NARRATIVE STYLE & LINGUISTIC FEATURES

NARRATIVE STYLE:

l   Patrick Suskind wrote Perfume in third person, omniscient. Suskind keeps a distance from Grenouille to create suspense, but also to prohibit the reader from feeling sympathetic to Grenouille.

l   However, Suskind sometimes writes as though he really is Grenouille. For example, in chapter 35, page 177, Suskind gives a very long description of the beauty of the woman, but in the last sentence of the description, he describes, “– her teeth like pearls and her limbs smooth as ivory – and all those idiotic comparisons.” Even though the narrator is omniscient, saying that the comparisons were idiotic makes the narrator sound like Grenouille, because Grenouille could not care less about her beauty, and probably would have called those comparisons idiotic as well.

 

LINGUISTIC FEATURES:

l   In chapter 40, page 202, everyone’s suspecting the Gypsies, the Italians, the wigmakers, the Jews, monks of the Benedictine cloister, Cistercians, the Freemasons, the lunatics from charite, the charcoal-burners, the beggars, and the nobility to be the murderer. This is an example of dramatic irony and satire because while reading this whole chapter, the reader already knows who is responsible for all these murders.

l   In chapter 44, page 221 and 229, when Richis, his people, and his daughter were alone in the house with Grenouille, there is foreshadow and irony: “Tomorrow he would let her in on the secret, he (Richis) said, but she could be certain that everything that he was planning and doing was for her good and would work towards her future happiness.” As the reader, we know that happiness is the complete opposite of what Richis’ daughter and he will have after that night. That night at the house, Richis “slept truly splendidly for the first time in months” because Richis thought that his daughter and he were in the safest place on earth, when ironically, they were under the same roof as the person they were trying to avoid.

l   On page 229, Richis was “eager almost to find her still sleeping, wanting to kiss her awake once again – one last time, before he must give her to another man.” This is satire because we know that he won’t be able to do that since she is dead, and also because this other man that Richis is giving his daughter to is Grenouille, without Richis knowing that coming.

STRUCTURE OF THE NOVEL:

l Perfume is divided into four parts:

PART I: Concludes with the end of his apprenticeship to Baldini and departure from Paris

PART II: Deals with his years of isolation and his introduction to the enlightenment society of Montpellier by the marquis

PART III: Represents residence in Grasse while developing techniques for the manufacture of perfumes

PART IV: Details flight from the site of his scheduled execution to die as on the day of his birth among the odors of Paris

l   By dividing this novel into four parts, Suskind is emphasizing the skills that Grenouille is developing while he is on his journey to create perfumes. The beginning of each part also represent Grenouille meeting new people, society and scent. For example, in Part I, Grenouille encounters many characters such as Madame Gaillard, Father Terrier and Baldini. Grenouille develops new skills being with Baldini, which helps him throughout the novel. He also meets new scent of nature in Part II, where he does not smell human odor. However, towards the end of every chapter, Grenouille leaves the people he met in each chapter. For example, Grenouille leaves Baldini towards the end of Part I. By giving unfortunate events to people who separated from Grenouille, Suskind is emphasizing that Grenouille is the one bringing unhappiness, and that Grenouille is not "normal."

l   Perfume is a suspense novel. Although the reader knows that Grenouille is guilty, the reader wonders whether and how Grenouille will be brought to justice. The novel could also be a horror novel. While it is clear that Grenouille is obsessed and insane, he performs within the confines of eighteenth century French society in a clear manner. 

Narrative Style&Linguistic Features

Narrative Style

Camus chose to write this novel as a first person narrative. It is Meursault who recounts what happens, what he feels, and what he sees, expressing himself in short, compact sentences. This makes the character of Meursault believable to the reader as we get insight into his reasoning. Meursault is considered as an observer, where he sees the surface but does not analyze the undercurrents. Unlike many first-person narrators, Meursault makes no attempt to filter his account through an awareness of its meaning.

Linguistic Features

Structure

The Outsider is separated into two parts: Part One and Part Two

Part One opens with the death of mother and ends with the murder of the Arab. By separating the story in to two parts, the reader can see how Meursault is affected by various deaths. There are three major deaths in this novel, at the beginning, middle and the end;

1. Meursault's mother dies
2. Death of Arab
3. Meursault is executed

By including the image of death throughout the novel, the reader can predict, or foreshadow what is going to happen to Meursault at the end of the novel. It can also be seen as a way for the reader to distinguish if Meursault is actually an outsider. At the beginning of the novel, when Meursault's mother had died, it is possible to see Meursault as an ordinary person, who does not want to show his feelings, therefore hiding his sadness within him. The lack of emotion or ambition throughout Part One does not greatly represent that Meursault is an outsider. He wrote the letter because his friend asked him, and he has desire to be with a woman. If the story was not titled "the Outsider", it is probably hard to tell that Meursault is abnormal. However, in Part Two, the reader notices a clear difference in Meursault. Everything he claims seems to prove that he was guilty for the murder, and he does not regret in killing the Arab. Camus separated the novel into two parts to emphasize the abnormality of Meursault compared to ordinary people.

The sentences used in this novel are short, unconnected statements, which emphasize the boredom or the lack of enthusiasm in Meursault's actions. The style used emphasizes the narrative style, which contribute to creating Meursault's character. Even though there are no jargon used, his description is very detailed, which reflect the character of Meursualt. 

The sentences gets even shorter towards the ends of the book, especially in page 102.

• The judges returned. The jury was very rapidly read a series of questions. I heard 'guilty of murder...', 'premeditation...', 'extenuating circumstances.'

This passage shows that Meursualt is eager to hear the punishment put on him. The short sentences represent rush or impatience of Meursault. It can also represent the built up of tension before Meursualt is being taken away.

The story is chronological, which allows the reader to follow the order of events, especially because of Meursault's descriptions. Meursault does not seem to care much about the time, or anything around him in Part One, however, during his imprisonment, he becomes more aware of the time. 

Repetition

There are words or phrases that are being repeated several times in the novel. Some examples include:

• "It's not my fault"
• "I couldn't be bothered"
• "it annoyed me"

By repeating the same phrase several times in the novel, it creates the character of Meursault, and makes his character believable. 

 

Another technique used by Camus is creating snap shots of scenes in page 66:

• "Raymond, the beach, the swim, the fight, the beach again, the little spring, the sun and the five shots."

By listing out what has happened to Meursault before the murder, it creates an image that he is confused about what has actually happened and trying to think back at what he has done. To the reader, this list of events create snap shots, (that we can visualize in our heads) which is like one scene of a movie. 

Diction

Camus uses wide range of vocabulary to describe the situation that Meursault is in, making him an observer. 

• "The Arabs were advancing slowly and they were already much nearer" (page 54)

By using the word "advancing", it sounds as though the Arabs are an army, approaching Meursault. This can also create a thought of a fight, building the tension before the gunshot. 

the reason why Solzhenitsyn chose a good day.

The day seems absolutely horrific for us. Getting up at 5:00am, to eat what seems like diluted dishwater and than walking to a power station, in subzero temperature throughout, to work for 10 hours, only to return back to eat more of the diluted dishwater and sleep on a uncomfortable bed.

The day, if we were to experience it, would possibly be the worst day of our lives.

However just before going to bed Shukhov is described as "pleased with life" and the day was accounted as "almost happy" The day was a good one for him.

Solzhenitsyn plays with the reader's notion of a 'bad day' as he make a good day, for the zeks, absolutely revolting.

The reader than is left to imagine what a bad day is like. The reader believes, due to this contrast, that the GULAG camps had hideous living conditions and the USSR, with approval and implementation of the GULAG system, was breaking international human right laws.

The reader is appauled with the government employees in this text, and thus sympathize with the position of the zeks

continuity and monotony.

continuity.

The lack of chapters is a clever method adopted by Solzhenitsyn

that reflets the seemingly never ending and relentless sentence

the zeks were sentenced too. The reader sympathizes with the

zeks as he two is locked within the book, unable to break, as

there seems to be no break in the prose.


The end of chapters are conventional points for the reader to

stop at and the lack of chapters handicaps the reader into

reading on. The reader, similar to the zeks, hasfreedom taken

away from himself/herself, in the form that they have to read

on.

The reader than feels easier to sympathize, or if you detest

reading, empathize with the zeks which are put on a strict

schedule, are stolen of their freedoms and our serving a endless

sentence.

monotony.

The simple authorship is combined with the lack of chapters in

this book to provide a sense of monotony throughout the novel. The book has no evident climax or buildup. There was nothing notably amazing about the plot of the book and there is no point at which the book seems like an ideal candidate for a blockbuster movie. However the humdrum tone of the novel colligates with the feel of the prison sentence, thus allowing, like the aspect of continuity, the reader to sympathize with the zeks.

literary devices and limitations to analysis.

Similar to the usage of diction, Solzhenitsyn keeps the utilization of linguistic features at a minimum, thus keeping the language of the book simple, and thus emulating the language the zeks use. The writing in casual and straightforward. The description is frank and to the point:"Shukhov was delighted. He thanked the Tartar for letting him go and said,"From now on i'll never get up late again"

A limitation to analyzing linguistic features is that the translation of the text could have lost some of the stylistic features such as alliteration. This includes russian based allusions or metaphors. The translator would have translated them out in familiar metaphors or allusion, while Solzhenitsyn would have used features native to Russia.

diction.

Solzhenitsyn uses colloquial language to effectively capture the philistic nature of the zeks.The reader assimilates himself in the prison society by getting acquainted to the word choice of Solzhenitsyn. The translator also plays a big role in the diction of the novel. The original was written in Russian and the translator, in this case, has chose to include some Russian and Ukrainian words in his translation, perhaps to increase the veritability of the interlingual rendition.

narrative voice.

The Narrative voice of Solzhenitsyn, in One day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich is in third person. The narrator seems to be omniscient concerning Shukhov however in concern to the other zeks, he seems to have the same knowledge Shukhov has. This plays in increasing the ambiguity between Shukhov's own thoughts and the narration.At points in the novel, it seems that they are the same person. There seems to be no clear distinction between Shukhov and the narrator.

However the narrator has exhibited qualities that differ himself, or herself for that matter, with Shukhov. Even though Shukhov is 'intellectual' in comparison to the other zeks as shown in(quote), he still did not understand the concept of poetry.The narrator,however, does. This exhibits the difference between the narrator and Shukhov, however, especially in the latter stages of the book, there is certain equivocalness between Shukhov's and the narrator's voice.

The narrator seems in conversation with the reader as shown in the quote,"Ah,but who's warder today?" and he seems to be explaining the situation of the GULAG to the reader. It is as if the reader is a new inmate and the narrator a experienced zek as shown in "You could never do the deal empty handed, of course.Have to slip the senior work-assigner half a kilo of fatback. Maybe a kilo, even.