponent)  Wizard (Opponent) new Roger (S) “Should Wizard Hit Mommy? ” with Greimasian paradigm (2)

39. “Should Wizard Hit Mommy? ” with Greimasian paradigm (3) contradiction Pre-supposition Simple negation

40. “Should Wizard Hit Mommy? ” with Greimasian paradigm (4) intensified by the daughter Complicated by the Mother & the Wife’s

41. “Should Wizard Hit Mommy? ” with Greimasian paradigm (5) Stopped by threat Complicated by the Mother & the Wife’s

42. Suggestions • 1. Usually interesting analysis happens when the characters break these categories or confuse them. 2. You can set up your own categories. 3. This kind of structuralist analysis is more useful on popular cultural products or shorter texts than novels—though the latter is not an impossible choice.

43. Issues for Discussion • Do we always think in terms of binaries, or two pairs of binaries? • What else do we do after finding out the patterns?

44. Reading for next week 1. Textbook -- chap 4 15-41

45. References • Greimas:Major Ideashttp://www.eng.fju.edu.tw/Literary_Criticism/structuralism/Greimas_quotes.html • Greimas:General Introductionhttp://www.eng.fju.edu.tw/Literary_Criticism/structuralism/Greimas.html • Semiotic Square:http://hypertext.rmit.edu.au/singing/essay/greimas.html