FRAMING THE HUMAN CONDITION: THE EXISTENTIAL DILEMMA IN IRIS MURDOCH'S THE BELL AND MURIEL SPARK'S ROBINSON

Abstract

One of the features of modernist and postmodernist novels is the way they interrogate classical metaphysics, in the spirit of what Habermas calls post‐metaphysical thinking, otherwise known as the post‐Enlightenment critique of the Enlightenment. As a literary prism, post‐metaphysical thinking is not anti‐metaphysical: it conducts its interrogation and still accommodates both secular and religious frames. Iris Murdoch and Muriel Spark are often compared but they interrogate classical metaphysics from different perspectives and for different purposes. In the nineteen‐fifties, Murdoch was an aspiring philosophical author who treated classical metaphysics as a canon of influential myth, while Spark was an aspiring theological author who had recently converted to Catholicism. Through a reading of The Bell and Robinson, both published in the same year, this article describes how the young Murdoch and Spark do what emerging literary authors of the nineteen‐fifties were expected to do: frame the human condition and reflect on its existential dilemma. With their different perspectives they both write within the same paradigm, or theory of mind; against symbolic backgrounds, and among significant dialogues, they make use of similar tropes. But Murdoch and Spark arrive at opposite positions on the relationship between imagination and reality, between logos and mythos, and ultimately on the nature of freedom and contingency.