Author: William Hope

Source: Yearbook of European Studies, "Beyond Boundaries: Textual Representations of European Identity", edited by Andy Hollis , pp. 181-199(19)

Publisher: Rodopi

Abstract:

One of the central aspects of Fagerholm's novel discussed by Sundholm is point of view, a vital consideration, too, when contemplating literature of an autobiographical nature. If narratorial reliability is at best uncertain when Fagerholm deploys a child's perspective through which to relate her 'Swedish' tale, it becomes entirely questionable when a narrator appears to be writing to further his own self-interest. William Hope suggests that such suspicions are justified when reading Curzio Malaparte's Diary of a Foreigner in Paris. Published in 1966, nine years after his death, Malaparte's 'Diary' highlights the problems faced by an Italian writer and francophile as he attempted to settle in Paris after the Second World War and frequent its literary circles. Finding that more attention was being paid to his association with Fascism than to the fact that he was decorated for bravery after volunteering to fight for France during the First World War, Malaparte used his diary and his reader-confidant as a means of combatting the hostility he faced. Although ultimately published in Italy, the diary was intended for publication in France, and through a modern approach to travel writing, it sought to strike a delicate balance between providing a French readership with a foreigner's view of their society while simultaneously distancing the author from Fascism by stressing his past loyalty to France.

Hope points out that various narrative strategies were employed to neutralise the hostility of people who sought to label Malaparte as a Fascist oppressor. At the same time, the author attempted to establish himself as a model of French patriotism in order to gain the reader's respect and trust. However, the diary was not revised by the author before his death, and in its unrefined form, the Malapartian narrator remains a deeply ambiguous figure. After having openly confronted and criticised the crude oppressor/liberator dichotomy that he believed was the prevalent criterion for evaluating people in postwar Paris, Malaparte, Hope argues, is far from convincing in his attempts to find a position for himself within this dichotomy.

Document Type: Research article

Publication date: 2000-12-15

More about this publication?

• Subscribe to this Title
• ingentaconnect is not responsible for the content or availability of external websites

Related content

• In this: publication
• By this: publisher
• In this Subject: History
• By this author: William Hope

Website © Publishing Technology. Article copyright remains with the publisher, society or author(s) as specified within the article.

• Terms and conditions
• Privacy policy
• Information for advertisers