『サテュリコン』の「信用できない語り手」エンコルピウス

概要

論文の詳細を見る
'Unreliable narrator' is a term of modern literary theory, applied to a type of narrator who, telling of his past experiences in I-narration, has some defects of character. We readers cannot accept what he says at face value, for he twists the facts according to his peculiar stand point, which is quite different from the author's. The author represents the narrator with an irony, which he expects the readers to notice and enjoy. Few people regard Encolpius, the hero and narrator of Satyricon, as reliable. In short, he is a narrator who tells us wild fancies. What he has to tell are vulgar matters in reality, but, filtered by him, they are transformed into heroic or romantic visions conveyed in lofty language. These basic points about the nature of Encolpius' narration have been understood properly, but it seems to me that scholars have not analyzed the text itself adequately. What I attempt here is to analyze two typical scenes and to reveal the ingenious devices that Petronius uses to show the foolishness of the narrator's vision. It must be noted that Encolpius is not unreliable in all scenes of the novel. He is reliable in such realistic episodes as the 'Cena.' Most of the scenes where one needs to doubt him are in the love affair episodes. First I discuss the quarrel scene between Encolpius and Ascyltos over Giton(Ch. 79, 9-80, 8). Many scholars have pointed out that the lofty style of Encolpius betrays his foolishness, but it may be objected that such a style is appropriate, for it is his dearest lover, Giton, that he was robbed of here. Certainly the grand style is one of the clues the author gives to indicate his irony, but he gives us another clue here. That is the words and behaviour of other characters, and from them we can infer how the situation really was before it was filtered by Encolpius. In this scene Encolpius is lost in a heroic fancy, but the reality is far from such heroism. This is reflected first in the contrast between Encolpius' vocabulary and Ascyltos'. Encolpius thinks his relationship to Giton and to Ascyltos very sublime, as is shown by his moralistic words, 'amicitia,' 'fides,' 'iniuria.' On the other hand, Ascyltos regards Giton only as an object of sex, as is suggested by his 'meam partem' or 'praeda.' Secondly, Encolpius believes that he is fighting a great battle, as is clear from 'parricidali manu,' 'composui ad proeliandum gradum,' while Ascyltos calls it only 'discordia.' In the last scene the behaviour of Ascyltos and Giton reveals the cold fact before filtered by Encolpius. Giton chooses Ascyltos with no hesitation. This means that Giton had long been conspiring with him and had no intention of choosing Encolpius. One can see how foolish the hero is, in that he expected 'vetustissimam consuetudinem in sanguinis pignus transisse.' Next, I analyze the scene of the love affair between the hero and Circe, who is an upper-class lady in Croton. Here Encolpius thinks her like a goddess, and their relationship very sublime, like that between a goddess and her worshiper. This is clear from a series of descriptions of her and from his religiously coloured language in Ch. 127, 3-4. It is Circe's speeches and behaviours that reveal this to be only a fancy. Her speech in Ch. 127 is rather indirect, but what she means is obvious. She is requiring a sexual relationship of him. In Ch. 128, the two discuss the cause of Encolpius' impotence. Circe thinks of sober reasons, while Encolpius insists the cause is a drug. Lastly, her reaction described in detail in Ch. 128, 3-4 is noteworthy. It is a quite unromantic description of her attitude, such as 'excussit vexatam solo vestem.' The goddess-like image Encolpius entertained is completely ruined by the description. It is unlikely that the primary aim of Petronius in these scenes is to parody a particular genre or to satirize a certain type of human character. I am of the opinion that the primary aim is to entertain the readers by showing the comical discrepancy between Encolpius' wild fancy and the cold fact. Unreliable narration in the first person presents a problem, in that it may puzzle readers as to how to understand some passages, since we have to get clues of the author's irony from the words of the unreliable narrator himself. However, the ingenuity of such a device as exploited by Petronius in Satyricon outweighs this potential fault.
1998-03-23

『サテュリコン』の「信用できない語り手」エンコルピウス

スポンサーリンク

概要

論文 | ランダム

スポンサーリンク