шш in review DISCOURSE OF THE OTHER - University of British ...

BOOKS IN REVIEWand therefore reformulation of that past.To differentiate it from the closely alliedforms of satire and irony, Hutcheon emphasizesthat parody foregrounds differenceover repetition and aims toward theintramural rather than the extramural.Throughout the six chapters (whichrange from definitions of parody, to itspragmatic range, to the central paradoxof parody, to parody's shared codes, tothe parodie text's relation to the world),Hutcheon concentrates on parody's reclamationof the past "with difference."While somewhat conservative, parodyallows the present room of its own.Although problems in using sharedcontemporary cultural codes sometimesforce parody closer to perversion than tosubversion, Hutcheon, I think correctly,claims parody as a postmodern genre parexcellence. Because it is self-reflexive andoperates with dependent meaning, likeother postmodern forms it contradictsessentialism. And it obliges a triple readingcompetence — linguistic, rhetorical,and ideological. Hutcheon's most importantargument, however, is that parodyde-marginalizes literature and theory byconnecting art with the world. By usingsatire (which always observes and commentson the world), by combining popularand elite cultures, by accepting theauthority of the past while insisting onart's right to transgress, and by encouragingthe sharing of reading codes, parodybrings into play many current debates onthe status of the subject, on the notionof reference, and on concepts of objectivityand closure.As this too-condensed summary suggests,A Theory of Parody is an ambitiousstudy. It is particularly valuable as aprovocative response to current aestheticrealities. And it is filled with a widerangingsample of examples from the visualarts, from architecture, from music,and from literature and cinema. Hutcheon'sincorporation of various currenttheories (for example, feminist theory)and her references to Canadian literatureas well as other world literatures areof considerable political importance. Ifat times the rapid listing of illustrationsconfuses a reader already struggling tofollow the on-going argument, quibblingabout excessive illustration detracts fromthe importance of using a thoroughlyinterdisciplinary perspective. To illuminatecontemporary life, as this book undertakesto do, to show how cultural,artistic, social, and ideological codes mustbe shared by creator and respondent(Hutcheon analyzes form and semiotics,creation as well as response), to illuminatea playful genre that moves anywherefrom anger to mocking fun, muchpostmodern expression needs to be investigated.Hutcheon's writing would certainlybenefit from a less highly condensed style.In a work this difficult, the reader needsmore direction, more summary, and moredescription. I also think that a more discursivestyle would help demonstrateparody's idiosyncracies. As it stands,Hutcheon leans heavily toward usingparody synonymously with the term"postmodern," undercutting parody's distinctiveness.As well, some of the theoreticallanguage needs fuller explanation,not because the terms are jargon, butbecause they have been used so oftenthey need reinterpretation from Hutcheon'sown point of view ("ideological";"historicize" ; "validation"). All thisaside, Hutcheon's refusal to be caught upin either/or thinking and her consequentemphasis on paradox are of crucial politicalimportance. By breaking down divisionsbetween élite and popular cultures,between tradition and innovation, evenamong disciplines, she aligns herself withpostmodern movements that re-situateart within the everyday world.Hutcheon's investigation of the ways inwhich the present uses and transforms265