DECONSTRUCTING THE PLAGUE: AMBIVALENCE OF MARY SHELLEY’S THE LAST MAN

Year 2018, Issue: 31, 215 - 220, 13.04.2018

Hande Tekdemir

https://doi.org/10.30794/pausbed.414825

Abstract

This
article will examine Mary Shelley’s The
Last Man as an end-of-the-world narrative and explore the ambivalence of
the global progression of the deadly plague that brings the end of the world. I
would like to examine the plague’s ambivalence not only as a deconstructive
strategy that resists traditional orientalist readings and promotes a
counter-politics of nationalism and orientalism, but also an effective
self-effacing principle that persistently eliminates any possibility of a
meta-narrative in the novel, even when that same meta-narrative could involve a
critique of western hegemony. With the purpose of examining the text’s
self-deconstructive foundation, I will do a double reading of the novel that on
the one hand illustrates its critique of orientalism and nationalism while on
the other hand focuses on the ambivalence as a central disorienting force in
the narrative, which is perhaps a gesture that stands for the text’s refusal to
colonize itself.

Keywords

Mary Shelley, The Last Man, Orientalism, Apocalypse

Vebanın Yapısökümü: Mary Shelley’nin Son İnsan’ındaki Muğlaklık

Abstract

Bu makale Mary Shelley’nin Son İnsan adlı romanını apokaliptik bir metin olarak incelemekte ve
dünyanın sonunu getiren ölümcül vebanın yeryüzüne yayılışındaki belirsizliğe
odaklanmaktadır.  Vebanın çıkış ve
dağılışındaki muğlaklığı, geleneksel şarkiyatçı okumalara karşı çıkan
yapısökümcü bir strateji olarak yorumlamanın yanı sıra, aynı zamanda metnin
genelinde bir üst-anlatının (ki bu üst-anlatı Batı hegemonyasını eleştirel
nitelik taşıyor olsa bile) oluşma imkanını baltalayan etkin bir “kendini
yoketme” prensipi olarak analiz edeceğim. Metnin yapısökücü temelini irdelemek
amacıyla, bir yandan romanın milliyetçi ve şarkiyatçı yaklaşımlara eleştirel
tutumunu, öte yandan da belirsizliğin metnin ana merkezi oluşunu, iki yönlü bir
okuma yaparak tartışmayı hedefliyorum

Keywords

Mary Shelley, Son İnsan, Şarkiyatçılık

References

• Bewell, A. (1999). “’All the World Has the Plague’: Mary Shelley’s The Last Man”, Romanticism and Colonial Disease, The John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore. 296-315. Canuel, M. (1998). “Acts, Rules, and The Last Man”, Nineteenth-Century Literature, Vol. 53, No. 2 (Sep), pp. 147- 170. Eller, J. (2009). “Vaulted Over by the Present”: Melancholy and Sovereignty in Mary Shelley’s The Last Man”, Novel 42.2 Summer 355-359. Franci, G. (1985). “A Mirror of the Future: Vision and Apocalypse in Mary Shelley’s The Last Man” Mary Shelley, (Ed: H. Bloom), Chelsea House Publishing, New York. Goldsmith, S. (1990). “Of Gender, Plague, and Apocalypse: Mary Shelley’s The Last Man”, The Yale Journal of Criticism; Fall; 4,1. 129-173. Lew, J. W. (1998). “The plague of imperial desire: Montesquieu, Gibbon, Brougham, and Mary Shelley’s The Last Man”, Romanticism and Colonialism: Writing and Empire, 1780-1830, (Ed: T. Fulford and P. J. Kitson), Cambridge University Press, New York. 261-278. Mellor, A. K. (1988). Mary Shelley: Her Life, Her Fiction, Her Monsters, Methuen, New York Shelley, M. (1826; 1998). The Last Man, (Ed: M. D. Paley), Oxford University Press, Oxford. Snyder, R. L. (1978). “Apocalypse and Indeterminacy in Mary Shelley’s The Last Man”, Studies in Romanticism, 17, Fall. 435-452. Sussman, C. (2003). “‘Islanded in the World’: Cultural Memory and Human Mobility in The Last Man”, PMLA 118.2 (Mar), pp. 286-301.