Contemporary Literature and Theory: Ethics, Storytelling and a New Radicality of Thought

The last few decades have been characterised by the demise of the golden age of theory and by an unparalleled proliferation of critical views, methods and jargons. The overall impression is that of a theoretical anomie, of a trivialisation of the role of criticism, whose fashion-conscious acolytes are less and less capable of escaping the traps of postmodern aporias. As Terry Eagleton provocatively asserts in "After Theory" (2003), the playful (and often ostentatious) ways in which theory is currently applied to literary texts evidence a crisis that has invested our structures of knowledge and conception of literature Together with Eagleton’s, other voices have recently raised to invite intellectuals to flee the arenas of fashionable debates, to avoid critical word-play for its own sake, and, more importantly, to rethink the relation between literature and criticism, representation and referentiality, history and fiction. It suffices to think of fresh attempts to reconcile relativism with absolutes made by philosophers like Paul O’Grady and Bernard Williams, or of Umberto Eco’s warning against a dangerous critical heresy which obliterates the literary text’s intentionality. In spite of their individual differences, these advocates of ‘fresh thinking’ share two important convictions: they see the danger of transforming the realm of theory into a ‘supermarket of opinions’ (Cesare Segre); and they place new value on the function fulfilled by humanities in representing and understanding reality. What is signalled by their multi-voiced bid for change is the fact that we are now at a turning-point in the history of theory and literary criticism. The problem of ethics, in particular, is a pressing one, since the reframing of humanistic ideals entails a reconsideration of philosophical and literary concepts long been exposed as obsolete and deceitful. While exploring these issues, this article analyses three novels published after 2000 which assign a new centrality to humanistic values and historical determinants: Sarah Waters’s "Fingersmith" (2002), Ian McEwan’s "Saturday" (2005), and Ben Okri’s "Starbook" (2007). In all of them, the authors’ fictionalisation of concrete historical problems invites the reader/interpreter to a wider reflection on more ‘universal’ questions, such as the relation between past and present, individual and communal life, pluralism and truth, knowledge and creativity. By comparing the above-mentioned novels, the article shows that contemporary literature has taken on the responsibility for bringing forth a new radicality of thought – a radicality that is etymologically closer to the original meaning of the Latin word "radix" (“roots”), since it entails a careful rethinking of philosophical notions concerning the foundations of historical and ethical ‘realities’. Without resurrecting ideological spectres that were exorcised by deconstructionists, Waters, McEwan and Okri nonetheless engage theorists in a creative dialogue, since they provide them with ‘radical’ texts that require a new theoretical framework to be properly read and understood. The importance of their ‘challenge’ is highlighted by the presence of distinctive generic markers that set dangerous traps for critics. But it is exactly this obstacle that we need to overcome. If we manage to escape ready-made classification, we see that the real novelty of these texts is the space of exchange between philosophy and storytelling, literature and interpretation they point to – a symbiotic, fertile space which theorists are invited to explore and interact with.