I think that it interesting that both Barnard and Vermeulen would agree that Ghostwritten exhibits features of globalization but that there seems to be one point about which they disagree: they offer vastly different interpretations about how it gets there, specifically with reference to the novel's stylistic changes from one section to the next.
It's almost as if they have set off together on the M-25 from Dartford and they both want to get to Heathrow but one thinks they should go north (counterclockwise) and the other south (clockwise): either way, they'll both get there but they want to take opposite paths. (link at bottom for visual explanation)
I'm specifically referring to Barnard's claim that the radically different modes of narration call the reader's attention to the diversity of perspective within the book. Barnard claims that the ability of the reader to engage with these characters both from within and without allows them to collectively take on the role of an updated (semi)omniscient narrator that helps to bridge the gap between the national novel and the new globalized one. Of utmost importance here is the claim that Mitchell calls attention to the differences through noticeable changes in style.
Juxtaposed with this is Vermeullen's claim that the novel does not break with its "traditional repertoire." He claims that the novel's sections flow more seamlessly together and that there is little attention called to the shifting narrative point of view caused by radically divergent technique. His claim for globalization through biopower in fact relies upon the idea that the novel does not divert from its traditional tropes and instead uses them in order to call attention to the globalization that it portrays (390).
To push the metaphor further, they both agree that the use of narrative modes is the key (the M-25 will get them to where they want to go) but the each argue in favor of using them in opposing ways.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M25_motorway#mediaviewer/File:Ringways_3_%26_4.png
Really well-put, Jerremy. You may be asked to reiterate this in person. We've essentially got two different accounts of what constitutes global form.
ReplyDelete