This term paper analyses Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's "The Sign of Four" in the light of Juri Lotman's theories of space and boundary crossings. Arthur Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes novel provides a good example for the representation of both Britishness and the foreign, exotic other. It reflects a cultural worldview of imperial Britain at the closure of the 19th century and establishes a fixed moral order. Formerly clear-cut and well-defined notions of Britishness, however, are also challenged as a result of the colonial endeavour, and this invokes popular fears in Victorian Britain. The novel tries to re-establish order with respect to gender, race and space, while it cannot deny the increasing impact of foreign elements on Britain.
Contents
I Introduction
II Main Body
1. Theoretical Background
1.1. E. Said: Narrative, Culture and Imerialism
1.2. Lotman: Space and Boundary Crossings
2. Text Analysis Doyle's The Sign of Four
2.1. Narrative Level
2.1.1. The Sidekick Pattern vs the Plotless System/System with Plot
2.1.2. Genre
2.2. Moral Order, Boundaries and Spatial Realization
2.2.1. Gender
2.2.2. Race
2.2.3. Space: Home and Abroad
2.2.3.1. Home: The Imperial City
2.2.3.2. In-between Characters and Frame Narrative
2.2.3.3. Abroad: The Depiction of the Great Mutiny
III Conclusion
I Introduction
The 2007 England and Wales citizenship survey asked members of different ethnic groups if they had a "fairly or very strongly feeling that they belong to Britain". 89% of Indian and Pakistanis, 87% of Bangladeshis and 84% of black African and Caribbeans agreed while 85% of white British people supported the statement1. Britain is indeed a multicultural society and its roots stem from the global spread of the former British Empire. However, according to Professor Tariq Modood, "legacies of colonialism and racism" are among the reasons that today "some of these groups are negatively perceived and treated"2. An increasing influence of colonial subjects on British society can already be found in cultural products of the 19th century, the high time of the Empire and colonialism. It is worth examining the contemporary cultural products to understand the roots of an imperial mind-set, and respective anxieties as the sovereignty of Britain is perceived to be under threat.
Arthur Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes novel The Sign of Four provides a good example for the representation of both Britishness and the foreign exotic other. It reflects a cultural worldview of imperial Britain at the closure of the 19th century and establishes a fixed moral order. Formerly clear-cut and well-defined notions of Britishness, however, are also challenged as a result of the colonial endeavour, and this invokes popular fears in Victorian Britain. The novel tries to re-establish order with respect to gender, race and space while it cannot deny the increasing impact of foreign elements on Britain.
This term paper examines space and boundaries as crucial elements of the narrative representing and consolidating a cultural worldview. For example the narrative structure, the constellation of characters, the representation of space and the use of factual elements support an underlying hierarchy of empire and a respective moral order. Cultural and literary theories by Edward Said and Jurji Lotman form the basis of this approach. First, these are introduced and then applied to an analysis of The Sign of Four. The conclusion of this paper briefly shifts towards a 21st century understanding of how culture is now renegotiated by the very notion of 'in-between'.
II Main body
1. Theoretical Background
1.1. E. Said: Narrative, Culture and Imperialism
At the beginning of the chapter "Consolidated Vision" in Culture and Imperialism, Edward Said discusses the role of the narrative in the discourse of the 19th century British Empire (1993: 73-95): A subtle presence of Empire is already found in the very early British novels, "these allusions constitute [...] a structure of reference and attitude" (ibid. 73). Surprisingly, these have been marginalized or even fully ignored by literary critics; the emerging of scholars with an own colonial background calls for "contrapuntal reading" (ibid. 78), which Said defines as follows: "We must therefore read the great canonical texts [...] with the effort to draw out, extend, give emphasis and voice to what is silent or marginally present or ideogically represented [...] in such works" (ibid.). The underlying imperial mindset is inherited from early literary production and becomes more explicit towards the closure of the century. In novels by Rudyard Kipling, George Orwell or Arthur Conan Doyle, "the empire is everywhere a crucial setting" (ibid. 74). The reference is more obvious and the attitude more aggressive as Britain competes against imperialist world powers in the 'Scramble for Africa' in the 1880s. With respect to the East, the British Empire is challenged from within by the Indian Mutiny of 1857. Both processes question the continuity of the status quo (cf. ibid. 88). In the analysis of The Sign of Four, this term paper tries to find evidences for respective anxieties on the one hand and subtle propaganda to reassure and regain stability on the other (cf. Raheja 2006: 417).
The novel as the institution of bourgeois society is the "major intellectual voice" (Said 1993: 85) in 19th century Britain. The unparalleled expansion of the British Empire not only coincides with the rise of the genre; Said argues that the British novel and imperialism reinforce each other, are in fact "unthinkable without each other" (ibid. 84). Fiction writing is not only product of an author but functions to regulate society (cf. ibid. 87). Britain's power is articulated in narrative forms and thus continuously reinforced: "The novel contributed significantly to these [imperialist] feelings, attitudes and references and became a main element in the consolidated vision, or departmental cultural view" (ibid. 88).
Said specifies the respective mechanisms of fictional writing. A tendency towards factual references in early British novels are, in the first place, employed to "suit the necessities of narrative" (ibid. 80). A set of choices by the author involve simplifications, one sided viewpoints, and ultimately an appropriation of alleged facts and history. Imperial possessions or exotic character are self-evidently and effectively employed in the narrative (cf. ibid. 75). The popular medium for the Western audience at home thus directly influences the way in which the public gets to know the colonial other; fiction functions as a substitute for the reader's real experience.
The reference to space is a crucial element that functions in novel as well as in the general imperial discourse. One of Said's main argument is that "the narrative sanctions the spatial moral order" (ibid. 94). In the context of imperialism, the most obviously association to space is land and territory as an element of desired possession, control and power. On the other hand, space is a social phenomena; "the differentiation of social space [... and] the barriers within social space" (ibid. 93) are able to invoke a hierarchy and associated system of values. The particular function of space in the narrative and the cultural worldview has been closely examined by the Russian structuralist Jurji M. Lotman.
1.2. Lotman: Space and Boundary Crossings
The following two works form the basis of a more detailed approach on the concept of space in the narrative: "On the Metalanguage of a Typological Description of Culture" (Lotman 1975: 97-123) and "The Composition of Verbal Art" (Lotman 1977: 209-39) together formulate a theory wherein space functions as a model to understand the picture of the world created by a text. The spatial order serves as an organizing element of non-spatial features and thus reflects the moral hierarchy of the cultural model (cf. 1977: 218). The most basic spatial translation of cultural models is the representation of internal vs. external, the following binary oppositions A versus Z are directly associated with morally defined spaces. For the purpose of this paper, the following oppositions have been selected as most applicable for the context of imperialism:
Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten
(cf. 1975: 105 - 108 & 1977: 229 )
The above model of binary oppositions A versus Z implies one distinct boundary. A more complex boundary system will be relevant for the analysis of The Sign of Four: the boundary between I and E goes through the closed space A and also forms A vs. ), so that "I and E compose the space A and E2 forms ) " (1975: 108).
Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten
(fig 1 & fig 4 from 1975: 104, 108)
If applied to the imperial concept of home versus abroad, the experience of the external shapes the subjects that has previously identified with the internal. In The Sign of Four, these cultural in-betweens are found in a particular space that itself is hybrid: the imperial city. The representation of space and characters will be discussed in greater detail in the course of this paper.
Such a situation of a boundary 1 between I and E1 and a boundary 2 between E1 and E2 violates "the rule of 'one' basic boundary within a cultural model" (1975: 108). Consequently it could be argued that the stability of only one boundary within a cultural model always needs to be re-established in and by the cultural text. This approach provides an interesting perspective on The Sign of Four, where the collision of different cultural spaces provokes fears and where stability and order is first challenged and then allegedly regained.
Lotman draws his study from examples of cultural texts in which space is divided into the internal human earthly world as opposed to the external non-human world beyond, both containing their respective gods. Following the argument that all artistic texts produce spatial and moral hierarchy in similar ways, parallels may be drawn and applied to the analysis of character constellation in The Sign of Four.
The 'gods' of the internal human sphere have defensive function, they protect the boundary between I and E while they do not try to pass it. Monsters with non-human features belong to the external sphere E2, these dangerous creatures do attempt to cross the boundary. The sphere of 'us' humans is challenged by 'other' humans that move in the external world; although they also belong to the category of humans, they are perceived as strange and chaotic, as thus as part of E (cf. 1975:108-109). In the case of The Sign of Four, this model can serve to interpret the clashes of internal versus external, that is of Britain versus India,
[...]
1 Anthony Heath, "Has Multicultralism failed in the UK? Not really."theguardian.com. 10 August 2012. last accessed on 19 April 2014 <http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/aug/10/multiculturalism-uk- research>.
2 cf. 2:34-2:54 audio interview with Tariq Modood and David Goodhart, attached to the article "Multiculturalism and What Does it Mean?"bbc.co.uk. 7 February 2011. last accessed on 19. April 2014 <http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-12381027>.