Just as Picasso and Braque fragment their canvases in an attempt to capture the subject from many perspectives at once, Faulkner shifts his narrative voice from one character to another, surrounding the plot from all sides while interrupting its flow.- Lindsay Gellman
Nedavno sam naišla na članak Lindzi Gelman koji je objavljen u Pariskoj Reviji u kome autorka termin „sintetički kubizamn“ transponuje sa slikarstva na literaturu. I kao što su slikari poput Braka i Pikasa kombinovali različite tehnike i materijale kako bi stvorili novu perspektivu za posmnatrača tj. recipijenta dela, tako je, prema autorki, i američki pisac Vilijamn Fokner postupio kroz postupak različitih narativnih tokova, stvarajući karaktere koji bi, baš kao i portreti Brakovbih i Pikasovbih figura, imali nekoliko strana koje bi im odavale tek naznake mogućih značenja. U nastavku slede neki od najzanimljivijih delova teksta.
Faulkner himself had an eye for art and a flair for visual expression; he drew and painted as a young man. And Picasso’s (and his contemporary Georges Braque’s) cubist project resonated with him. Beginning roughly after Picasso’s revolutionary „Les Demoiselles d’Avignon„ in 1907 and ending about 1912, Picasso and Braque mainly produced paintings now classified as analytic cubism, representing a subject from multiple perspectives simultaneously. In May of 1912, Picasso glued a piece of oilcloth, printed with a pattern of woven chair caning, onto a canvas he had painted with a still life. Synthetic cubism—the incorporation of found objects in a work to create a modernist collage—was born. (It died two years later.)
Some critics argue that Faulkner deliberately modeled the structure of his earlier works, like „The Sound and the Fury“ and „As I Lay Dying“ along analytic-cubist lines. Just as Picasso and Braque fragment their canvases in an attempt to capture the subject from many perspectives at once, Faulkner shifts his narrative voice from one character to another, surrounding the plot from all sides while interrupting its flow. But little attention has been paid to whether Faulkner continues to trace the cubist trajectory in his later work (or, put differently, whether cubism remains a helpful interpretive framework for Faulkner’s mature fiction). Was he a synthetic cubist, too?