Introduction: “Word, Dialogue and Novel” by Julia Kristeva
“Word, Dialogue and Novel” by Julia Kristeva, first appeared in 1969 in the collection Sémeiotihé, is pivotal in the development of literature and literary theory. It introduced the concept of intertextuality, revolutionizing how we understand the relationship between texts and their contexts. Kristeva’s exploration of language, dialogue, and the novel laid the groundwork for poststructuralist and feminist literary criticism, challenging traditional notions of authorship, meaning, and the literary canon.
Summary of “Word, Dialogue and Novel” by Julia Kristeva
Introduction to Kristeva’s Work on Bakhtin
- Summary: Julia Kristeva’s essay was pivotal in introducing Mikhail Bakhtin’s ideas to Western audiences. Kristeva, along with Tzvetan Todorov, was one of the first to present Bakhtin’s concepts, which deeply influenced her own linguistic and psycho-linguistic theories.
- Reference: The essay highlights how Kristeva’s interaction with Bakhtin’s texts influenced her work, particularly in the late 1960s and early 1970s. This is evident in her adoption of Bakhtinian concepts such as “dialogism” and “carnivalism,” which she later developed into her own ideas, like “intertextuality” (Kristeva, 1969).
Structuralism vs. Post-Structuralism
- Summary: The essay sits at the intersection of traditional structuralism and an early form of post-structuralism. Kristeva explores the limits of structuralist categories, showing how they often break down under the pressure of more subversive, carnival-like elements of language that Bakhtin described.
- Reference: Kristeva contrasts the structuralist desire for scientific objectivity with Bakhtin’s celebration of the “irreverent, mocking and subversive tradition of carnival and Menippean satire,” positioning her work in a transitional phase between these intellectual movements (Kristeva, 1969).
Speaking Subject and Intertextuality
- Summary: Kristeva emphasizes the importance of the speaking subject in linguistic analysis, which she derives from Bakhtin’s concept of dialogism. This focus leads to her development of “intertextuality,” the idea that texts are in constant dialogue with one another.
- Reference: Kristeva interprets Bakhtin’s notion of dialogism as an “open-ended play” between the text of the subject and the text of the addressee, which is foundational to her concept of intertextuality. This idea is central to her later works, such as “Revolution in Poetic Language” (Kristeva, 1969).
Carnivalesque Discourse
- Summary: The essay explores Bakhtin’s concept of carnivalism, where language becomes a space of subversion, breaking through the restrictions imposed by official codes. This idea profoundly influences Kristeva’s analysis of modernist discourse.
- Reference: Kristeva discusses how Bakhtin viewed carnivalesque discourse as not only breaking linguistic codes but also serving as a form of social and political protest. She links this to her own exploration of how texts “meet, contradict and relativize each other” (Kristeva, 1969).
Word as a Mediator
- Summary: Kristeva highlights Bakhtin’s idea that the word in a text is not a static point of meaning but an intersection of different textual surfaces. The word acts as a mediator, connecting literary structures to broader historical and social contexts.
- Reference: The word’s role as a “minimal structural unit” situates the text within history and society, which are seen as “texts read by the writer” who rewrites them. This concept transforms linear history into a synchronic space where the writer transgresses abstractions (Kristeva, 1969).
Dialogism and Ambivalence
- Summary: Bakhtin’s concept of dialogism, where all language is inherently dialogic, is central to understanding the ambivalence in narrative structures. Kristeva explores how even seemingly monologic texts contain dialogic elements.
- Reference: Kristeva describes how Bakhtin’s ideas blur the lines between monologue and dialogue, revealing that even monologic discourse can have dialogic elements. This leads to a deeper understanding of the “ambivalence of writing,” which is crucial in the polyphonic novel (Kristeva, 1969).
Impact on Narrative Structure
- Summary: The essay outlines Bakhtin’s influence on narrative analysis, particularly in how he sees the novel as a space for dialogic and ambivalent interactions rather than linear, monologic representations of reality.
- Reference: Bakhtin’s view of the novel as a “polyphonic” space, where multiple voices interact and conflict, contrasts with the monologic nature of epic and realist narratives. This concept is foundational to Kristeva’s analysis of modern literary forms (Kristeva, 1969).
Critique of Monologic Discourse
- Summary: Kristeva critiques the dominance of monologic discourse in epic and realist narratives, arguing that such forms suppress the multiplicity of voices and perspectives that characterize more dialogic, carnivalesque structures.
- Reference: Monologic discourse, as described by Kristeva, is associated with the “rule of 1” (God or absolute authority) and is dominant in epic and realist genres. In contrast, the carnivalesque and polyphonic novel disrupt these hierarchies, allowing for a more dynamic interplay of voices (Kristeva, 1969).
Reevaluation of the Novel’s Structure
- Summary: Kristeva reevaluates the novel’s structure through Bakhtin’s lens, suggesting that the novel is a space where traditional binaries and hierarchies are disrupted. This leads to the emergence of new narrative forms that reflect a more complex, dialogic reality.
- Reference: Kristeva concludes that the novel, particularly the polyphonic novel, rejects the linearity and causality of Aristotelian logic, instead embracing a “logic of analogy and non-exclusive opposition.” This transformation is seen as a key development in modern literary thought (Kristeva, 1969).
Literary Terms/Concepts in “Word, Dialogue and Novel” by Julia Kristeva
| Term | Definition |
| Intertextuality | The concept that all texts are inherently connected to other texts, creating a network of meaning and influence. |
| Semiotic | The study of signs and symbols, exploring how meaning is created through language and other cultural systems. |
| Symbolic | One of two poles of language in Kristeva’s theory, representing the ordered, structured aspect of language. |
| Semiotic | The other pole of language, representing the pre-linguistic, chaotic, and poetic aspect of language. |
| Genette | While not explicitly defined by Kristeva in this essay, Genette’s work on narrative is implicitly engaged with in terms of its focus on textual analysis and the structure of the novel. |
| Bakhtin | Kristeva’s work is heavily influenced by Bakhtin’s concept of dialogism, which emphasizes the multiplicity of voices within a text. |
| Subject | A complex and multifaceted concept in Kristeva’s work, often referring to the constructed identity of the individual within language and discourse. |
| Ideology | The system of beliefs and values that shape a society and its individuals, often implicitly present in texts. |
Contribution of “Word, Dialogue and Novel” by Julia Kristeva to Literary Theory/Theories
- Introduction of Bakhtin to Western Thought: Kristeva was instrumental in bringing Mikhail Bakhtin’s ideas to Western literary theory, particularly his concepts of dialogism, carnivalism, and the polyphonic novel.
- Development of Intertextuality: Kristeva’s concept of intertextuality, which posits that texts are in constant dialogue with each other, was a groundbreaking addition to literary theory, reshaping how texts are analyzed in relation to one another.
- Shift from Structuralism to Post-Structuralism: The essay marks a significant shift in literary theory from structuralist approaches, which emphasize static, scientific objectivity, to post-structuralism, which embraces the fluid, subversive, and dynamic nature of language.
- Reconceptualization of the Speaking Subject: Kristeva emphasized the importance of the speaking subject in linguistic and literary analysis, moving away from viewing language as an abstract system and toward understanding it as a dynamic interaction between speaker and listener.
- Dialogism and Polyphony in Narrative: Kristeva expanded Bakhtin’s idea of dialogism, applying it to literary texts to explore how multiple voices and perspectives can coexist and interact within a single narrative, leading to the concept of polyphony in literature.
- Critique of Monologic Discourse: The essay critiques the dominance of monologic discourse in traditional literary forms like the epic and realist novel, advocating instead for the recognition of more complex, dialogic forms of narrative that reflect the multiplicity of voices and perspectives.
- Carnivalesque as a Subversive Force in Literature: Kristeva highlighted the importance of carnivalesque elements in literature, where language and narrative structure break away from established norms, challenging social and political hierarchies.
- Influence on Modern Literary Criticism: By incorporating concepts such as the semiotic, the symbolic, and the chora, Kristeva’s essay laid the groundwork for future explorations of how language, subjectivity, and society intersect in literature.
- Expansion of Semiotics: Kristeva’s work expanded the field of literary semiotics by introducing new ways of understanding how meaning is generated in texts, especially through the interplay of different signifying structures and cultural contexts.
Examples of Critiques Through “Word, Dialogue and Novel” by Julia Kristeva
| Literary Work | Critique Through Kristeva’s “Word, Dialogue, and Novel” | Key Concepts Applied |
| Fyodor Dostoevsky’s The Brothers Karamazov | The novel can be analyzed through Bakhtinian dialogism, as interpreted by Kristeva, where multiple voices and conflicting perspectives coexist and interact, creating a polyphonic structure. | Dialogism, Polyphony, Intertextuality |
| James Joyce’s Ulysses | Joyce’s use of stream-of-consciousness and his complex narrative structure exemplify Kristeva’s concept of intertextuality, where the text becomes a mosaic of quotations and references to other works. | Intertextuality, Polyphony, Carnivalesque |
| Franz Kafka’s The Trial | Kafka’s narrative reflects the ambivalence and dialogic nature of language that Kristeva emphasizes, with the protagonist caught in a web of contradictory and ambiguous legal and social structures. | Ambivalence, Dialogism, Carnivalesque |
| Laurence Sterne’s Tristram Shandy | The novel’s fragmented structure and self-referential narrative can be critiqued through Kristeva’s ideas of carnivalism and the subversion of traditional narrative forms, creating a dialogic interaction. | Carnivalesque, Dialogism, Subversion of Monologic Discourse |
Criticism Against “Word, Dialogue and Novel” by Julia Kristeva
- Complexity and Accessibility: One of the primary criticisms of Kristeva’s “Word, Dialogue, and Novel” is its dense and complex language, which can make the text difficult to access for readers who are not already familiar with advanced literary theory. The essay’s heavy reliance on specialized terminology and abstract concepts may alienate those who are new to the field.
- Overemphasis on Bakhtin: Some critics argue that Kristeva’s work overly emphasizes Mikhail Bakhtin’s ideas, to the point where her own original contributions might be overshadowed. While Kristeva introduces important concepts like intertextuality, her work is often seen as more of a commentary or extension of Bakhtin’s theories rather than a groundbreaking development on its own.
- Ambiguity and Lack of Clarity: Kristeva’s writing is often critiqued for its ambiguity and lack of clear definitions, particularly regarding key concepts like the “semiotic” and “symbolic.” This can lead to difficulties in understanding how these ideas are practically applied within literary analysis, leaving readers to interpret her ideas in various, sometimes conflicting, ways.
- Limited Practical Application: While Kristeva’s theoretical insights are profound, some critics argue that her ideas lack practical applicability in everyday literary analysis. The abstract nature of her theories, particularly the concepts of dialogism and intertextuality, can be challenging to apply to specific texts in a straightforward manner, limiting their usefulness for literary critics and scholars.
- Feminist Critique: From a feminist perspective, some scholars critique Kristeva for not fully integrating gender analysis into her theories, despite her later work focusing on feminist issues. In “Word, Dialogue, and Novel,” the absence of an explicit focus on gender and the power dynamics within language and literature can be seen as a significant oversight, especially given the potential for her concepts to explore these areas.
Suggested Readings: “Word, Dialogue and Novel” by Julia Kristeva
- Allen, Graham. Intertextuality. Routledge, 2000.
- Bakhtin, Mikhail. The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays. Edited by Michael Holquist, translated by Caryl Emerson and Michael Holquist, University of Texas Press, 1981.
- Beardsworth, Sara. Julia Kristeva: Psychoanalysis and Modernity. State University of New York Press, 2004.
- Moi, Toril. Sexual/Textual Politics: Feminist Literary Theory. Methuen, 1985.
- Oliver, Kelly. Reading Kristeva: Unraveling the Double-Bind. Indiana University Press, 1993.
- Roudiez, Leon S. Introduction. Desire in Language: A Semiotic Approach to Literature and Art by Julia Kristeva, translated by Thomas Gora, Alice Jardine, and Leon S. Roudiez, Columbia University Press, 1980, pp. 1-20.
- Smith, Anna. Julia Kristeva: Speaking the Unspeakable. Pluto Press, 1998.
- Still, Judith, and Michael Worton, editors. Intertextuality: Theories and Practices. Manchester University Press, 1990.
- Tihanov, Galin. The Master and the Slave: Lukács, Bakhtin, and the Ideas of Their Time. Oxford University Press, 2000.
Representative Quotations from “Word, Dialogue and Novel” by Julia Kristeva with Explanation
| Quotation | Explanation |
| “Any text is constructed as a mosaic of quotations; any text is the absorption and transformation of another.” | This quotation introduces the concept of intertextuality, which suggests that every text is inherently connected to and influenced by other texts, reflecting a network of references and transformations. |
| “The notion of intertextuality replaces that of intersubjectivity, and poetic language is read as at least double.” | Kristeva argues that intertextuality shifts the focus from the relationship between individual subjects to the relationship between texts, where meaning is always layered and multi-dimensional. |
| “The word as minimal textual unit thus turns out to occupy the status of mediator, linking structural models to cultural (historical) environment…” | Here, Kristeva emphasizes the role of the word as a dynamic mediator in texts, connecting linguistic structures with broader cultural and historical contexts. |
| “Dialogue can be monological, and what is called monologue can be dialogical.” | This quotation reflects Kristeva’s interpretation of Bakhtin’s dialogism, highlighting the complexity of language where even a seemingly singular voice can contain multiple perspectives and dialogues. |
| “The polyphonic novel becomes ‘unreadable’…and interior to language.” | Kristeva notes how modern polyphonic novels, such as those by Joyce or Kafka, push the boundaries of readability by becoming deeply self-referential and focused on the inner workings of language itself. |
| “Carnivalesque discourse breaks through the laws of a language censored by grammar and semantics and, at the same time, is a social and political protest.” | This quotation illustrates Kristeva’s application of Bakhtin’s idea of carnivalism, where subversive language challenges established norms and serves as a form of resistance against social and political systems. |
| “The novel incorporating carnivalesque structure is called polyphonic.” | Kristeva explains that novels using carnivalesque elements, which allow multiple voices and perspectives, are considered polyphonic, meaning they embrace a plurality of dialogues and meanings. |
| “The word within the space of texts…is oriented towards an anterior or synchronic literary corpus.” | This statement underlines the idea that words in a text are always in dialogue with past and contemporary literary works, reinforcing the interconnectedness of all textual production. |