A long ideation process
It is not uncommon for a 19th-century writer's work to gain the attention of 20th-century theorists, after all, all great art is forward-looking. Yet the novel can be fully discussed, almost not in an artistic way, but in a totally philosophical way, as if it were no longer an independent and self-consistent work of art, but a figurative commentary on a certain philosophical idea.
The conception of Bouvard and Peguille went through a long process, even more complex and tortuous than Flaubert's other novels. According to the relevant records of the seventh chapter of Li Jianwu's "Flaubert's Commentary", the novel may have been conceived around 1843, and the writer's close friend Du Gang mentioned in the "Memoirs": "From 1943 onwards, he told me that he intended to write the story of two transcribes. These two transcriptors, who occasionally inherited a small fortune, immediately resigned from their posts and went into hiding in the countryside..." This is the earliest plot conception of Bouvard and Peguire.
Unfinished Masterpiece, by Bernard Richards Editor-in-Chief, Translated by Sardine, Edition: Shuangyou Culture | China Pictorial Press, May 2021
And in 1850, we can see his further conception of the novel in a letter to another friend, Buye: "You think of the Entry Into the World Quotations, which is wonderful. This book is completely written, preceded by a good preface, explaining why this book was written, the purpose is to make everyone return to the old system, return to order, return to the general rules, and at the same time use a special style to line out, the reader sees, does not know that people are making fun of. Yes or no, this may be a miracle book that can succeed, because it is very timely. ”
What does the Entry Quotations here have to do with the stories of the two transcripts? Judging from the later conceived works, it is likely that this "quotation" was originally conceived in the second part of the novel, the Dictionary of Yongmi. The "good order" corresponding to this part is connected by the transcriptor's story, which in turn gives the whole work a rather peculiar structure. Sure enough, two years later, in a letter to his lover, Madame Degli Gaulai, Flaubert wrote: "I sometimes have a terrible itch in my heart, and I really hope to insult the whole of mankind, and in the near future, ten years later, in a novel of some great framework, I will do it." At present, an old idea has emerged again, that is, my "Dictionary of Mediocrity". (Do you know what kind of book this is?) The preface especially excites me, which is a book in itself, and by the way I conceive of it, no law can catch me, even if I attack everything in it. It will celebrate for an unprecedented time everything that people agree with. I will show that the majority is always justified and the minority is always wrong. I will sacrifice great men, all fools, martyrs, all executioners, all in an extremely exaggerated, rocket-like style. Although it was not until 1872, after completing the textual revision of The Temptation of St. Antony, that writers began to really begin to make various preparations for the creation of the novel, the general idea, the purpose of the writing, and the overall style of the work set the tone 20 years ago.
Book cover of Bouvard and Peguile
Formally start writing
In August 1874, Flaubert officially began to write, initially dividing the novel into three volumes. The first ten chapters, the first volume, tell the story of Bouvard and Pejuche, much like Du gang's memoirs: two transcribes who had retired to the countryside because of a considerable inheritance had taught themselves various knowledge and wanted to try some ideal career. However, all their efforts failed, and finally they simply resumed the business of copying. The second volume of the novel consists entirely of quotations, and the content is a variety of excerpts from the books that the two protagonists read in the first volume. The third volume is the end, and the writer plans to complete the novel after a little explanation of the story of the two people. Flaubert had expected to complete the work within two to three years, but in fact the progress of the novel was rather difficult, and until his death, he had only completed parts of the entire second and first volumes.
Bouvard and Peguille is a novelly structured novel that is also in keeping with its author's constant quest for form. Embedding a large number of non-narrative texts in a narrative work, making the novel move between fiction and reality, events and ideas, coupled with this avant-garde "sandwich-like" structure, it is no wonder that it was criticized by some conservative critics at that time. It was not until nearly a century later that Roland Barthes, a representative figure of French structuralist philosophy, discovered the dazzling elements of modernity in this work and regarded it as a prophecy about the modern world.
The first edition of the Dictionary of Yong sees
But rather than focusing on the entire novel of Bouvard and Peguille, Barthes is more interested in the second chapter, the Dictionary of The Vulgar. Unlike 19th-century critics, Barthes no longer tried to judge whether the novel itself constituted a qualified "narrative work", but focused on language, or rather, Flaubert's attitude toward language. In the same way, he sees the kind of boredom that the author shows in the novel, which on the surface is directed at elitist knowledge, and thus gives rise to the idea of "mediocrity"; but in fact it is even more tired of the act of constructing the edifice of knowledge in language. Flaubert, or Barthes, was not only tired of "mediocrity", but also of "dictionaries". This encyclopedic way of abstracting the objective world into a language, and then classifying and assembling it is indeed enough to be the object of their ridicule and ridicule.
In the 19th century, when writers lived, "encyclopedias" of all kinds were all the rage, from miscellaneous quotations that recorded professional or everyday conversations or terminology to pamphlets instructing upper-class ladies on how to socialize more effectively, and this comprehensive genre similar to pocket dictionaries also attracted Flaubert. In fact, the "encyclopedia", or the way of thinking of compiling the "encyclopedia", is not a new thing, and the naturalist (old) Pliny, who lived during the Roman Empire in the first century AD, is famous for his encyclopedic masterpiece "Naturalist". This natural science research work full of fantasy imagination is not only similar to the mythological thinking in the early civilization of mankind, but also full of magnificent literary color. It can be said that in different historical stages, especially those who tend to rely on human knowledge, wisdom and extensive knowledge to conquer the objective world, there have been various "encyclopedias", but in France in Flaubert's time, this "ambition" to grasp knowledge has gradually become a carving and pestering trick used by a certain class, and living things or phenomena have given way to stale descriptive language, and people seem to be keen on generalization and producing all kinds of aphorisms. And true expression and true knowledge are becoming more and more barren.
Unfinished works, "Dictionary of Mediocrity"
Nowadays, when you open the Dictionary of Yongzhi, all you can see is some very simple entries, the language is concise, and most of the content becomes very inexplicable once it is detached from the specific historical context. For example, ice cubes: "there is a danger of eating"; thorn bushes: "always gloomy, not allowed to enter", and so on. Time has passed, and looking back at the annotations of these words, one can still feel a certain irritation of Flaubert in stating and recording them, a kind of physiological exhaustion caused by the excessive use of discourse, over-interpretation. For thousands of years, human beings have been able to tirelessly build the Tower of Babel of language so majestic and rich, but this does not prove that human beings will be more creative in language than other places, but it is more reflective of human triviality and long-winding, and the mediocrity and incompetence behind it. And this incompetence and cumbersomeness is manifested by the seemingly grandiose, rather large system of linguistic expression, and even the more exquisite and peculiar this system is constructed, the more likely it is that the expression itself will not be able to reach the specific meaning it wants. The paradox formed between the signifier and the signified of language has a great ironic effect and is full of modernity. And this is what Barthes points out, the central crux of modern society: the extreme sophistication of form and the great loss of meaning can go hand in hand.
Flaubert
In fact, judging from the contents of the Dictionary of The Vulgar, the exposure of ugly and self-righteous public images and social order as part of cultural production has always been nothing new. Even many times, the ridicule of popular culture and kitsch lifestyles itself becomes part of kitsch. For example, many years ago, an American writer named Paul Fossel published two books in two years: "Style" and "Vice". Their content complements each other and aims to shed light on the inadequacies and hypocrisy of contemporary American public culture.
However, it has become a best-selling public book, because people love to use such books as "lightning rods" to hide the fact that they have lost the ability to judge culture. To know that such a serious "cause" of cultural criticism is now being dissolved by the people's consumption impulses and the self-satisfaction of desires, just like many other "causes", what everyone needs is a simple and pragmatic guide, which is convenient to carry through the streets and alleys, and carefully distinguish what is tasteful and what is vulgar according to its instructions. Because of this, when Flaubert wrote Bouvard and Pegusche, he realized that his "scope" might be too big, too big to even be able to retreat. "I become them, and their stupidity is mine" (Flaubert). Thus, when the critical intention of the Dictionary of Philistines departs from a particular period of development in history, even the author himself will feel that what he reveals is actually the universality of existence that human beings show through discourse.
Dictionary of Yongjian, by Flaubert, translator: Shi Kangqiang, edition: East China Normal University Press, August 2015
"I became them" somewhat explains why the novel became a work that could not be completed for a long time, but more importantly, there is a writer's earnest reflection on his own creative intentions: that is, when all the "mediocrity" recorded by Bouvard and Pejuche, and the "mediocrity" they point to, are presupposed to be the lack of subjective consciousness that can touch the essence of human existence, it means that this irrefutable "fact" itself may lack artistic expression. When anyone inevitably speaks of certain words in this dictionary throughout the day, can the so-called "personality" still be a standard? Flaubert confirmed through the extreme irony of the lack of individuality that only mediocrity is infinite and absolute, and human convergence became a universal reality that writers were most reluctant to face and most difficult to escape in their creative careers. Moreover, this reality eventually conquered his writing, enveloping his creative artistic language in the lacklusterity of vulgarity itself. This may be the regurgitation of writing, when we gaze at an important question, we think that we can grasp it in its entirety in a special way, when in fact, we may end up grasping it. Flaubert's method was his artistic irony, but he had an incomplete mentality toward the object he was trying to criticize from beginning to end, so to what extent could this unique, well-used method work?
Mr. Shi Kangqiang, the translator of the Dictionary of Mediocrity, wrote in the afterword: "He [referring to Flaubert] convinces people that simply accepts a kind of inner discipline can strip themselves of the bourgeoisie; as long as they practice noble thoughts in private, they can continue to enjoy their property and privileges with a clear conscience." The writer has a lifetime of contempt for the bourgeois Mannerism, believing that his writing is trying to reconstruct an "inner discipline" and that this is the unique function of art, at least ironic, negative art. However, the writer has never been a thorough revolutionary, and what kind of negation is the "negation of art" that he believes in, how should it be denied, and to what extent? It can be said that the irony in the novel has reached the extreme in his works, but it has also come to its own boundaries.
Author | Chen Yanjing
Edit | Miyako
Proofreading | Zhao Lin