30.05.2016 Views

sempozyum_bildiri_kitabi

sempozyum_bildiri_kitabi

sempozyum_bildiri_kitabi

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

[…] and slowly everything changed inside me. Yes of course it did. Because suddenly it<br />

was all different, what I did had a value that made people ready to pay, up to that time<br />

everything I did had a value because nobody was ready to pay. It is funny about money.<br />

And it is funny about identity. You are you because your little dog knows you, but when<br />

your public knows you and does not want to pay for you and when your public knows you<br />

and does want to pay for you, you are not the same you. 7<br />

This distinction between textuality and authenticity can be exemplified from The Autobiography<br />

of Alice B. Toklas. This sensibility is depicted through a conversation between French art critic<br />

Ambroise Vollard and a young painter that Gertrude Stein hears and Toklas voices:<br />

Conclusion<br />

You are a nice young man, gentle and intelligent, but to the important personage you<br />

would not seem so, you would be terrible. No they need as representative painter a<br />

medium seized, slightly stout man, not to well dressed but dressed in the fashion of his<br />

class, neither bold or well brushed hair and a respectful bow with it. You can see that you<br />

would not do. So never say another word about official recognition, or if you do look in<br />

the mirror and think of important personages. No, my dear young friend there is art and<br />

there is official art, there always has been and there always will be. 8<br />

In conclusion, as contemporary critics of women’s life writing, having examined Everybody’s<br />

Autobiography and The Autobiography of Alice B. Toklas, we have come out with certain sensibilities<br />

concerning the issues of representation and textuality. First of all, we observed that Gertrude Stein<br />

broke with traditional autobiographical pact as a referential link between the author / the name of<br />

the author and the person s/he writes about that is herself or himself, because Stein challenged the<br />

validity of language as a means to depict selfhood. To her, selfhood could not be reported / written<br />

yet fictionalized. Thus, ultimately freed from the necessities of language, Stein’s narration flows<br />

without punctuation and the rules of standard English as a means in highlighting the multilayered<br />

forms of reality. There are no rules in her writing, but her idiosyncrasy can be immediately received<br />

by the reader and it evokes relevant sensibilities of characterization and narration she used to apply<br />

in her other works of fiction. To talk about her fictional style while commenting on her<br />

autobiographies may sound strange, however, she rejects any kind of distinction between her<br />

fictional and autobiographical narratives. She believes that the effect of reality can also be derived<br />

from the way it was depicted. By treating her autobiographical subject, then, she denounces the<br />

assumed truthfulness of the traditional autobiographies. Thus, by applying her fictional techniques<br />

such as multiple narrators / personas, fragmentation and stream of consciousness, Stein provides the<br />

reader with a multilayered depiction of her life in early twentieth century Paris with her partner Alice<br />

B. Toklas. Therefore, not only her own portrayal but also a gallery of portraits is exhibited through<br />

her autobiography. Moreover, considering her ethos as a female author – though she never stresses<br />

her female identity – she transgresses the hierarchy and the canon of male autobiographers as her<br />

The Autobiography of Alice B. Toklas becomes a bestseller. Hence, her voicing of Alice B. Toklas in the<br />

example of Matissé’s art is unique, where out of a single author come two authors of the same life.<br />

In this example, Stein’s voice does not overwhelm Toklas’s voice. Stein has her way of artistic<br />

comment whereas Toklas has hers. However what distinguish Toklas from Stein is her practical, trueto‐life<br />

examples. Toklas has her feminine responses to life. And into her autobiographical narrative<br />

she exposes her female identity, which has been only recently the concern of the French feminists.<br />

Thus, Stein’s autobiographies can be defined as the precursors of post‐structuralists of late twentieth<br />

century. What is more, with her autobiographies, Stein puts forward an ontological significance<br />

through the writing process. She frequently questions whether her narrative is responsive to outer

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!