MLR, 96. I, 2001 UmbertoEco: Philosophy,Semioticsand the Workof Fiction. By MICHAELCAESAR. (Key Contemporary Thinkers) Cambridge: Polity Press. i999. x + 198 pp. [45 (paperbound I3.99). This is another in Polity's'Key ContemporaryThinkers'series and it is interesting to speculateon the briefthe authorwas given by the editors(John Thompson, who began the series, is not credited here, except in the acknowledgements).Michael Caesar decided to go for the hard and the mainstream,and well over half his book is on Eco and semiotic theory, about which he writesvery competently, but a little dourly, as though it were not an area he feels relaxed in. His concentration on this, as central to Eco's work, makes it very professional,but also means that he cannot find space to write about other parts of Eco that are not so mainstream. I miss discussionof Travels inHyperreality, Eco's book on America:not so much the workof a key contemporary thinker, but as interesting as Baudrillardon the same topic. Eco's workonJames Bond isjust alluded to, but as it also shows off Eco at his best, it is a pity that it was missedout. There isnothing on Eco's relationshipwith Borges, where the affinitiesand culturaldifferencesrun deep. What is witty and on the side of the transgressivein Eco, not least the aspect of his semiotics that sees it as the theoryof the lie, is missedout. Caesar'sapproach, beginning with Croce and Pareyson,necessitatesleaving out much of the changesin criticaltheorytakingplace in Francein the I96os and 1970s: these are reduced to occasional references, but they matter, as does Eco's relationshipwith them: for example, why did he staywith structuralistapproaches afterpost-structuralism? Though Caesarrefersto the 'cultureindustry'(p. 39), he is silent on Adorno from whom the phrase comes, and does not relate Eco's work on the popular to other debates. At one point (p. Io8) he quotes Roger Scruton's irritationwith semiotics as making all cultural forms 'equally legitimate forms of inquiry';noting that Eco does not reply to that specifically,Caesar does not either, and remains content with close descriptionof what Eco's theory of semiotics does, without taking up the argument. Caesar cites others on Eco in general terms: Jonathan Culler's'interesting'discussion(p. 72), or Michael McCanles's 'trenchant review' (p. I03). But here the problems with Caesar's approach set in. His critical termsare inadequatefor seeing that a review in Diacritics (thatof McCanles) means a specificallynuanced criticaldebatefromwhich neitherEco nor he can be isolated. Referringto Eco'sApocalittici eintegrati (1964), his studyof intellectuals'relationship, (apocalypticor integrated)to popularculture,he notes how Eco feels able to situate both, but thisposes the question:the intellectualwho can situateothers,fromwhat point of vantage does he write himself? What blindness gives him the insight to divideup intellectualsin thatway?Which intellectualpositions,apartfromhis own, is he missing out? In reacting to essays such as David Robey's as 'closely argued', (p. 46), the compliment disguisesthe point thatCaesar'sbook,valuableon so much, fails to ask about the basis for his own and his subject'sjudgements about politics and culturalpractices;there is no recognition of the role of ideology either in Eco's workor as a topic that semioticsis inseparablefrom. I miss in both Eco and this book, a sustainedtreatment of the unconscious, and of Freud,and of Kristeva, though a discussionof these things begins and breaksoff through reference to Teresa De Lauretis (pp. Io6-07); similarly, the question of gender,whose relationshipto semioticsshouldneed no arguing,isbarelymentioned. Lastly,I thinkCaesarshould have trustedhimselfmore to write about Eco'sfiction, where he spends roughly only ten pages. As exasperationa hundredpages before I stopped reading meant I could not finish Foucault's Pendulum, I would have liked I45 Caesar to have told me whetherI was rightor wrong, but he is much too evasive to give a clue on thismatterto the reviewer. UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG JEREMY TAMBLING Travel Writing andEmpire.Ed. by STEVE CLARK. London and New York:Zed Books. I999. viii + 264 pp. $65 (paperbound $22.50; 1I4.95). This collection of fifteenessaysoffersfreshperspectiveson travelwritingin the light of a number of contemporarytheories.Collectivelythey argue conclusivelythat the very notion of an innocent travel narrativeis an impossibilityand that travellers' 'textspromote, confirmand lament the exercise of imperialpower' (p. 3...
Read full abstract