Introduction: “Spatial Form in Literature: Toward a General Theory” by W. J. T. Mitchell
“Spatial Form in Literature: Toward a General Theory” by W. J. T. Mitchell first appeared in the Critical Inquiry journal, Vol. 6, No. 3 (Spring 1980), published by The University of Chicago Press. This seminal essay examines the concept of spatial form as an essential lens for understanding literature, not merely as a metaphorical notion but as a structural reality integral to interpretation and experience. Mitchell critiques and extends Joseph Frank’s idea of spatial form in modernist literature, arguing that spatial form transcends temporal linearity and is a universal aspect of literary experience across cultures and epochs. He navigates the interplay between literal and metaphorical uses of spatiality, demonstrating its application to narrative, imagery, and thematic cohesion. This theory is significant in literary criticism for its challenge to conventional temporal models of literature, fostering interdisciplinary dialogue between literary studies, visual arts, and cognitive sciences, and providing a framework for exploring the semiotic and structural complexities of textual analysis.
Summary of “Spatial Form in Literature: Toward a General Theory” by W. J. T. Mitchell
1. Introduction: Spatiality and its Central Role in Criticism
- Mitchell highlights how spatial form has become a cornerstone for understanding literature, fine arts, language, and culture (Mitchell, 1980, p. 539).
- He poses key questions: Are spatial models literal or metaphorical, and how do they function as explanatory tools? (p. 540).
2. Historical Context of Spatial Form in Literary Criticism
- Joseph Frank’s 1945 essay identified modernist literature (e.g., Eliot, Pound, Joyce) as “spatial” for replacing historical sequence with mythic simultaneity and syntactic disruption (p. 541).
- Critics debate whether spatial form denies literature’s inherent temporality or reflects deeper aesthetic and ideological tensions (p. 542).
3. Interdependence of Spatial and Temporal Forms
- Spatiality is integral to experiencing time; temporal metaphors often rely on spatial imagery (e.g., “long time,” “before and after”) (p. 543).
- In literature, the text’s physical layout as a spatial form underpins both linear and simultaneous reading experiences (p. 544).
4. Reconciling Static and Dynamic Perceptions of Space
- The misconception that spatial forms are static is rooted in Newtonian absolute space, contrasting with relational models like Leibniz’s “order of coexistent data” (p. 544-546).
- Literary spatiality is fluid and experienced through movement, reading, and interpretation, rejecting binary oppositions of space vs. time (p. 546).
5. Spatial Form Across Genres and Historical Periods
- Mitchell challenges the notion that spatial form is unique to modernist literature, asserting its presence in all periods (p. 547).
- Genres like novels and poetry employ spatiality differently, from symbolic topographies to structural patterns (p. 551).
6. Four Levels of Spatiality in Literature
- Literal Spatiality: The physical text as a spatial form, including typography and layout (p. 550).
- Descriptive Spatiality: The represented world within the text (e.g., settings, objects, and relationships) (p. 551).
- Structural Spatiality: Narrative and thematic patterns, such as plotlines and imagery (p. 552).
- Metaphysical Spatiality: The interpretive whole or “vision” of meaning that emerges from the work (p. 553).
7. Literary Memory and Iconography
- Spatial forms trace back to ancient mnemonic systems and visual imagery (e.g., Dante’s Inferno as a cosmic spatial structure) (p. 557).
- These systems link the cognitive and aesthetic, blending memory and imagination (p. 558).
8. Romanticism, Modernism, and Shifting Spatial Patterns
- Romantic literature emphasized open, fluid spatial forms (e.g., spirals in Wordsworth), contrasting with the decorative spatiality of earlier periods (p. 559).
- Modernist works integrate fragmented or dynamic spatiality to reflect contemporary experience (p. 560).
9. Integrating Linguistic and Spatial Consciousness
- Literature bridges spatial and temporal modalities, dissolving rigid distinctions between language and visual forms (p. 561).
- The interplay between structure and perception underpins both literary and visual creativity (p. 562).
10. Spatial Form and Comparative Aesthetics
- Mitchell advocates for cross-disciplinary studies of spatial form, linking literature, art, and science to better understand the shared cognitive and representational structures (p. 565).
11. Conclusion: The Value of Spatial Analysis
- Recognizing spatial form enriches literary criticism by integrating analytic rigor with experiential insight (p. 567).
- It illuminates literature’s capacity to mirror human thought and existence through dynamic, interconnected forms (p. 567).
Theoretical Terms/Concepts in “Spatial Form in Literature: Toward a General Theory” by W. J. T. Mitchell
| Theoretical Term/Concept | Explanation/Definition | Key References/Applications |
| Spatial Form | A conceptual framework emphasizing spatiality as intrinsic to understanding literature and its structures. | Present across genres and periods; tied to physical text layout, narrative structures, and interpretive visions (p. 547). |
| Temporal Form | The experience of time in literature, often visualized through spatial patterns or metaphors. | Linked to continuity, sequence, and simultaneity within texts; not opposed to spatial form but interdependent (p. 544). |
| Simultaneity | The perception of multiple elements occurring or being understood at the same time. | Central to modernist works (e.g., Eliot, Pound) that reject linear narratives (p. 541). |
| Synchronic vs. Diachronic | Synchronic refers to spatial or simultaneous elements, while diachronic refers to sequential or temporal ones. | Explored in narrative structures, plot rearrangements, and story progression (p. 553). |
| Literal Spatiality | The physical existence and layout of a text as a spatial form. | Typography, pagination, and physical production affect reader experience (p. 550). |
| Descriptive Spatiality | The construction of represented worlds within literary works. | Includes settings, characters, and their spatial relationships (p. 551). |
| Structural Spatiality | The organization of literary elements like plot, imagery, or themes into discernible patterns. | Found in narrative progressions, thematic connections, and metaphorical mappings (p. 552). |
| Metaphysical Spatiality | The interpretive vision or “whole” meaning derived from the text. | Often an elusive, nonverbal understanding of the text’s unity or essence (p. 553). |
| Order of Coexistent Data | Leibniz’s concept defining space as an arrangement of simultaneous relationships or patterns. | Highlights relational and dynamic aspects of spatiality (p. 544). |
| Mnemonic Systems | Ancient spatial and visual methods for organizing memory and thought. | Illustrated in works like Dante’s Inferno as cosmic orders of places (p. 557). |
| Geometry of Narrative | The use of abstract patterns (e.g., lines, spirals) to represent narrative structures. | Examples include Sterne’s diagrams in Tristram Shandy (p. 555). |
| Open vs. Closed Form | Open forms allow fluid, evolving interpretations, while closed forms suggest fixed, symmetrical structures. | Contrasts Romantic (open) with earlier neoclassical forms (p. 559). |
| Tectonic | Mitchell’s term for “global, symmetrical, gestalt-like” spatial forms. | Differentiated from linear forms, akin to formal gardens (p. 561). |
| Linear and Tectonic Opposition | The interplay between linearity (narrative time) and tectonic structures (geometric or symmetrical forms). | Seen in genres like ballads, which combine sequential and musical patterns (p. 561). |
| Iconology | The study of visual and symbolic systems as integral to understanding art and literature. | Informs connections between literature and visual arts, especially through pictorial representation (p. 565). |
| Vision/Visual Imagery | The mental “seeing” of patterns, structures, or meanings in literature. | Integral to criticism as a way of perceiving spatial and thematic relationships (p. 553). |
| Bicameral Brain Theory | A theory linking the left hemisphere to linear/verbal cognition and the right to spatial/visual thinking. | Explored in relation to spatial form’s role in perception and creativity (p. 561). |
| Art of Memory | The ancient practice of organizing memory through spatial and visual schemas. | Basis for literary spatiality, influencing medieval allegory and cosmic designs (p. 557). |
| Spatial Metaphors in Criticism | The pervasive use of spatial imagery (e.g., “structure,” “levels”) to discuss literature. | Reflects how criticism implicitly employs spatial thinking (p. 548). |
| General Theory of Spatiality | Mitchell’s call for a unified framework to analyze spatial forms across disciplines. | Encompasses literature, visual arts, and semiotics for interdisciplinary understanding (p. 565). |
Contribution of “Spatial Form in Literature: Toward a General Theory” by W. J. T. Mitchell to Literary Theory/Theories
1. Spatial Form and Modernism
- Key Contribution: Extends Joseph Frank’s notion that modernist literature emphasizes spatiality over linear temporality.
- Example: Works by T. S. Eliot and Ezra Pound disrupt narrative sequence, invoking a “mythic simultaneity” (p. 541).
- Impact: Challenges the idea that literature is intrinsically temporal, showing how modernism prioritizes patterns, simultaneity, and disjunction.
2. Integration of Space and Time in Literary Analysis
- Key Contribution: Argues that spatial and temporal forms are not antithetical but interdependent.
- Space provides the framework for perceiving and organizing time (p. 544).
- Relation to Criticism: Refutes notions that spatiality is merely metaphoric in literature, instead making it foundational to interpretation.
- Reference: Cites Leibniz’s spatium est ordo coexistendi (“space is an order of coexistent data”) to connect spatiality with temporal processes (p. 544).
3. Structuralism and Poststructuralism
- Key Contribution: Spatial metaphors underlie critical theories of structure and language.
- Example: The “stratification” of texts into levels, from literal to thematic or metaphysical meanings (p. 550).
- Impact: Relates spatial patterns to semiotics, deconstruction, and structuralism, emphasizing interconnectedness across disciplines.
4. Historical Perspectives: From Classical to Modern Forms
- Key Contribution: Maps the evolution of spatial form across literary periods.
- Medieval allegory: Structured as memory systems (e.g., Dante’s Divine Comedy) based on spatial and cosmic orders (p. 557).
- Romanticism: Shifts from closed, symmetrical forms to open, evolving forms, reflecting dynamic temporal experiences (p. 558).
- Impact on Romantic Theory: Suggests Romantic works retain spatial patterning through metaphors like the spiral and labyrinth (p. 559).
5. Interdisciplinary Connections
- Key Contribution: Bridges literature with visual arts, music, and cognitive sciences.
- Example: Analysis of Sterne’s Tristram Shandy reveals a “labyrinthine” spatial form mirrored in diagrammatic representations (p. 555).
- Links to art and memory: Relates literature to the “art of memory” traditions that use spatial visualization to organize content (p. 557).
- Impact on Comparative Arts: Shows literature’s hybrid nature, combining temporal (musical) and spatial (visual) dynamics.
6. Formalism and the Aesthetics of Space
- Key Contribution: Advocates spatial form as essential for understanding structure and form in literature.
- Critiques traditional binaries like “open vs. closed” or “spatial vs. temporal,” proposing a continuum of literary forms (p. 558).
- Impact on Formalist Criticism: Deepens the analysis of form, not as static geometry but as dynamic patterns revealing textual meaning.
7. Reader Response and Cognitive Theory
- Key Contribution: Suggests spatial form is not just in texts but emerges through the reader’s cognitive process.
- Example: Frye’s idea of a “simultaneous apprehension” of meaning (p. 553).
- Connection to Neuroscience: Engages with bicameral brain theory, linking linguistic and spatial cognition to hemispheric functions (p. 561).
- Impact on Reader-Response Theory: Positions readers as co-creators of spatial patterns, bridging subjective experience and textual structure.
8. Language, Iconicity, and Semiotics
- Key Contribution: Positions spatial form as integral to language and semiotics, challenging the privileging of temporal over spatial models.
- Iconicity in texts: Pictorial representations in literature (e.g., visual metaphors, concrete poetry) underscore spatiality as inherent to meaning-making (p. 564).
- Impact on Semiotics: Encourages broader theories of representation, uniting textual and visual modes under the rubric of spatiality.
9. Ethics and Political Implications
- Key Contribution: Rebuts critiques that spatial form is politically or ethically disengaged.
- Spatial form allows literature to encode resistance, critique, and alternative worldviews without denying historical or temporal dimensions (p. 563).
- Impact on Cultural Criticism: Opens literature to interdisciplinary readings that connect aesthetic structure with cultural and historical meaning.
10. Toward a General Theory of Spatiality
- Key Contribution: Calls for a unified theoretical framework to analyze spatiality across disciplines.
- Proposes terms like “tectonic” to refine distinctions between structural forms (p. 560).
- Advocates for examining how literature, art, and science all rely on spatial frameworks to conceptualize their subjects (p. 565).
- Impact: Lays groundwork for cross-disciplinary studies in literature, cognitive science, and visual studies.
References to Key Theories and Critics
- Joseph Frank: Initial theorization of spatial form in modernist literature (p. 541).
- Rudolf Arnheim: Contributions on the psychology of visual space (p. 544).
- Northrop Frye: Insights on spatiality in literary criticism and allegory (p. 554).
- Jacques Derrida: Critiques of metaphoric language in spatial theories (p. 565).
Mitchell’s essay broadens the field of literary theory by demonstrating how spatiality pervades both the creation and interpretation of literature, merging aesthetics, semiotics, and cognitive processes into a unified framework.
Examples of Critiques Through “Spatial Form in Literature: Toward a General Theory” by W. J. T. Mitchell
| Literary Work | Critique Using Spatial Form | Key Concepts from Mitchell | Key Citation/Reference |
| T. S. Eliot’s The Waste Land | – Eliot’s fragmented narrative disrupts temporal flow, creating a simultaneity of disjointed experiences. – Spatial form emerges as the reader maps mythic, historical, and symbolic elements into a unified whole. | – Spatial form as mythic simultaneity. – Temporal disjunction to create coherent spatial patterns in reading. | “Spatial form in literature is not antitemporal but a way to organize time through space” (p. 544). |
| Laurence Sterne’s Tristram Shandy | – The narrative digressions mimic a labyrinthine spatial structure. – Sterne explicitly uses diagrams to visualize narrative movement. | – Textual “labyrinths” and metafiction as critiques of linear narrative. – The visual diagram as a literal spatial form. | Sterne’s use of digressive diagrams exemplifies “spatial form as both an explanatory device and a visual element” (p. 555). |
| Dante’s Divine Comedy | – The text functions as a memory system, using layered spatial structures (Hell, Purgatory, Paradise). – The cosmic order of spheres mirrors hierarchical spatial constructs of medieval allegory. | – Allegorical texts as organized orders of space. – Spatial form as both descriptive and metaphysical frameworks. | “The Inferno is a cosmic order of places: a summa of similitudes and exempla arranged spatially” (p. 557). |
| James Joyce’s Ulysses | – Joyce’s stream of consciousness disrupts narrative continuity, replacing it with a dense web of simultaneous events. – Urban Dublin serves as a spatial framework to explore personal and historical themes. | – “Order of coexistent data” as a unifying framework. – Urban landscapes as symbolic spatial forms. | “Spatiality allows narratives to explore simultaneity and historical resonance beyond linear progression” (p. 541). |
Criticism Against “Spatial Form in Literature: Toward a General Theory” by W. J. T. Mitchell
- Oversimplification of Space-Time Interaction
- Critics argue that Mitchell’s attempt to unify spatial and temporal forms oversimplifies their distinct roles in literature and art. Temporal progression in literature cannot be fully equated with spatial constructs.
- Misuse of “Spatial Form” as a Universal Concept
- The application of spatial form across all historical periods and literary genres is seen as overly broad and reductive, ignoring specific historical and cultural contexts.
- Over-reliance on Metaphor
- Some critics highlight that much of Mitchell’s argument depends on spatial metaphors that may not correspond to actual cognitive or formal structures in texts.
- Neglect of Reader’s Temporal Experience
- By focusing on spatial structures, Mitchell risks downplaying the reader’s experience of time and sequence during the process of reading, which is central to literary engagement.
- Ambiguity in Differentiating Literal and Metaphorical Space
- Mitchell’s approach blurs the lines between literal, metaphorical, and interpretive uses of spatiality, leading to potential confusion in distinguishing actual spatial forms from interpretive frameworks.
- Insufficient Attention to Non-Visual Dimensions
- Critics argue that Mitchell’s emphasis on visual and geometric spatiality does not adequately account for auditory, tactile, and other sensory dimensions of literature.
- Resistance from Traditional Formalists
- Formalist critics reject the spatial form theory for straying from temporal and structural dynamics essential to narrative and poetic analysis.
- Lack of Empirical Support
- The theory relies heavily on theoretical constructs without providing sufficient empirical evidence or detailed case studies to substantiate its claims.
Representative Quotations from “Spatial Form in Literature: Toward a General Theory” by W. J. T. Mitchell with Explanation
| Quotation | Explanation |
| “The concept of spatial form has unquestionably been central to modern criticism … in language and culture.” | Mitchell emphasizes the significance of spatiality in understanding literature and its interpretation across various fields, marking it as a critical analytical tool. |
| “Spatial form is the perceptual basis of our notion of time … all our temporal language is contaminated with spatial imagery.” | He argues that space and time are interdependent in literary representation, with spatial imagery being foundational for conceptualizing time. |
| “Readers construct images of temporal or other organizational patterns in any work of literature.” | Readers play an active role in mapping and interpreting spatial and temporal relationships in texts, making spatial forms central to the reading process. |
| “Spatial form is a crucial aspect of the experience and interpretation of literature in all ages and cultures.” | Contrary to its association only with modernist texts, Mitchell asserts that spatial form underpins the structure and meaning of literature universally. |
| “We cannot talk about our temporal experience without invoking spatial measures.” | The inseparability of spatial and temporal modes of thought underscores their mutual influence on how literature is conceptualized and analyzed. |
| “Spatial form is no casual metaphor but an essential feature of the interpretation and experience of literature.” | Mitchell insists on the substantive role of spatial form in literary analysis, rejecting the view that it is merely metaphorical or incidental. |
| “Spatial thinking creeps into the work of even the most resolutely ‘temporal’ critics.” | He critiques the implicit reliance on spatial metaphors in literary theories that claim to focus solely on temporality. |
| “The reading experience may produce the illusion of temporal sequence … but it arises out of a spatial form.” | Even when literature appears predominantly temporal, it is rooted in spatial structures, highlighting their interpretive significance. |
| “The traditional comparison of space and time to body and soul expresses … our experience of both modalities.” | By likening space to the body and time to the soul, Mitchell offers a compelling analogy for their interdependence in literature and art. |
| “Spatial form is our basis for making history and temporality intelligible.” | He defends spatial form as essential for understanding historical and temporal dimensions within literary works. |
Suggested Readings: “Spatial Form in Literature: Toward a General Theory” by W. J. T. Mitchell
- Mitchell, W. J. T. “Spatial Form in Literature: Toward a General Theory.” Critical Inquiry, vol. 6, no. 3, 1980, pp. 539–67. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/1343108. Accessed 25 Nov. 2024.
- Stewart, Jack F. “Spatial Form and Color in The Waves.” Twentieth Century Literature, vol. 28, no. 1, 1982, pp. 86–107. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/441446. Accessed 25 Nov. 2024.
- Surette, Leon. “Rational Form in Literature.” Critical Inquiry, vol. 7, no. 3, 1981, pp. 612–21. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/1343121. Accessed 25 Nov. 2024.
- Salvaggio, Ruth. “Theory and Space, Space and Woman.” Tulsa Studies in Women’s Literature, vol. 7, no. 2, 1988, pp. 261–82. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/463682. Accessed 25 Nov. 2024.