On Normalities: Narratives of Bodies, Ability, and Freaks of Culture in Twentieth-century Francophone Literature

Abstract

Click to increase image sizeClick to decrease image size Notes 1. My use of “Francophone literature” arises in part from my position as a US citizen interested in questions raised in a field that, in my country of origin, is called Francophone literature. My use of la francophonie corresponds with this same background but also with the signification proposed by, among others, Michel Tétu in Qu’est-ce que la francophonie?: whereas “Francophonie” with an upper-case “F” designates the organization of French-speaking nations known as la Francophonie, “francophonie” with a lower-case “f” references a cultural (of which part is literary) movement, a grouping together of historically associated cultures with similar concerns about representation and identity (15-16). Together, my choice of terminology works in tandem with that of most if not all Francophone regions in an effort not to efface regional individuality but to reflect a “partage de valeurs communes ‘véhiculées’ […] par la langue française” (15). 2. The French translation of Garland Thomson's “Introduction” proposes “monstre culturel” for “freak of culture” undoubtedly because the etymologies of “monstre” and “freak” refer to nineteenth-century displays and spectacles of human bodies (Bancel 44). I propose “monstre de la culture” as it corresponds in signification as well as in structure to other “freak” terminology–“bizarreries de la nature,” “merveilles de la nature,” “freak of nature”—and thereby serves through these direct references as means of reappropriation and revalorization for individuals historically devalued as freaks. 3. By proposing a commonality other than colonization, the French language, or the French empire, I do not wish to imply that the linguistic and historical connections between these regions are unimportant. Indeed, they are at the very base of any study of la francophonie because “francophone” denotes “French-speaking” and because the regions were all at one time over the past three centuries French territories. It is nevertheless the French language–as an artifact of the former empire's majority powers and also as a living force in these regions–that I use as permission to unite these French-language texts in a study that asks new questions about language and power over bodies. 4. See also Davis’ insightful analysis, “Who Put the the in the Novel?” (Bending Over Backwards) which explores the paralleled development of normality and the development of the novel. Additional informationNotes on contributorsChristian FlaughWith an introduction by Aliko Songolo