Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorMARSH, HDJen_US
dc.date.accessioned2016-09-08T10:50:01Z
dc.date.available2016-06-30en_US
dc.date.issued2018-11-08en_US
dc.date.submitted2016-08-05T15:36:52.428Z
dc.identifier.issn1470-1308en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://qmro.qmul.ac.uk/xmlui/handle/123456789/15047
dc.description.abstractUnreliability and uncertainty are at the centre of Ian McEwan’s Atonement, and discussions of the novel often emphasise this aspect of the text, arguing that it demands to be reread in light of its surprise ending. Yet such readings do not entertain a more radical doubt as to the reliability of the novel’s protagonist, Briony Tallis, and the accuracy of her adult attempt to atone for a childhood mistake. This article asks why this is the case and offers an alternative reading. It suggests that the force of the concluding section, as well as the way in which the preceding sections build to suggest that Briony’s revised version of events is correct, have effectively shut down a more far-reaching discussion of reliability and the ways in which meaning is revealed and withheld. Drawing on recent developments in narrative theory, it does not argue for an alternative orthodoxy about what ‘really’ happened and what Briony did or did not see, but rather suggests that the consensus that has accreted around her revised version of events raises important questions about the nature of narrative (un)reliability, the role of the implied author, and the ways in which narratives are read, and reread.en_US
dc.format.extent1325 - 1343 (19)en_US
dc.publisherTaylor & Francis (Routledge): SSH Titlesen_US
dc.relation.ispartofTextual Practice: an international journal of radical literary studiesen_US
dc.rights© 2017 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
dc.titleNarrative unreliability and metarepresentation in Ian McEwan’s Atonement; or, why Robbie might be guilty and why nobody seems to noticeen_US
dc.typeArticle
dc.rights.holder© 2017 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
dc.identifier.doi10.1080/0950236X.2016.1276955en_US
pubs.notes18 monthsen_US
pubs.notesArticle not yet published; embargo is 18 months from date of publication.en_US
pubs.organisational-group/Queen Mary University of London
pubs.organisational-group/Queen Mary University of London/Faculty of Humanities, Social Sciences & Law
pubs.organisational-group/Queen Mary University of London/Faculty of Humanities, Social Sciences & Law/English and Drama - Staff
pubs.organisational-group/Queen Mary University of London/REF
pubs.organisational-group/Queen Mary University of London/REF/REF - HSS - SED
pubs.organisational-group/Queen Mary University of London/REF/REF - UoA 27
pubs.publication-statusPublisheden_US
dcterms.dateAccepted2016-06-30en_US


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record