Az Eszterházy Károly Tanárképző Főiskola Tudományos Közleményei. 2004. Vol. 4. Eger Journal of English Studies. (Acta Academiae Paedagogicae Agriensis : Nova series ; Tom. 30)
ANGELIKA REICHMANN Reading Wolf Solent Reading
46 Angelika Reichmann the narrative consciousness, but Wolf Solent's identity is generated by the text itself. So much so, that for example Nordius's interpretation of the novel as the expression of Powys's philosophy of solitude in the making (45) shows it as the "plotting out" (in the sense Peter Brooks uses the term 4) of the central metaphor of the "lone wolf" (46) inherent in the main character's name. Wolf Solent as a subject seems to be unambiguously definable by one metaphor, by his name —which appears as a clearly readable sign. However, the reader might realise that the word "solent", revealing a fundamental feature of both character and text, can actually be read as a play on words, combining sole/solitary and silent. The ambiguity inherent in his name is only one example of the multitude of carnivalesque ambiguities 5 characteristic of the novel. Through the character of Wolf Solent as the archetypal reader, reading itself is represented in the text as a form of transgression, which, instead of creating coherent and unquestionable ultimate discourses, rather opens up new gaps in the already existing ones by maintaining a constant dialogue 6 of text and reader. The acceptance of 4 Cf. Peter Brooks, Reading for the Plot — Design and Intention in Narrative (Cambridge, Massachusetts; London, England, Harvard University Press, 1984). 5 Apart from the works by Bakhtin mentioned above, cf. Julia Kristeva, "Word, Dialogue, and Novel," Desire in Language — A Semiotic Approach to Literature and Art, ed. Leon S. Roudiez, trans. Thomas Gora, Alice Jardine and Leon S. Roudiez (New York, Columbia University Press, 1980), 64-91. 6 I use the word "dialogue" in the Bakhtinian sense here (cf. M. M. BaxTHH, ripoÓJieMbi nodmuKu JJocmoeecKOZo and Julia Kristeva, "Word, Dialogue, and Novel"), Cf. K. TOMCOH, "ÜHa/iorHHecKají noaTWKa BaxTWHa." trans, from English into Russian A. MaxoB and T. IUeraJiOBa. M. M. Baxmun: pro et contra — Jlunxocmb u meopvecmea M. M. Baxmuna e ov,enice pyccKoü u Mupoeoü MUCJIU. Vol. 1, ed., introduction and commentary K. P. McynoB (CaHKT-IleTep6ypr, PXPH, 2001), 312322. Thomson claims that Bakhtin's notion of the dialogue is a much debated one and his contemporary interpreters often emphasise such aspects of his ideas which are not sufficiently detailed and elaborated to settle the issue. He himself suggests taking it as a "strategy" of polemics which Bakhtin himself usually applied when he, without any intention to nivellate them, let the ideas of his opponents speak for themselves in his writings. Thomson, relying on Ken Hirschkop's opinion, treats this "strategy" as a "kind of populist deconstruction" (313), which clearly relates Bakhtin's critical writings with poststructuralist, rather than structuralist reading strategies. A similarly broad understanding of the term is also reflected by the special edition of the Hungarian journal of literary criticism, Helikon, on the dialogue. Cf. Változatok a dialógusra — Helikon — Irodalomtudományi Szemle XLVÍI (2001/1). Peter Brooks in his short study, "The idea of a psychoanalytic literary criticism" [Discourse in Psychoanalysis and Literature, ed.
