482 Narratology, Feminist

Narratology, Feminist
R E Page, University of Central England, Birmingham, UK
2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Feminist narratology emerged as a distinctive area within narrative theory in the late 1980s. It might be understood as a response to classical narratology where earlier models and approaches are revisited and critiqued from a feminist perspective. In its broadest sense, feminist narratology embraces the study of narrative (including its formal features, interpretation, and function) with particular attention to the ways in which these might inform or be informed by aspects of feminist theory. However, defining what constitutes both feminism and narratology is not unequivocal, for both terms encompass a range of diverse positions. This has led to some debate as to the validity of feminist narratology. In its strictest sense, narratology might be understood as describing the abstract systems behind literary narratives, in which case feminist narratology has been deemed problematic for it is understood to be concerned with matters in the domain of application and interpretation (Diengott, 1988). However, the development and diversification of contemporary narrative theory have broadened its realms to include nonliterary texts and theoretical paradigms, thus incorporating the potential influence of feminism(s) in this enterprise. Like the multiplicity characterizing narrative and feminist theories, feminist narratology cannot be said to present a unified school. Instead, work that might be considered under this umbrella term spans varied terrain. This is not ad hoc, but might be grouped together in distinctive streams. Each of these is discussed below.

breastfeeding, childbirth, and the female orgasm (Winnett, 1990). The corollary of this is a binary pairing of linear versus nonlinear plots, which is then transposed onto male and female values and experience. This opposition is not unproblematic, and though it reflects a second wave feminist impulse to identify difference and to recoup, indeed celebrate female alternatives, this stream of feminist narratology has been critiqued in later years. In line with the shift away from essentialism, a recognition of the socially constructed nature of gender and an increased awareness of cultural diversity in feminist thought, these studies have been termed Eurocentric and interrogated for their potential elitism (Homans, 1994). Furthermore, the psychoanalytic theory that these models draw on has itself been challenged in a variety of ways. In particular, the universal mapping of gender onto erotic desire or the death drive has been questioned. This has led to closer attention to the specific intersections of gender, plot structure, and cultural situation as they are manifest in specific texts and contexts.

Postclassical Narratology
A second, and highly influential, stream of feminist narratology is that which might be termed postclassical. This work has followed the imperative given in Susan Lansers seminal paper Toward a feminist narratology (1986) to re-examine the classical models of narratology. As Lansers groundbreaking paper indicates, the intersection of narratology and feminist theory exists as a dialectic relationship whereby both paradigms are informed and altered by the other. Studies in this area might be understood not only as illuminating texts by or about women in the light of narratological analysis (examples of applied narratology) but also as challenging or extending the narratological frameworks employed. Central to this re-evaluation of classical narratology is the move away from structuralisms attempt to identify universal components of narrative (for example, Propp, 1968 [1928]; Barthes, 1977; Labov, 1972). In line with narratologys shift toward a more contextualist stance, postclassical feminist narratology seeks to understand the form and function of narratives in relation to specific texts and contexts. Underpinning this is a critique of the limitations imposed by corpora as seen from a feminist perspective. As Lanser puts it, the narratives which have provided the foundation for narratology have been either mens texts or texts treated as mens texts (1986: 343). Specific studies have pursued this matter further. Notable examples include the re-evaluation of

Psychoanalytic Plot Dynamics

Feminist narratology has been usefully applied in studies derived from psychoanalytic theory that explore issues of plot dynamics. The premise underpinning this approach is that the trajectory of plot may be conceptualized in terms of desire, both of which then may be related to gender. Thus, Brooks characterizes the progressive rise and subsequent decline of tension in conventional, action-driven plot structure as the male plot of ambition (1984: 39). Feminist critics have sought to expose the gendered erotics behind this paradigm and instead have offered alternatives where the stereotypical characteristics of womens writing as repetitive, cyclical, or resistant to closure are associated with dynamics of desire grounded in explicitly female experience, such as

Narratology, Feminist 483

Labovs work on narratives of personal experience where the apparent neglect of gender as a salient speaker variable (at least in certain subsequent applications of his model) has been called into question. The feminist application of narrative theory to texts by women has gone on to be far-reaching and highly fruitful, encompassing the re-evaluation of many different aspects of narratology. This includes studies of plot; closure; narration and voice; manipulation of time; reader response; focalization; and spatialization. Although the individuality of particular studies should not be underestimated, a general (although not unequivocal) trend found in this kind of approach has been to explore the distinctive character of these texts in relation to a binary model of gender. This is inherent in the direction indicated by Lansers (1986) paper, which is shaped by the secondwave feminist emphasis on the difference of womens writing and speech. Significant collections of this kind of work include Mezei (1996). Clearly, this postclassical re-evaluation has been a vital stage, not only in elucidating a range of texts that had been excluded from the canon but also in re-energizing aspects of narratology. However, shifts in feminist theory have now begun to have an impact on more recent approaches in feminist narratology. In particular, the influence of Butlers (1990) work has resulted in the replacement of a reductive, binary model with an acceptance of the potentially shifting and multiple nature of gender as performed by individuals in particular situations. The outworking of this has yet to fully emerge, but has included interpreting nonconventional narrative structures, intertextuality, and multiple voices as forms of performance (Page, 2003a).

Linguistic Studies
One of the proposed outcomes of feminist narratology as indicated by Lansers paper was the exploration of whether or not womens writing of narratives differed from that of men and hence could be located as a separate tradition. This investigation of gender difference in relation to storytelling style may be paralleled with the analysis of nonliterary narratives taking place in other research paradigms. Specifically, the sociolinguistic work that has come to be known as feminist linguistics has included within it the study of women and mens conversational narratives. This may be considered as a third significant subfield of feminist narratology. Work in this area has examined data from a range of cultures and contexts. The results of this indicate that, within certain contexts, there does seem to be a measure of evidence for women and mens differing use of

linguistic features in storytelling styles. This has focused on specific areas, such as uses of evaluation (Page, 2002), humor (Eggins and Slade, 1997), the creation of narrative worlds (Johnstone, 1990), and the use of reported speech (Coates, 2000). Although they indicate points of difference, these studies caution against the simplistic mapping of isolated narrative features onto a single variable such as gender. Rather, the trend has been to argue that speakers use of narrative features might be seen in terms of performance where these features act as contextualization cues for gender that may interact in complex ways with other potential influences such as class, ethnicity, or sexuality. Moreover, these studies are grounded in local contexts, from which abstracting a generalized conclusion about a definitive narrative style distinguished on the grounds of gender is seen as untenable. The analysis of narrative and gender has also been influential in the study of identity in the social sciences, particularly as means of understanding the ways in which individuals use storytelling as a means of self-portrayal, a way to explore possible selves, and a way to negotiate alignment with their audience(s). Individual studies range across diverse areas from preschoolers use of narrative (Kyratzis, 1999) to the construction of masculine identity (Coates, 2001). These studies reinforce many of the points made earlier, particularly that the correlation of gender and narrative features must be understood as dynamic and jointly constructed and reconstructed by those who produce and interpret narratives in particular contexts. One further area of significance is the analysis of media narratives from a feminist perspective. These studies often draw on critical discourse analysis, but may use frameworks derived from narratology (focalization, evaluation, characterization) in conjunction with this in order to interrogate the relationships between form, content, and ideology. In contrast to the work on literary narratives, though these studies do point to the differences in the representation of groups of women and men, they are also concerned with the origins and sociopolitical ends to which these narrative representations may be put. For example, the objectification of women (constructing them as the focalized) might be understood as reflecting and maintaining the masculinist agenda of the media, thereby continuing to perpetrate gendered stereotypes with negative effects for women. This has been the subject of extensive work and intersects with research in media studies and discourse analysis. The data that have been analyzed include advertisements (Mills, 1995), magazine articles (Caldas-Coulthard, 1996), newspaper reports (Caldas-Coulthard, 1995;

484 Narratology, Feminist

Page, 2003b), and web pages (Chandler-Olcott and Mahar, 2003). Although not strictly within the domain of feminist narratology as such, the intersection of feminism and narrative theory has also been highly influential in feminist film theory. Key theorists in this field are Mulvey (1975) and De Lauretis (1984), both of whom draw heavily on semiotics and psychoanalytic theory in their feminist interpretations of gender politics, desire, and pleasure in film. In particular, Mulveys work developed a theory of the male gaze that argues that in its voyeurism, the structures of Hollywood cinema must be understood as patriarchal and therefore rejected by feminists. De Lauretis also focuses on the power dynamics inherent in the structures of narrative desire and, via psychoanalysis and semiotics, maps this gendered paradigm (male as agent, female as object) onto the processes of representation. As with the psychoanalytically inflected feminist narratology, this work has been subsequently critiqued for its essentialism and universalizing tendency, with later work calling for recognition of genders intersection with other variables such as sexuality, race, class, and cultural context, thereby embracing feminisms increasing multiplicity. Feminist narratology is thus a diverse enterprise that continues to expand along with narratologys influence. Despite this diversity, many of these studies reflect similar shifts in feminist thought. This includes the early preoccupation with exploring narrative in relation to gender difference in line with second-wave feminism; a contextualist position where gender is seen as one of multiple, intersecting variables that influence particular tellings in specific situations; and a third-wave understanding of gender as performed and shifting rather than a fixed, stable entity. As such, the feminist theory that has influenced this field includes both French feminists and those from the Anglo-American school. Feminist narratologys wide-ranging use in applications across disciplinary boundaries suggests that it is a field that will continue to shape and be shaped by changes in feminist thought and perspectives from other research paradigms.
See also: Critical Discourse Analysis; Gender and Language; Narrative: Linguistic and Structural Theories; Stylistics, Feminist.

Bibliography
Barthes R (1977). Introduction to the structural analysis of narratives. In Heath S (ed.) ImageMusicText. London: Fontana. 77124. Brooks P (1984). Reading for the plot: Design and intention in narrative. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Butler J (1990). Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York and London: Routledge. Caldas-Coulthard C (1995). Men in the news: The misrepresentation of women speaking in news-as-narrative-discourse. In Mills S (ed.) Language and gender: Interdisciplinary perspectives. London: Longman. 226239. Caldas-Coulthard C (1996). Women who pay for sex. And enjoy it: Transgression versus morality in womens magazines. In Caldas-Coulthard C R & Coulthard M (eds.) Texts and practices: Readings in critical discourse analysis. London: Routledge. 250270. Chandler-Olcott K & Mahar D (2003). Tech-savviness meets multiliteracies: Exploring adolescent girls technologymediated literacy practices. Reading Research Quarterly 38(3), 356386. Coates J (2000). Small talk and subversion: Female speakers backstage. In Coupland J (ed.) Small talk. Harlow: Pearson Education. 241263. Coates J (2001). My mind is with you: Story sequences in the talk of male friends. Narrative Inquiry 11(1), 81101. De Lauretis T (1984). Alice doesnt: Feminism, semiotics, cinema. London: Macmillan. Diengott N (1988). Narratology and feminism. Style 22(1), 4260. Eggins S & Slade D (1997). Analysing casual conversation. London: Cassell. Homans M (1994). Feminist fictions and feminist theories of narrative. Narrative 2, 316. Johnstone B (1990). Stories, community and place. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Kyratzis A (1999). Narrative identity: Preschoolers self construction through narrative in same-sex friendship group dramatic play. Narrative Inquiry 9(2), 427455. Labov W (1972). Language in the inner city. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Lanser S (1986). Toward a feminist narratology. Style 20(3), 341363. Mezei K (ed.) (1996). Ambiguous discourse: Feminist narratology and British women writers. Chapel Hill and London: University of North Carolina Press. Mills S (1995). Feminist stylistics. London: Routledge. Mulvey L (1975). Visual pleasure and narrative cinema. Screen 16(3), 618. Page R E (2002). Evaluation in childbirth narratives told by women and men. Discourse Studies 99116. Page R E (2003a). Feminist narratology? Literary and linguistic perspectives on gender and narrativity. Language and Literature 4356. Page R E (2003b). Cherie: Lawyer, wife, mum: Contradictory patterns of representation in media reports of Cherie Booth/Blair. Discourse and Society 14(5), 559579. Propp V (1968 [1928]). The morphology of the folktale. Austin: University of Texas Press. Winnett S (1990). Coming unstrung: Women, men, narrative and principles of pleasure. Publications of the Modern Language Association 105, 505518.