ABSTRACT |
It is
commonly accepted that in mágico-realistic narratives the reader
hesitates between two contradictory understandings of events, and
experiences unsettling doubts. This hesitation frequently stems from the
implicit clash of cultural systems within the narrative. This round
table proposes to focus on the results of this confrontation. For some
critics, magical realism becomes a form of calibanic discourse, insomuch
as the Other masters the European discourse of realism to undermine some
of its assumptions. Stephen Slemon, among others, has suggested that
magical realism can “signify resistance to central assimilation by more
stable generic systems and more monumental theories of literary
practice.” In contrast, other critics, like Michael Valdez Moses, claim
that just like the historical romance, magical realist writings “are
compensatory sentimental fictions that allow, indeed encourage, their
readers to indulge in a nostalgic longing for and an imaginary return to
a world that is past, or passing away.” In this sense, mágico-realistic
narratives represent no more than a purely symbolic or token resistance
to the inexorable triump of modernity. In representing their worlds as
essentially vanished, gone, victims of modernity and industrialism,
mágico-realistic writers ultimately embraced the modernity they presumed
to be resisting. This round table proposes to explore these issues with
reference to so-called ethnic American writers like R. Anaya, Ana
Castillo, Amy Tan, Maxine Hong Kingston, Toni Morrison, Linda Hogan,
Louise Erdrich and others.
|
