The caricature of emotionality in Flaubert`s Bouvard and Pécuchet

Abstract

福婁拜的最後一部小說《布瓦爾與佩區謝》呈現兩位與小說同名的主 人翁非凡的人生歷程。福婁拜曾以「我的兩個傻瓜」稱呼他們。本研究要探索這個表面上有貶抑之形容用語的意義。傻瓜idiot這個詞彙除了它較為人熟知的意義，思想簡單，它的希臘文原始字根idios（意指:個人的），並衍生«idiosyncrasie»一字，意為《個人的性情》。小說中兩位主角的性情可以《過度的易感性》（émotivité）來概括稱呼。這也是導致他們令人感到荒誕無稽（grotesque）的原因。事實上透過這個研究，筆者要呈現福婁拜最後一部小說對易感性的滑稽諷刺。本文首先要指出這兩位人物心理上的不成熟性與在社會階層上的邊緣性，接著探討他們的所作所為內部深層的動機，最後論證他們同屬福婁拜式心理(包法利主義)的人物，且為最佳例子之一。事實上，布瓦爾與佩區謝的《激動》常缺乏智性與理性的基礎，這些被他們當成《行動》的激動行徑，是本文第三部分的研究對象，要分析這兩位抄寫員成為各種領域類別的實驗家之行徑的內在機制。他們充滿著狂熱，有著一個比一個更具原創性的主意，且用精力過於旺盛的方式去執行計劃，但最終總是以災難的結果作收。論文的第四部分所要探討的正是他們失敗的原因，可約略歸納為他們孩子氣中的某些智性面向:業餘愛好（dilettantisme）、驚訝、好奇性、對顛覆的喜好。在這個研究中，還有必要更仔細探討這部小說中《笑》的本質，更明確來說，探討這兩個人物的荒誕無稽的內涵。但並不因此陷入過於單一意義的閱讀陷阱，這也是論文的第六部分所要呈現，在對兩位荒誕人物的嘲諷的背後，能分析他們的憂鬱之苦、絕對的孤寂、與慈善（charité）的欠缺。

Flaubert`s last novel, Bouvard and Pécuchet, depicts the extraordinary journey of two eponymous characters. Flaubert called them ＂my two idiots＂. In this research, we will examine the meaning of this seemingly unflattering expression. Besides the well known meaning of ＂idiot＂, ＂simple-minded＂, the Greek etymon idios (＂particular＂) has endued the word with ＂idiosyncrasy＂, carrying the meaning of ＂personal temperament＂. The temperament of the two characters is, in short, an excessive emotionality that renders them grotesque. Indeed, in this study, we will demonstrate that the last novel by Flaubert is a caricature of emotionality. First of all, we will highlight the mental immaturity and the social marginality of these two characters. Secondly, we will consider the underlying reasons for their behaviors, to conclude that they are perfect examples of the key notion in Flaubertian psychology : Bovarysm. Indeed, Bouvard and Pécuchet appear to be much « agitated » that they do not act intelligently and reasonably. This agitation which they carry for action will be fully illustrated in the third chapter of this study, where we will analyze the mechanism of action of the two transcribers becoming experimenters of all kinds. They go fast, demonstrate excessive zeal, implement overabundant measures, conceive ideas which each one more original than the others, to, ultimately, achieve, invariably, a catastrophic result. The reasons for these failures perhaps lie in certain intellectual aspects of their infantilism: dilettantism, astonishment, curiosity, interest for transgression. This is what we will try to explore in chapter four of this article. Then we will look more closely at the nature of the laughter in this novel, and specify the nature of the grotesqueness of these two characters. Without hence falling into the situation of an overly univocal reading, behind the mockeries of the two whimsical characters, we will, in the sixth and final chapter, seek to demonstrate their melancholic suffering which essentially consists in the radical loneliness and the lack of kindness towards the others.