Autobiography as Guided Chinatown TourWord文档格式.docx

Autobiography as Guided Chinatown TourWord文档格式.docx

《Autobiography as Guided Chinatown TourWord文档格式.docx》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《Autobiography as Guided Chinatown TourWord文档格式.docx（15页珍藏版）》请在冰豆网上搜索。

sfellowChineseAmericans.AnumberofChinese-AmericancriticshaverepeatedlydenouncedTheWomanWarrior,questioningitsautobiographicstatus,itsauthenticity,itsrepresentativeness,andtherebyKingston'

spersonalintegrity.Thoughoftencouchedintheemotionallycharged,attimesopenlyaccusatory,languagecharacteristicofwhattheChinesecall"

penwars,"

thecriticalissuesraisedinthisdebatearenotmerelyofpassinginterest.Rather,theylieattheheartofanytheoreticaldiscussionofethnicAmericanautobiographyinparticularandethnicAmericanliteratureingeneral.Itwouldthereforebeinstructivetosetoutthetermsofthecontroversyandexploretheirtheoreticalramifications,withaviewtounderstandingthenatureofKingston'

snarrativeenterpriseinTheWomanWarrior.

ThemostfundamentalobjectiontoTheWomanWarriorconcernsitsgenericstatus:

itsbeingbilledasautobiographyratherthanfiction,whensomuchofthebookdepartsfromthepopulardefinitionofautobiographyasanunadornedfactualaccountofaperson'

sownlife.RespondingtoafavorablereviewofthebookbyDianeJohnsonintheNewYorkReviewofBooks,JefferyChannotes[in"

JeffChan,ChairmanofSFStateAsianAmericanStudies,AttacksReview,"

SanFranciscoJournal,May4,1977]how"

awhitereadingpublicwillraveoverethnicbiographywhileignoringaChineseAmerican'

sliteraryart"

andattacksKnopf,"

awhitepublishinghouse,"

for"

distributinganobviousfictionforfact."

ThethrustofChan'

smessageisthattheautobiographicallabelisamarketingployinwhichtheauthor,toherdiscredit,hasacquiesced.Chan'

sstrictureisechoedbyBenjaminTong,whofindsTheWomanWarrior"

obviouslycontrived,"

aworkof"

fictionpassingforautobiography"

["

CriticofAdmirerSeesDumbRacist,"

SanFranciscoJournal,May11,1977].Bywayofcontrast,whiletheunusualgenericstatusofTheWomanWarriorisalsowidelynotedbynon-Chinese-Americancritics,itisseldomcitedaseitheraweaknessoramatterofpersonal,asopposedtoartistic,purpose.

HowfarisKingstonpersonallyresponsibleforthenonfictionlabelonthecoversofTheWomanWarrior?

Accordingtoher,verylittle:

TheonlycorrespondenceIhadwiththepublisherconcerningtheclassification

ofmybookswasthathesaidthatNon-fictionwouldbethemostaccurate

category;

Non-fictionissuchacatch-allthateven"

poetryisconsidered

non-fiction."

Andpoetryissomethinginwhosecompanyshewouldbe"

flattered"

toseeherbooks.Theentiremattermighthaverestedhere--butforsometheoreticalissuesraisedbythecontroversywhichcommandaninterestbeyondthetopical.

AlthoughKingston'

sdetractorsdonotusetheterm,attheheartofthecontroversyisthequestionoffictionalization:

towhatextent"

fictional"

featuresareadmissibleinaworkthatpurportstobeanautobiography.TheChinese-AmericancriticsofTheWomanWarriorfocustheirattentiononthesocialeffectsofadmittingfictionalizationintoanautobiographicalwork.Theirconcern,variouslyworded,issummedupmostconcisely,ifbaldly,byKatherynFong:

IreadyourreferencestomythicalandfeudalChinaasfiction..

..Yourfantasystoriesareembellishedversionsofyourmother'

s

embellishedversionsofstories.Asfiction,thesestoriesarecreatively

writtenwithgraphicimageryandemotion.Theproblemisthatnon-Chinese

arereadingyourfictionastrueaccountsofChineseandChinese

Americanhistory.["

ToMaxineHongKingston:

ALetter,"

Bulletin

forConcernedAsianScholars,Vol.9,No.4,1977]

Thusstated,theWomanWarrior"

problem"

isseentorestultimatelyonthereaders,nottheauthor;

thebasisfordenouncingTheWomanWarriorispragmatic,response-contingent,andreader-specific.Why,then,hasKingstonbeenimplicatedatallinthemisreadingsofheraudience?

Itispossibletorejecttheveryquestionasirrelevant,inthatauthorshavelittlecontroloverhowtheirpublishedworkswillberead.Ontheotherhand,whencriticslikeChan,Tong,orFongholdKingstonresponsibleforherreaders'

failings,theydosofromasetofassumptionsaboutethnicliteraturethataregroundedinakeenawarenessofthesociopoliticalcontextofminorityliterarycreation.Suchanawarenessispreciselywhatismissinginmanywhitereviewers'

remarksonTheWomanWarrior;

moreover,theautobiographicalgenre,withitspromise（perceivedorreal）of"

truthfulness,"

bynatureencouragespreoccupationwithawork'

ssociopoliticalcontext.Thusthechargeofunwarrantedfictionalizationmustbeaddressed.

TheWomanWarriorcanbeconsideredfictionalizedinanumberofways.Onthemostobviousformallevel,itviolatesthepopularperceptionofautobiographyasanorderedshapingoflifeeventsanchoredintheso-calledexternalworld.ItaimsatcreatingwhatJamesOlneycalls"

arealmoforderwhereeventsbeartooneanotherarelationshipofsignificanceratherthanofchronology"

SomeVersionsofMemory/SomeVersionsofBios:

TheOntologyofAutobiography,"

Autobiography:

EssaysTheoreticalandCritical,1980].Accordingtoanearlystudentofthegenre,autobiographiesmustcontain,"

insomemeasure,thegermofadescriptionofthemannersoftheirtimes"

[RoyPascal,DesignandTruthinAutobiography,1960].Althoughrecentscholarshavefoundthereferentialgroundingofautobiographymuchmoreproblematicanditsdefiningessencemuchmoreelusive[e.g.,Olney,"

AutobiographyandtheCulturalMoment:

AThematic,Historical,andBibliographicalIntroduction,"

Autobiography;

ElizabethBruss,AutobiographicalActs:

TheChangingSituationofaLiteraryGenre,1976;

JohnPaulEakin,FictionsinAutobiography:

StudiesintheArtofSelf-Invention,1985],thetermautobiographyusuallydoesevoke,atleastamonggeneralreaders,achronologicallysequencedaccountwithverifiablereferencestoplaces,people,andevents.Asonecriticputsit,inmoreabstruselanguage:

"

Textsboundbytherealinsistuponanepistemologicalstatusdifferentfromworksoftheimaginationinwhichtherealismorenearlyhypothetical"

[ArnoldKrupat,"

TheIndianAutobiography:

Origins,Type,andFunction,"

AmericanLiterature,Vol.53,No.1,1981].Butwhatifthe"

real"

thatanautobiographyisboundbyisthe"

imagination"

oftheprotagonist?

ThisisthethornyproblemofgenericdifferentiationposedbyTheWomanWarrior.

Byanoutwardlyorienteddefinitionofautobiography,TheWomanWarriorisatbestonlynominallyautobiographical:

toborrowaphrasefromPascal,itisawork"

soengrossedwiththeinnerlifethattheouterworldbecomesblurred,"

toldbyanarratorwho,asachild,regularlysees"

freemovies"

on"

blankwalls"

and"

[t]alkstopeoplethataren'

trealinside[her]mind."

Theproseslipsfromthesubjunctivetothedeclarativewithbuttheslightestwarning:

theNoNameWomanstorybeginswithperhaps'

sandcouldhavebeen'

sbutsoondispenseswiththeseremindersofconjecture.Likewise,whiletheFaMuLansegmentin"

WhiteTigers"

isinitiallymarkedasanenumerationofthepossibleanddesirable--"

Thecallwouldcomefromabird....Thebirdwouldcrossthesun....Iwouldbealittlegirlofseven...."

（myitalics）--thebulkofthenarrationisinthesimplepasttense,asifrecountingcompletedeventsintheactualworld.TwodivergentaccountsaregivenofBraveOrchid'

sencounterwiththeSittingGhost,neitherofwhichcouldhavebeendefinitivesincetheevent（orallegedevent）predatesthebirthofthedaughter/narrator."

AttheWesternPalace,"

presentedasadeceptivelyconventional,self-containedshortstory,isrevealedinthenextchaptertobeathird-handfiction.Inshort,thereferentialgroundingofTheWomanWarrioristenuousandpresentedinapotentiallymisleadingmanner.Afewpublicplacesandeventsinthe"

outer"

worldarerecognizablefromwhatweknowaboutauthorKingston'

slife;

allelseisrecollection,speculation,reflection,meditation,imagination.Verifiabilityisvirtuallyoutofthequestioninaworksoself-reflexive.Presumably,then,readerswhodonotpaysufficientattentiontothenarrativeintricaciesofTheWomanWarrior,especiallywhitereaderswithbiasedexpectations,willmistakefictionforfact.

ThecriticsofTheWomanWarrioralsodetectfictionalization—inthesenseof"

makingthingsup"

--inthewayKingstonhaschosentotranslatecertainChineseterms.Acentralexampleisthewordghost,basedonCantonesekueiorgwai,akeyterminthebookappearinginthesubtitleaswellasseveralimportantepisodes.Kingstonrenderskueiasghost.ChanandTong（"

CriticofAdmirer"

）,whileconcedingthatthecharactercanindeedmean"

ghost"

（asin"

spiritofthedead"

）,insistthatitbetranslatedasdemon（ordevil