Stendhal: Le Temps et l'histoire (review)

Ansel, Yves. Stendhal: Le Temps et l'histoire. Presses Universitaires du Mirail, 2000. Pp. 255. ISBN 2-85816-504-1

In order to produce an original work within the already crowded area of Stendhal studies, Yves Ansel had to narrow his focus, finding for himself a niche in Stendhal: Le Temps et l'histoire. While this focus requires Ansel to explore in detail the œuvre of Stendhal as only specialists as well versed as he could, it also paradoxically permits him to open onto areas of theoretical interest to scholars whose primary interest is not Stendhal. This volume will be of particular value to those working on questions of temporality in narrative and to those working on any aspect of autobiography.

Yves Ansel has not, as the title might suggest, attempted a historical reading of Stendhal, rather a reading of history in its relation to temporality in the œuvre of Stendhal. Ansel's readings go back and forth between the fictional and the non-fictional texts, highlighting continuities in the treatment of temporality. His best developed argument revolves around the often noted errors in temporality made by the author in the novels and journals, which are normally dismissed by critics as simple carelessness. Working from an analysis of Stendhal's comments on his own writing, as seen in journals and marginal notes, Ansel provides fascinating insight into the writing process which produced these errors. He argues convincingly that they are the result of aesthetic ambivalence about time, rather than carelessness about the details of narration. For Ansel, Stendhal is an author who fundamentally refuses, in his life and in his fictional works, to progress: "Le manque de liaison, les déficiences de l'intrigue dans les romans de Stendhal doivent sans doute beaucoup à Beyle, absolument incapable de planifier, de régler sa vie: entre l'œuvre, faible dans la 'science della sceneggiatura' (les récits de Stendhal sont très évidemment mal charpentés, mal structurés) et l'homme confiant son destin à la fortune, la relation s'impose" (19).

While his readings of the novels occasionally fall into synthesis of earlier critics (Ansel owes much to Philippe Berthier, to whom the volume is dedicated) and fail to present an original analysis, Ansel's work on the autobiographical texts is outstanding and should be required reading for anyone working on this aspect of Stendhal's œuvre. Moreover, it will also be of interest to anyone working on any autobiographical texts, as it examines the inherent difficulties of narrativizing one's own life. Ansel makes a strong argument for the originality of Stendhal's auto-biographical works, as he writes: "Prenant ses aises avec les dates et la durée, Stendhal écrit une autobiographie 'moderne' où les souvenirs, comme chez Leiris, sont moins égrenés qu'ils ne sont 'montés en série' (par affinité, similarité)" (101).

In reading this elegantly written volume, I often wished that Ansel had been more explicit in mapping out the structure and progression of his arguments. In fact, in the short preface, he explicitly refuses to explain or defend his methodology, stating (in somewhat bad faith, I think): "Nous ne voulions que lire Stendhal" (9). As a result, the book, which at times reads more like an appreciation than an analysis with quotes from Stendhal bleeding relentlessly into the main text, can basically only be read from start to finish and excerpting it for use in class would be nearly impossible. Still, for specialists of Stendhal and for those interested in narrative temporality, especially in autobiography, Ansel's volume will be a valued addition.

Susan McCready, University of South Alabama

 

...