Existentialist Roots of Narrative Actants

It is time to rethink the history of narratology, a field of study that is undergoing a recontextualization and renaissance. Examining ways in which classical narrative theory was embedded in its cultural milieux, this paper reconsiders one chapter in the history of structuralist narrative analysis as it emerges in France in the 1960s. The paper focuses on the genesis—and the genealogy—of the concept of narrative "actants." Actants were originally construed as names for the basic and general roles that can be assumed by characters in the unfolding of a narrative. Structuralist theories owed much to Vladimir Propp's actantial typology, which included the villain, the donor, the helper, the sought-for-person and her father, the dispatcher, the hero, and the false hero. But existentialist theories of the self may also have inflected the way structuralist narratologists drew on linguistic theory to redescribe characters in stories as actants. Further, a more historically particularized account of actants may have significant methodological consequences for present-day analysts interested in using actantial models to study narrative. This article is available in Studies in 20th Century Literature: http://newprairiepress.org/sttcl/vol24/iss2/5 Existentialist Roots of Narrative Actants David Herman North Carolina State University It seems that rumors of the death of narratology have been greatly exaggerated. Recently we have witnessed a small but unmistakable explosion of activity in the field of narrative studies; signs of this minor narratological renaissance include the publication of a spate of articles, special issues, and books that rethink and recontextualize classical models for narratological research;' the evident success of the journal Narrative (not founded until 1993); and the establishment of a book series devoted specifically to "The Theory and Interpretation of Narrative" at the Ohio State University Press. Thus a full account of narratologya complete story of our ongoing rapprochement with storiesremains yet to be written. By the same token, narratology's history sometimes gets told in ways that flatten it out into a monolithically (if not monomaniacally) scientistic endeavor. Recounted too rapidly, the history of narratology can work to decontextualize a method of analysis that is itself sometimes charged with a lack of concern for context. In particular, it is important not to sever links between models for narrative analysis and surrounding critico-theoretical trends. Here, in order to indicate ways in which classical narrative theory was embedded in its cultural milieux, I should like to reconsider one chapter in the history of structuralist narrative analysis as it emerged in France in the 1960s. My concern is with the genesis-and the genealogy-of the concept of narrative "actants." In the narratological tradition, actants represent a new, linguistically informed approach to the very old problem of lit1 Herman: Existentialist Roots of Narrative Actants Published by New Prairie Press 258 STCL, Volume 24, No.2 (Summer, 2000) erary character. Actants are typically defined as "fundamental role [s] at the level of narrative deep structure" (Prince 1). In other words, "actants are general categories [of behavior or doing] underlying all narratives (and not only narratives) while [actors] are invested with specific qualities in different narratives" (Rimmon-Kenan, Narrative 34).2 After investigating the lineage of this key narratological concept, I shall go on to examine some philosophical contexts for the actantial model that first appeared in its canonical form in 1966 in A. J. Greimas's Simantique structurale (Structural Semantics). Refined by Greimas in his 1973 essay on "Actants, Actors, and Figures," the model was widely influential, adopted (and adapted) in much subsequent narratological work. My claim is that, in what amounts to a series of disciplinary displacements, existentialist theories of the self may have inflected the way structuralist narratologists drew on linguistic theory to redescribe characters in stories as actants. Further, a more historically particularized account of actants may have significant methodological consequences for present-day analysts interested in using actantial models to study narrative. In a certain sense, structuralist narratology began with the attempt to create a systematic framework for describing how characters participate in the narrated action. In his Morphology of the Folktale-a text first published in 1928 and one of the works associated with Russian Formalism that would exercise such a profound influence on Francophone narratology3-Vladimir Propp followed Aristotle in subordinating character to action or plot." Articulating a descriptive vocabulary based on the "functions" performed by characters in stories, Propp conceived of the function as "an act of character, defined from the point of view of its significance for the course of the action" (21). A function is thus a participatory slot in the syntagmatic unfolding of a narrative, and "character" is a relatively loose (if traditional) way of talking about kinds of slots and the relational networks linking them together. Arguing that many seemingly diverse functions join together to create a few, typifiable "spheres of action," Propp developed a typology of seven general roles (the villain, the donor, the helper, the sought-for-person and her father, the dispatcher, the hero, and the false hero) that correspond to the ways in which 2 Studies in 20th & 21st Century Literature, Vol. 24, Iss. 2 [2000], Art. 5 http://newprairiepress.org/sttcl/vol24/iss2/5 DOI: 10.4148/2334-4415.1484