9卷 第1期
School of Foreign Language and Literature, Chongqing Normal University, Chongqing 401331, China
纸质出版：2025-05-29
Scan QR Code
(2025). Theoretical Impasse of Rhetoric Narratology. 批评理论（英文版）, 9(1), 5-12.
Yuan Yuan,Hu Ruyun.Theoretical Impasse of Rhetoric Narratology[J].Critical Theory,2025,09(01):5-12.
(2025). Theoretical Impasse of Rhetoric Narratology. 批评理论（英文版）, 9(1), 5-12. DOI： 10.47297/wspctWSP2515-470201.20250901.
Yuan Yuan,Hu Ruyun.Theoretical Impasse of Rhetoric Narratology[J].Critical Theory,2025,09(01):5-12. DOI： 10.47297/wspctWSP2515-470201.20250901.
Originating from the Chicago School in American academia during the latter half of last century
rhetorical narratology has become one of the most influential sub-trends of narratology in its post-classic phase. Rhetoric narratology essentially views storytelling as a communicative process whereby the author achieves specific effects on the audience. In its theoretical system
"the Implied Author"
a concept first put forward by Wayne Booth
takes up a pivotal position
while the narrative communication model elaborated by James Phelan serves as the overall frame integrating its core ideas. However
the ambiguity integral to Booth's definition of "the Implied Author" foreshadows the problems
notably causal inversion and circular reasoning
in rhetorical narratology's theorization about narrative
and Phelan's elaboration of the narrative communication model
instead of overcoming such problems
only throws them into sharper relief. Because of the autonomy displayed by narrative's production and the openness of its reception
it is unjustified to treat storytelling and communication as qualitatively similar processes. To do this would overstretch the explanatory power of the (implied) author's communicative intention by tracing back to it everything concerning a narrative's production and reception
which is prone to lead the critic into a trap of circular reasoning.
Abbott, H. P. (2011). Reading intended meaning when none is intended. Poetics Today , 32 (3), 461-487. https://doi.org/10.1215/03335372-1336592
Alber, J. (2018). Rhetorical ways of covering up speculations and hypotheses, or why empirical investigations of real readers matter. Style, 52 (1), 34–39. https://doi.org/10.5325/style.52.1.0034
Aristotle. (2018). Rhetoric . In J. Padgett, M. Allman, D. Mansfield, & T. Douglas (Eds.), Ancient Greek philosophers (pp. 377–523). Canterbury Classics. (Original work published ca. 350 BCE)
Barthes, R. (1977). The death of the author. In Image, music, text (S. Heath, Trans., pp. 142–148). The Nobody Press. (Original work published 1967)
Biazzo, F. (2024). What is the work of art? Aesthetics and hermeneutics in H.-G. Gadamer. Critical Inquiry, 8 (1), 46-57. https://doi.org/10.47297/wspctWSP2515-470205.20240801
Booth, W. C. (1983). The rhetoric of fiction (2nd ed.). University of Chicago Press.
Booth, W. C. (2005). Resurrection of the implied author: Why bother? In J. Phelan & P. J. Rabinowitz (Eds.), A companion to narrative theory (pp. 75–88). Blackwell.
Caracciolo, M., & Kukkonen, K. (2018). Hitting the wall? The rhetorical approach and the role of reader response. Style, 52 (1), 45–50. https://doi.org/10.5325/style.52.1.0045
Chatman, S. (1978). Story and discourse: Narrative structure in fiction and film . Cornell University Press.
Dawson, P. (2018). Rhetorical poetics: Between creative writing and deconstruction. Style, 52 (1), 66-72. https://doi.org/10.5325/style.52.1.0066
Eliot, T. S. (2006). Tradition and individual talent. In Q. Guoqiang (Ed.), A reader of the 20th century Western literary criticism (pp. 39–47). Fudan University Press. (Original work published 1919)
Forster, E. M. (2005). Aspects of the novel . Penguin Classics. (Original work published 1927)
Foucault, M. (1979). What is an author? In J. V. Harari (Ed.), Textual strategies (pp. 141–160). Taylor & Francis.
Fowles, J. (2004). The French lieutenant's woman . Vantage Books. (Original work published 1969)
Foxwell, J., Alderson-Day, B., Fernyhough, C., & Woods, A. (2020). "I've learned I need to treat my characters like people": Varieties of agency and interaction in writers' experiences of their characters' voices. Consciousness and Cognition , 79, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2020.102901
Herman, D. (2005). Histories of narrative theory (I): A genealogy of early developments. In J. Phelan & P. J. Rabinowitz (Eds.), A companion to narrative theory (pp. 19–35). Blackwell.
Levinson, S. C. (2014). Pragmatics . Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Phelan, J. (1989). Reading people, reading plots: Character, progression, and the interpretation of narrative . University of Chicago Press.
Phelan, J. (1996). Narrative as rhetoric . Ohio State University Press.
Phelan, J. (2005). Living to tell about it . Cornell University Press.
Phelan, J. (2017). Somebody telling somebody else: A rhetorical poetics of narrative . Ohio State University Press.
Phelan, J. (2018). Authors, resources, audiences: Toward a rhetorical poetics of narrative. Style, 52 (1), 1-34. https://doi.org/10.5325/style.52.1.0001
Phelan, J., & Frow, J. (2022). Reading characters rhetorically. Narrative, 30 (2), 255-265. https://doi.org/10.1353/nar.2022.0018
Richardson, B. (2011). Introduction: The implied author—Back from the grave or simply dead again? Style, 45 (1), 1–10. https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5325/style.45.1.1
Ricoeur, P. (1990). Time and narrative (Vol. 1). University of Chicago Press.
Shen, D. (2020). Rhetorical narratology: A keyword in critical theory. Foreign Literature , 1, 80–95.
Shen, D. (2021). Debating rhetorical narratology: Challenges, defenses, and complementary relations. Thinking, 47 (2), 131–139.
Taylor, M., Hodges, S. D., & Kohányi, A. (2003). The illusion of independent agency: Do adult fiction writers experience their characters as having minds of their own? Imagination, Cognition and Personality, 22 (4), 361–380. https://doi.org/10.2190/FTG3-Q9T0-7U26-5Q5X
Wimsatt, W. K., & Beardsley, M. C. (1946). The intentional fallacy. The Sewanee Review, 54 (3), 468–488. https://www.jstor.org/stable/27537676
Wimsatt, W. K., & Beardsley, M. C. (1949). The affective fallacy. The Sewanee Review, 57 (1), 31–55. https://www.jstor.org/stable/27537833
Related Articles
Related Author
Related Institution
京公网安备11010802024621