论文部分内容阅读
【Abstract】In “A Conversation with My Father”， Grace Paley talks about a middle-aged narrator who at the request of her eighty-six-year-old father telling two versions of the same short story. The narrator’s father has certain expectation towards the narrator’s story. Yet， the narrator’s two stories are quite different from what her father expects. In fact， the narrator and her father’s varied views on story-telling is reflected in their different views of life. In this paper， the author will analyze father and daughter’s different views on life in “A Conversation with My Father”.
【Key words】story; views on life; father and daughter
【作者簡介】程澜（1991.03-），女，汉族，陕西西安人，西安博源学府教育科技培训中心有限责任公司，英语老师，硕士研究生，研究方向：跨文化交际。
Grace Paley in “A Conversation with My Father” talks about a middle-aged narrator who at the request of her eighty-six-year-old father telling two versions of the same short story. The narrator’s two stories are quite different from what her father expects her to tell. In fact， the narrator and her father’s varied views on story-telling is reflected in their different views of life.
For a person as old as the narrator’s father， health is an issue. In Klinkowitz’s view， “Paley’s narrator engages the question with a startlingly physical image： ‘His heart， that bloody motor， is equally old and will not do certain jobs anymore.’ Yet it ‘still floods his head with brainy light”. Even though narrator’s father is old， he is intellectually quite sharp. The story begins with the juxtaposition of the father’s physical worrisome condition and his intellectual brightness. Faced with his own imminent death， the father “offers last-minute advice and makes a request” to his daughter， a professional writer， “I would like you to write a simple story just once more，…the kind de Maupassant wrote， or Chekhov”（799）. The father’s request of her daughter writing a simple story， in fact， is not that simple. The father “had been a doctor for a couple of decades and then an artist for a couple of decades，” and he remains “still interested in details， craft， and technique” （801）. He shares his life experience with his daughter by using concepts that she， as a fiction writer， is familiar with.
The story that the father expects his daughter to write is actually the story that reflects his approach towards life. However， the daughter has her own outlook towards life which is clearly reflected in the story she tells her father. In Neff’s opinion， “mere phrases become seeds which blossom into opposing narrative strategies， almost as if the participants are using narrative patterns as metaphors expressing their antithetical feelings about death” （119）.For Neff， the father and daughter are using narrative patterns as metaphors expressing their different feelings about death. In my understanding， the father and daughter’s different narrative patterns are the reflection of their distinct views on life. From the narrator’s point of view， she wrote “an unadorned and miserable tale” based on a story that took place right across the street. However， for the father this story is incomplete， he states， “that’s not what I mean…You know there’s a lot more to it. You know that. You left everything out” （800）. For the father， the woman in the story， her looks， hair， parents and marital status matter. According to him， the woman is not an isolated individual， on the contrary， she has her own past and her past to certain degree will affect the decisions she makes at the moment. The father tells the narrator what she has left out， he eventually lets the narrator admit “the trouble with stories” （800）. The woman in the story may be good-looking， but for the narrator the woman is not as smart as she originally thinks she is. Realizing the problem of her story， the daughter tells her father “you just have to let the story lie around till some agreement can be reached between you and the stubborn hero” （801）. Under the guidance of her father， the narrator finally admits she needs to reach some agreement between her and the character in her story.
For the first story， the father insists on knowing the woman’s detailed appearance， her family background and her marital status. From the father’s perspective， an individual is not isolated from his or her appearance or social status. For him， an individual should be a specific person having his or her own characteristics. Therefore， he is not content with what his daughter has written in the first story. Hence the father tells his daughter “you left everything out” （800）.
As for the daughter， the woman in the first story can have unpredictable events in her life. Since the woman’s information is not that clear， there are many possibilities for her. The daughter believes that the woman’s past or her marital status is not as important as what happens to her. The woman’s fate is not decided by her past.
The father and daughter’s different views on the first story are the reflection of their varied views on life. For the father， an individual merely does not have his or her existential form but also his or her history. Knowing where the person comes from is important. For example， Jews migrated to America to live a peaceful life. Nevertheless， their past holds significance， their journey is an inseparable part of their lives for all generations to come. Knowing their history is in a way connecting to their roots and in this way， they can know themselves better. As for the narrator， the woman’s existence in the story speaks directly to the readers. There is no need to further explain the woman’s background or appearance. In the daughter’s interpretation of life， individual choices decides his or her life more than his or her family background. The narrator chooses to obey her father and proceeds to write a second story. In this story， the narrator describes the woman in a more detailed way. The narrator adds the woman’s description as “a fine handsome woman” other than “a woman” in the first story. This detailed second story is still not enough for the father. According to the narrator， the woman in the second story has a son who she loves dearly. To keep her son from feeling guilty of becoming a junkie， the mother too becomes a junkie. However， the son is in fact hopeful， he successfully returns to normal life after he meets “a stern and proselytizing girl” whose “organic heat” makes him “become interested once more in his muscles， his arteries， and nerve connections” （801）. The mother wishes to be closer to her son， nevertheless， she is finally deserted by her son since she herself can’t be off drugs.
The mother loses confidence in life’s apparent endless capacity to change， she has no hope. She accepts this situation and remains trapped in it crying “My baby！ My baby！” and bursting “into terrible， face-scarring， time-consuming tears” （802）. This leads to another debate among the father and daughter. They debate not only what constitutes good writing but also， the implication on how they see life differently after reading the same story.
The father believes the ending of the story is the end of the women’s tragic life hence he states that this is “the end of a person，” but the daughter protests， “No， Pa”， It doesn’t have to be. She’s only about forty. She could be a hundred different things in this world as time goes on. A teacher or a social worker. An ex-junkie！ Sometimes it’s better than having a master’s in education（802）. The daughter fully believes the possibility of infinite number of things that can happen in one’s life. She believes in possibility of transformation. Therefore， for the daughter， the woman’s story， could have ended as being a “teacher or a social worker” instead of working at the community clinic. On the contrary， the father believes that the women’s life is already fixated， hence he sees the end as a tragedy.
The father views the women in the story as someone who is ignorant and habitually making bad decisions throughout her life. Therefore， he concludes that tragedy is inevitable. Her father is persistent. “You don’t want to recognize it. Tragedy！ Plain tragedy！ Historical tragedy！ No hope. The end” （802）. He urges his daughter to face the woman’s unavoidable tragic life. As for the daughter， she “had promised the family to always let him have the last word when arguing，” nevertheless， she recognizes “a different responsibility” towards him. The daughter bombards her father with newly created details from the mother’s life-details which supports her assertion that there is hope in the world. In the story the son never returns to his mother， and yet she manages to survive， successfully having a career as a “receptionist in a storefront community clinic in the East Village” （803）. This evidence by the daughter supports her positive way towards life. The narrator states， “it could really happen that way， it’s a funny world nowadays” （803）. The woman in the story is full of possibilities and her fate is not fixed. Yet， for the father， “[the woman] will slide back. A person must have character. She does not” （803）. From the father’s point of view， the choices the person makes will determine his or her character and it is not likely to change all of a sudden. Just as the woman in the story， all she does is for her son and she doesn’t have a life of her own. When her son deserts her， it’s hard for the woman to get out of junkie situation by herself. Therefore， the woman’s tragic end is unavoidable.
In the end of the “A Conversation with My Father”， the father asks his daughter “when will you look it in the face”， by that he means when will the daughter face reality. The father is concerned about his daughter. He wants his daughter to accept and face the reality courageously even if it is unavoidable. It’s not through changing the characters’ fate in the story that people’s tragic life would be avoided. To re-write the story with a positive ending and shower mercy on the woman， the daughter is portraying false hope. This would make it unbelievable.
“A Conversation with My Father” by Grace Paley is a truthful rendition of a father and daughter’s discussion on two versions of the drug-addicted family. According to Wilson， a critique， “the presence of two stories， the portrayal of a writer writing a story， and the conversation about fiction between the narrator and her father makes ‘A Conversation with My Father’ metafictional work， a story about stories and story-writing.” The father and daughter’s argument about the two versions of the story is actually their different views on life. For the father， history is important for an individual and many times a person’s tragic ending is unavoidable. As for the daughter， an individual’s present choices are more important than his or her history and infinite number of things can happen in life. Through the father and daughter’s conversation， Paley presents two distinct kinds of views on life using her story within story narrative technique.
References：
[1]Klinkowitz， Jerome. A Conversation with My Father： Overview[J].
[2]Neff， D. S. Extraordinary Means： Healers and Healing in “A Conversation with My Father”[J].Literature and Medicine， vol. 2， 1985， pp.118.
[3]Wilson， Kathleen. Overview： A Conversation with My Father[J]. 1998.
【Key words】story; views on life; father and daughter
【作者簡介】程澜（1991.03-），女，汉族，陕西西安人，西安博源学府教育科技培训中心有限责任公司，英语老师，硕士研究生，研究方向：跨文化交际。
Grace Paley in “A Conversation with My Father” talks about a middle-aged narrator who at the request of her eighty-six-year-old father telling two versions of the same short story. The narrator’s two stories are quite different from what her father expects her to tell. In fact， the narrator and her father’s varied views on story-telling is reflected in their different views of life.
For a person as old as the narrator’s father， health is an issue. In Klinkowitz’s view， “Paley’s narrator engages the question with a startlingly physical image： ‘His heart， that bloody motor， is equally old and will not do certain jobs anymore.’ Yet it ‘still floods his head with brainy light”. Even though narrator’s father is old， he is intellectually quite sharp. The story begins with the juxtaposition of the father’s physical worrisome condition and his intellectual brightness. Faced with his own imminent death， the father “offers last-minute advice and makes a request” to his daughter， a professional writer， “I would like you to write a simple story just once more，…the kind de Maupassant wrote， or Chekhov”（799）. The father’s request of her daughter writing a simple story， in fact， is not that simple. The father “had been a doctor for a couple of decades and then an artist for a couple of decades，” and he remains “still interested in details， craft， and technique” （801）. He shares his life experience with his daughter by using concepts that she， as a fiction writer， is familiar with.
The story that the father expects his daughter to write is actually the story that reflects his approach towards life. However， the daughter has her own outlook towards life which is clearly reflected in the story she tells her father. In Neff’s opinion， “mere phrases become seeds which blossom into opposing narrative strategies， almost as if the participants are using narrative patterns as metaphors expressing their antithetical feelings about death” （119）.For Neff， the father and daughter are using narrative patterns as metaphors expressing their different feelings about death. In my understanding， the father and daughter’s different narrative patterns are the reflection of their distinct views on life. From the narrator’s point of view， she wrote “an unadorned and miserable tale” based on a story that took place right across the street. However， for the father this story is incomplete， he states， “that’s not what I mean…You know there’s a lot more to it. You know that. You left everything out” （800）. For the father， the woman in the story， her looks， hair， parents and marital status matter. According to him， the woman is not an isolated individual， on the contrary， she has her own past and her past to certain degree will affect the decisions she makes at the moment. The father tells the narrator what she has left out， he eventually lets the narrator admit “the trouble with stories” （800）. The woman in the story may be good-looking， but for the narrator the woman is not as smart as she originally thinks she is. Realizing the problem of her story， the daughter tells her father “you just have to let the story lie around till some agreement can be reached between you and the stubborn hero” （801）. Under the guidance of her father， the narrator finally admits she needs to reach some agreement between her and the character in her story.
For the first story， the father insists on knowing the woman’s detailed appearance， her family background and her marital status. From the father’s perspective， an individual is not isolated from his or her appearance or social status. For him， an individual should be a specific person having his or her own characteristics. Therefore， he is not content with what his daughter has written in the first story. Hence the father tells his daughter “you left everything out” （800）.
As for the daughter， the woman in the first story can have unpredictable events in her life. Since the woman’s information is not that clear， there are many possibilities for her. The daughter believes that the woman’s past or her marital status is not as important as what happens to her. The woman’s fate is not decided by her past.
The father and daughter’s different views on the first story are the reflection of their varied views on life. For the father， an individual merely does not have his or her existential form but also his or her history. Knowing where the person comes from is important. For example， Jews migrated to America to live a peaceful life. Nevertheless， their past holds significance， their journey is an inseparable part of their lives for all generations to come. Knowing their history is in a way connecting to their roots and in this way， they can know themselves better. As for the narrator， the woman’s existence in the story speaks directly to the readers. There is no need to further explain the woman’s background or appearance. In the daughter’s interpretation of life， individual choices decides his or her life more than his or her family background. The narrator chooses to obey her father and proceeds to write a second story. In this story， the narrator describes the woman in a more detailed way. The narrator adds the woman’s description as “a fine handsome woman” other than “a woman” in the first story. This detailed second story is still not enough for the father. According to the narrator， the woman in the second story has a son who she loves dearly. To keep her son from feeling guilty of becoming a junkie， the mother too becomes a junkie. However， the son is in fact hopeful， he successfully returns to normal life after he meets “a stern and proselytizing girl” whose “organic heat” makes him “become interested once more in his muscles， his arteries， and nerve connections” （801）. The mother wishes to be closer to her son， nevertheless， she is finally deserted by her son since she herself can’t be off drugs.
The mother loses confidence in life’s apparent endless capacity to change， she has no hope. She accepts this situation and remains trapped in it crying “My baby！ My baby！” and bursting “into terrible， face-scarring， time-consuming tears” （802）. This leads to another debate among the father and daughter. They debate not only what constitutes good writing but also， the implication on how they see life differently after reading the same story.
The father believes the ending of the story is the end of the women’s tragic life hence he states that this is “the end of a person，” but the daughter protests， “No， Pa”， It doesn’t have to be. She’s only about forty. She could be a hundred different things in this world as time goes on. A teacher or a social worker. An ex-junkie！ Sometimes it’s better than having a master’s in education（802）. The daughter fully believes the possibility of infinite number of things that can happen in one’s life. She believes in possibility of transformation. Therefore， for the daughter， the woman’s story， could have ended as being a “teacher or a social worker” instead of working at the community clinic. On the contrary， the father believes that the women’s life is already fixated， hence he sees the end as a tragedy.
The father views the women in the story as someone who is ignorant and habitually making bad decisions throughout her life. Therefore， he concludes that tragedy is inevitable. Her father is persistent. “You don’t want to recognize it. Tragedy！ Plain tragedy！ Historical tragedy！ No hope. The end” （802）. He urges his daughter to face the woman’s unavoidable tragic life. As for the daughter， she “had promised the family to always let him have the last word when arguing，” nevertheless， she recognizes “a different responsibility” towards him. The daughter bombards her father with newly created details from the mother’s life-details which supports her assertion that there is hope in the world. In the story the son never returns to his mother， and yet she manages to survive， successfully having a career as a “receptionist in a storefront community clinic in the East Village” （803）. This evidence by the daughter supports her positive way towards life. The narrator states， “it could really happen that way， it’s a funny world nowadays” （803）. The woman in the story is full of possibilities and her fate is not fixed. Yet， for the father， “[the woman] will slide back. A person must have character. She does not” （803）. From the father’s point of view， the choices the person makes will determine his or her character and it is not likely to change all of a sudden. Just as the woman in the story， all she does is for her son and she doesn’t have a life of her own. When her son deserts her， it’s hard for the woman to get out of junkie situation by herself. Therefore， the woman’s tragic end is unavoidable.
In the end of the “A Conversation with My Father”， the father asks his daughter “when will you look it in the face”， by that he means when will the daughter face reality. The father is concerned about his daughter. He wants his daughter to accept and face the reality courageously even if it is unavoidable. It’s not through changing the characters’ fate in the story that people’s tragic life would be avoided. To re-write the story with a positive ending and shower mercy on the woman， the daughter is portraying false hope. This would make it unbelievable.
“A Conversation with My Father” by Grace Paley is a truthful rendition of a father and daughter’s discussion on two versions of the drug-addicted family. According to Wilson， a critique， “the presence of two stories， the portrayal of a writer writing a story， and the conversation about fiction between the narrator and her father makes ‘A Conversation with My Father’ metafictional work， a story about stories and story-writing.” The father and daughter’s argument about the two versions of the story is actually their different views on life. For the father， history is important for an individual and many times a person’s tragic ending is unavoidable. As for the daughter， an individual’s present choices are more important than his or her history and infinite number of things can happen in life. Through the father and daughter’s conversation， Paley presents two distinct kinds of views on life using her story within story narrative technique.
References：
[1]Klinkowitz， Jerome. A Conversation with My Father： Overview[J].
[2]Neff， D. S. Extraordinary Means： Healers and Healing in “A Conversation with My Father”[J].Literature and Medicine， vol. 2， 1985， pp.118.
[3]Wilson， Kathleen. Overview： A Conversation with My Father[J]. 1998.