The hermeneutics of vagueness

Abstract

Notwithstanding its popularity and the presence of clear literary critical definitions, the term magical realism continues to attract controversy and confusion. This essay explores the reasons for this state of affairs, and proposes solutions for it. It rejects the vagueness that accompanies much criticism of magical realism, and advocates an approach that attends to narrative technologies of form and structure, while also insisting that cultural and historical particularities be respected.

Keywords:

• magical realism
• criticism
• postcolonial literature
• culture

Notes

For the former, see Thornhill. The latter use of the term appears in an advertisement by a company called Mag‐Well for a “magic realist water softening device” (see Mag‐Well). The company claims that the multinational corporation Halliburton has invested substantially in the new device, and notes, wholly without irony, that Halliburton intends to market the device to its customers in Latin America first.

See Todorov: “The birth of a tiger does not modify the species in definition [ … ] the same is not the case in the realm of art or science. Here evolution operates with an altogether different rhythm: every work modifies the sum of possible works, each new example alters the species” (6).

Among the novels that Roberts calls magical realism are Etienne van Heerden’s Ancestral Voices (Toorberg), Karel Schoeman’s Another Country (’n Ander land) and Marita van der Vyfer’s Entertaining Angels (Griet skryf ‘n sprokie). Of these, I can find convincing evidence of magical realism only in Van Heerden.

For a similar mistake see Menton (20–30).

For a convincing argument that “New Age spirituality is, in fact, the most important cultural vector shaping The Famished Road” see Douglas McCabe (172).