Christie Malry's Own Double-Entry: B. S. Johnson's Oppositional Discourse of Unbelief

Re is a Alican ina de Es udios Ingleses 7 (1994): 55-66 Ch is ie Mal y's Own Double-En y: B. S. Johnson's Opposi ional Discou se o Unbelie B ian C ews Uni e sidad de Se illa ABSTRACT This a icle poin s ou he analogous na u e o he no el and pos mode nism as o ms o opposi ional discou se and sugges s ha i is wo hwhile o conside he pos mode nis no el as he opposi ional discou se o unbelie , which con es s he o ms and con en ions o ou cul u e, in gene al, and o he no el i sel , in pa icula , delibe a ely se ing i sel up in opposi ion o hem. This is he case o Ch is ie Mal y's Own Double-En y, whe e an analogy is d awn be ween he Double-En y sys em o bookkeeping, which he p o agonis applies igo ously o his expe ience, and he G and Na a i es o Ch is iani y and Capi alism, which a e igo ously applied o ou own. Each is a manne o gi ing o m and signi icance o exis ence in he same way as na a i e i sel ends owa ds a simila allacious o de ing o expe ience. Thus, Johnson alludes o a concei able eali y bu a he same ime con es s he alidi y o he o ms we use o gi e shape o i . When any pos mode nis na a i e is conside ed, he endency is o begin, no wi h he ex , bu wi h a heo e ical conside a ion o he na u e o pos mode nism and e en o ha o he no el. This is an annoying ea u e o much con empo a y c i icism which usually leads o abs ac ion, al hough i is some imes di icul o a oid. Fo his eason i becomes necessa y o edisco e he ex i sel . The wo k o B. S. Johnson is ine i ably ela ed o opics like me a ic ion and pos mode nism al hough he, nei he as c i ic ño as no elis , e e ed o himsel in hese e ms. He clea ly seeks a con on a ion wi h con en ion and adi ion, bu he inno a i e manne in which he does so leads us o econside he na u e o he ela ion be ween adi ion and inno a ion, be ween no el and pos mode n. Up o now, he pos mode n deba e has ailed o app ecia e his ela ion ha exis s be ween no el and pos mode n and, while many ins ances o pos mode nism ha e occu ed in na a i e, he link is mo e han casual: he ideology o each is simila and wha is called pos mode n in na a i e is he esul o aking ad an age o possibili ies ha ha e 56 Re is a Alican ina de Es udios Ingleses always exis ed in he o m in o de o push i in a new di ec ion, bu wi hou b eaking comple ely wi h he pas . The appea ance o pos mode nis na a i e is, he e o e, linked o he de elopmen o he no el as such, as many ea u es ha a e conside ed pos mode n jus happen o be and ha e always been ound he e. Conside ed as pa o he de elopmen o he no el, pos mode nis na a i e can be seen as sha ing simila ideological implica ions and i is in his ligh ha we ha e o see he supposed inno a ions o much con empo a y na a i e. Le us conside a ew basic sha ed ea u es: he no el, since i s beginnings always eac ed agains o he , pa icula ly li e a y, o ms o na a i e, wi h a endency o assimila e a g ea a ie y o modes o discou se wi hou being conside ed as any o hem. The no el is, he e o e, hyb id, an open gen e which uses and a he same ime con es s he ideologies and o ms which p ecede and coexis wi h i . All o his is equally ue o he pos mode nis no el al hough we can say ha he la e highligh s some o hese exis ing ea u es, pa icula ly in he ligh o con empo a y ideology. Howe e , i emains a no el, and he changes ha we ind he e a e o deg ee and no o na u e. The inno a ions ha a e ound usually occu in e ms o he ac ha he no el has always been an á ea whe e dis inc cul u al codes and o ms o exp ession, bo h li e a y and non-li e a y, come in o con ac and in e ac wi h one ano he (see Holquis and Reed 418-19). Each no el can also be conside ed as a unique se o a iables (B adbu y 289), bu i always in ol es he use o a se ies o exis ing possibili ies ha a e always a ailable, hough emphases may change. The no el has always ques ioned adi ional ideas o ealism and many changes in i s de elopmen a e ela ed o his. The no el i sel , and la e de elopmen s, including he pos mode nis no el, a e also a esul o his. This leads us o conside he changes ha ha e aken place as esul ing om he na u e o he no el as opposi ional discou se: ha is, he no el exis s in some kind o ela ion o opposi ion o o he modes o discou se, adi ions and con en ions as well as o ea lie conside a ions o ealism (see Bakh in 5). Cu iously, he same can be said o pos mode nism which is pe u bed by he ac ha we so eadily assimila e con en ions and he con en ional and eac s agains he allacies o accep ed ealis ic modes o discou se. The no el is, hen, essen ially, an i- adi ional, al hough i is a ques ion o deg ee o which poin each no el akes ad an age o o ejec s he possibili ies ha exis wi hin, and e en ou wi h, ha adi ion. The ejec ion o con en ions o he uncon en ional use o he mechanisms o na a i e o m pa o a play ul elemen which has always exis ed in he no el and, up o a poin , ou conside a ion o he no el as adi ional, mode a o pos mode n depends on he obse a ion o ansg ession o li e a y con en ions. Howe e , he inno a i e use o al eady exis ing modes and o ms has always been ypical o he no el as well as o ming pa o he cha ac e o pos mode nism. Thus, al hough i may be doing i o di e en easons, he pos mode nis no el con inúes o do wha he no el had al eady been doing be o e. The changes ha a e ound in he pos mode nis no el ake place due o a change in a í ude owa ds eali y and ealism, some hing ha has always occu ed in he no el, in i s beginnings and du ing i s pe iods o de elopmen . These changes usually lead o a sea ch o new means o p esen a ion and he assimila ion o ejec ion o some mode o discou se (Ke le I: 24). The e o e, we should hink o he de elopmen o he no el as a B. S. Johnson's Opposi ional Discou se 57 se ies o ealisms, o di e en o ms o seeing eali y, and ha he pos mode nis no el is a u he example o his. As opposi ional discou se, e en he adi ional English no el denied he con en ions o p e ious ealisms, bu made use o i s adop ed con en ions (mainly hose o non-li e a y modes o discou se) o pe suade he eade o i s ealism. La e , he no el would begin o de amilia ise hese con en ions and, al hough his is a ea u e o bo h mode nism and pos mode nism, i emains a de ining ea u e o he no el i sel h ough which i is con inually enewed. Pos mode nism, seen as opposi ional discou se (o e en as a se ies o opposi ional discou ses), ques ions ou o ms o aming eali y and asks whe he he e a e possibili ies o eno a ion when many had conside ed he possibili ies o ha e been exhaus ed. Au ho s like B. S. Johnson unde s ood ha man does no ep esen eali y bu p ojec s o cons uc s i , and ha he does so ine i ably in e ms o exis ing con en ions, whe he he ollows hem o no . This in ol es a c i ical econside a ion o pas and p esen con en ions in which he ine i able dis o ion o expe ience ha akes place in any na a i e is emphasised. Johnson con inúes o make use o exis ing li e a y and non-li e a y modes o p esen a ion as he no el has always done, bu like o he pos mode nis w i e s he does so in a mo e sel -conscious and c i ical manne . I has been said ha pos mode ni y is he esul o a legi ima ion c isis whe e au ho i a i e and o icial na a i es a e ques ioned (see Habe mas and Lyo a d 74). The e a e only app oxima ions o he u h and pos mode nism, as opposi ional discou se, econside s he o ms and con en ions we use. Theo is s ell us ha while we a e able o concei e o eali y, i emains unp esen able. This means ha we can only know a simulac um, which, in pos mode ni y, coincides wi h a pe iod o de e io a ion which has o e es ima ed he alué o he image a he expense o eali y. I becomes clea ha he eali y wi h which we come in con ac is a ab ica ion, a ic ional cons uc like any o he ic i ious na a i e (all o his is mo e ully de eloped by Jameson, Lyo a d and Baud illa d). We can only know a simulac um o eali y and he g and na a i es o ou ime, like Ch is iani y and Capi alism, a e ecognised as such in spi e o hei appa en au ho i y. Pos mode nis na a i e d aws a en ion o all his in a mo e sub e si e manne han i s p edecesso s which is o en called me a ic ion. This in ol es he dena u alisa ion and e ela ion o i s own a í ice in a sel - e lexi e manne , which can also be conside ed as a kind o opposi ional discou se. This kind o ac i i y is no exclusi e o pos mode nis ex s, bu no longe o ms pa o a he o ic designed o pe suade he eade : bu a he dissuades him as ega ds he ealis ic possibili ies o he na a i e. The wo k o B. S. Johnson shows ha he e ms no el and pos mode nis a e analogous as, acco ding o Johnson himsel , he only wan ed o do wha he no el does bes and we could say ha ha is wha makes he no el pos mode nis (1973). He en e s in o a dialogue wi h he o ms and con en ions o li e a u e in o de o disco e he mechanisms o he no el, making use o bu con es ing he con en ions we ind he e. In a no el like Ch is ie Mal y's Own Double-En y, he shows how na a i e always dis o s eali y and he d aws a en ion o a numbe o ealis ic allacies, in pa icula he de amilia ises and ques ions au ho i a i e and o icial discou ses like hose o Ch is iani y and Accoun ing and, by showing ha hey oo a e analogous, highligh s he need o al e na i es. 58 Re is a Alican ina de Es udios Ingleses Ch is ie Mal y is an ob ious example o abula ion which, h ough a o m o nega ion, alludes o eali y h ough i s absence. Mo e han his, we ind an ex eme example o me a ic ion which en e s in o a di ec dialogue wi h he eade and wi h o m, exploi ing a wide ange o na a i e modes and embodying a se ious s a emen abou he ic ional na u e o all na a i es. Johnson himsel said ha his ma e ial was he inside o his own skull and, in his case, his is ue almos en i ely as ega ds his sel -conscious conside a ion o he mechanisms a ailable o him as a w i e . He anges om he g and na a i es o eligious discou se o accoun ancy, and om an imp essionis ic s eam o consciousness o a d ama ic hea ical s yle. The use o he o me , pa icula ly whe e he ic i ious na u e o e e y mode o discou se is o eg ounded, clea ly implies a se ious s a emen abou he way in which ou idea o he wo ld has been adically dis o ed by bo h eligión and ma e ialism. The s a emen made is ha eali y is no like his and we a e o ced o go beyond hese g and na a i es in o de o look o an al e na i e. The no el is abou Ch is ie Mal y, "a simple pe son" (11), bo h in e ms o his a i ude owa ds li e and in e ms o he simplici y o his cha ac e isa ion, which shows how Johnson combines s a emen s abou li e and na a i e. Ch is ie's p oblem is how o acqui e money, he "be all and end all" o a ypically ma e ialis ic cha ac e , bo n wi hou money in o a ma e ialis ic wo ld. He i s joins a bank in o de o place himsel cióse o i , soon becomes disillusioned and hen becomes an accoun an o ind ou whe e money comes om. Na u ally, he soon begins o see e e y hing in e ms o p o i and loss, c edi s and debi s, pa icula ly as, when s udying a co espondence cou se on accoun ing, he disco e s he double-en y sys em o bookkeeping. One day, on inding his p og ess impeded by an o ice building on his way o wo k, he p omp ly decides o apply his sys em o li e in gene al: o each o ence ha he ecei es om socie y Ch is ie expec s some ecompense om socie y: I could exp ess i in Double-En y e ms. Debi Recei e , C edi gi e , he Second Golden Rule, debi Ch is ie Mal y o o ence ecei ed, C edi O ice Block o he o ence gi en How se le ha accoun ? I am en i led o exac paymen o cou se. E e y Debi mus ha e i s co esponding c edi , he Fi s Golden Rule. Bu paymen in wha o m? (24) Wha he does is o sc a ch he wall o he o ice building and om hen on Socie y becomes g adually mo e and mo e in deb o Ch is ie o i s o ences agains him, and his modes o exac ing paymen become mo e and mo e ex eme, biza e and, inally, unbelie - able. The no el also ells o Ch is ie's mo he , his upb inging, his ela ionship wi h his gi l iend and his sudden dea h om cánce . Each sec ion concludes wi h a " eckoning," which balances Ch is ie's c edi s and debi s. I is cu ious o no e ha " eckoning" is a wo d wi h ob ious eligious o e ones, and he no el g adually de elops a pa allel be ween he wo. Ch is ie's use o c edi and debi is equa ed wi h good and e il, punish- men and ecompense. Ou isión o eali y is dis o ed by seeing e e y hing in e ms o ei he eligious o economic discou ses and he ic i ious na u e o each is unde lined. The no el is o e ly and sel -consciously he c ea ion o an omniscien and omnipo en au ho . The na a o always eminds he eade and e en his cha ac e s o his in ol emen B. S. Johnson 's Opposi ional Discou se 59 in he wo k. Bu his is mo e han a abula ion; i has i s poin o make, which is ha man has been led o concei e o eali y and e en himsel in ma e ialis ic e ms, e ms which a e analogous o hose we ind in he discou se o Ch is iani y. We see how socie y imposes a pa icula isión o i sel on he indi idual and ind ha man has been misled, pa icula ly by eligión and his o y, in o sha ing a alse no ion o he exis ence o o m and meaning in ou li es. All o his akes place in a dialogue wi h o m and con en ion which shows up he possibili ies and limi a ions o a ailable modes and discou se. In s aigh o - wa d e ms, Ch is ie's exagge a ed o m o o de ing he uni e se in e ms o c edi s and debi s shows ha any o de we pe cei e is imposed, impe sonal and meaningless. Johnson's wo k in gene al ends o look o new o ms o mimesis bu pa adoxically, each a emp disco e s i sel as ye ano he o m o dis o ion o ic ion. This applies as ega ds his cons uc ion o cha ac e as well as in he way he sea ches o a new way o o de ing he chaos which we disco e in his no el. Johnson d aws a en ion o he ela ion be ween ic ion and eali y a a numbe o le éis. One o hese is o conside he na u e o cha ac e as a ic ional cons uc , which also in ol es an explo a ion o he ela ion be ween au ho and cha ac e . This in ol es playing wi h he logic o ealism and d aws a en ion o he basic absu di y behind he ealis ic allacy. E e y omniscien au ho c ea es he illusion o independen au onomous cha ac e s, bu in Johnson's no el, hese same cha ac e s ind ha ealism and eali y o e lap and in e ac , which allows hem o ansg ess on ologically dis inc wo lds in o de o ake pa in discussions wi h hei au ho . This ollows on om whe e Flann O'B ien's A Swim-Two-Bi ds began, whe e he ealism o cha ac e s is aken li e ally and he ic i ious is conside ed as eal, hus highligh ing he ypical and ic i ious na u e o cha ac e isa ion as such. Much o he no el eads like he ypical an i-he oic "ang y young man" no éis o he 50s and 60s, bu he na a i e is con inually in e up ed by commen s abou he na u e o na a i e and mo e pa icula ly by commen s by he cha ac e s hemsel es abou hei own ic i ious na u e. Thus, dis inc on ological wo lds collide and he ela ion be ween he na a i e and he eali y ha exis s beyond i is ema ked. Johnson commi s himsel o a o m o ealism, bu inds ha his own cha ac e s gi e he game away by e e ing o he ic i ious na u e o hei exis ence. Howe e , his i sel is pa adoxical as na a o , cha ac e s and e en he eade become in ol ed in " eal" discussions abou , and make alid, o e en, accep able s a emen s abou he na a i e, d awing ou a en ion o a se ies o le éis o deg ees o eali y, which become appa en due o ou bo h eal and ic i ious pa icipa ion in he app ecia ion and c ea ion o a se ies o dis inc on ological wo lds. The way in which his is done depends la gely on he use o a se ies o dialogues be ween eade -na a o and na a o -cha ac e , whe e alid c i ical commen s on he na u e o he na a i e a e placed in he mou hs o cha ac e s. We also ind he in e ac ion o eal and ic i ious wo lds as well as he o e lapping o li e a y and non-li e a y modes o gi ing o de o exis ence. This no el is an ob ious cons uc and ends e y ab up ly wi h he sudden dea h o he p o agonis . This migh ha e been due o lack o in e es o lack o imagina ion on Johnson's pa bu eally s ems om his app ecia ion o he a i icial na u e o all endings. All endings and beginnings a e imposed, dis o and mus be ic i ious. Ch is ie's Mum (no Johnson) explains his in he no el: 60 Re is a Alican ina de Es udios ingleses "We ondly belie e he e is going o be a eckoning, a day when all injus ices a e e ened ou , when wha we ha e done will beyond doub be seen o be igh , when he ligh o ou jus i ica on blazes o h upon he wo ld. Bu we a e w ong: lea n, hen, ha he e is no going o be any day o eckoning, excep possibly by acciden . I seems ha enough acciden s happen o i o be a hope o e en an expec a ion o mos o us, he day o eckoning. Bu we shall die un idily, when we did no p ope ly expec i , in a mess, mos hings un esol ed, un eckoned, e lec ing ha i is all chaos. E en i we unde s and ha all is chaos, he unde s anding ep esen s a denial o chaos, and mus he e o e be an illusion." (20) The link be ween his Ch is ian o m o conside ing eali y and Ch is ie's use o eckonings should be clea and he i ony is ob ious: Johnson is denying any o m o signi icance in he uni e se and e en in his no el, as he e can only be an illusion o such o de . Thus ou eali y, no ma e he e ms in which we conside i , mus be a ic ion. Fo m and signi icance wi hin and ou wi h he no el is denied and e e y hing ha happens is jus by acciden . Any eckoning whe he eligious o o he wise, mus be a alse eckoning and e en Ch is ie's dea h is denied signi icance, o which eason he inal eckoning in he no el does no balance. Ch is ie's, like all dea hs, is meaningless. In his way, Johnson unde mines he basic s uc u e o he no el as well as he illusion o o m ha he c ea es. Any sense o o m is shown o be jus an illusion. Mo eo e , he cha ac e 's desi e o ind bo h o de and signi icance h ough his use o double-en y pa allels ha o he au ho and bo h a e delibe a ely shown o be u ile. We ha e said ha his no el can be conside ed as a dialogue wi h o m: an opposi- ional discou se. Ch is ie sugges s jus ha o he "au ho " owa ds he end: "'You wo k has been a con inuous dialogue wi h o m'" (166). Wha his means in his no el, is ha while Johnson wo ks wi hin a se ies o ecognisable con en ions he con inually d aws ou a en ion o hem as a i icial. He clea ly ma ks his exposi ions, de elopmen , complica ion and esolu ion bu unde mines his choice o o m by exposing hei ic ionali y. He pa odies he con en ions o ealis ic w i ing a se e al le éis om he ole o he omniscien na a o o chap e headings and modes o discou se in o de o make clea ha , whiche e he on ological wo ld hey belong o ( he eal wo ld o a ic i ious wo ld), hey a e s ill na a i e de ices in spi e o he ac ha we a e accus omed o calling hem ealis ic. A numbe o di e en , pa icula ly ealis ic, modes a e pa odied in his no el, pa icula ly he oles o eade and au ho , as well as he complici y ha exis s be ween he wo, bu no in an a emp a pe suasión, as would occu in a adi ional na a i e, bu in o de o emphasise he ic i ious na u e o he whole hing: a ealis ic con en ion is used o a me a ic ional end. The explici s uc u e combined wi h he use o chap e headings which pa ody hose o 18 h cen u y no elis s se es a simila pu pose, so ha all o hese become appa en ly ob ious, ic i ious and a bi a y. The pa odie na u e o Johnson's use o hese con en ions makes i clea ha hey a e all na a i e de ices and, abo e all, i becomes clea jus o wha ex en i is allacious o cali hem ealis ic. The no el pa odies a numbe o di e en modes o discou se which appea a di e en le éis, anging om he 18 h cen u y s yle chap e headings o he con empo a y dialogues B. S. Johnson's Opposi ional Discou se 61 be ween he cha ac e s. Howe e , he na a i e as such is sha ed by a numbe o oices which a e awa e o hei ole wi hin he no el and which dialogue wi h he "au ho " on a numbe o occasions. The eade himsel inds himsel placed in a simila dialogue wi h he au ho which b ings abou a cu ious ansg ession o na a i e le éis, hus ende ing ou implici dialogue equally ic i ious, bu which, mo e impo an ly, b oaches he ques ion o au ho i y. He e we ha e a na a o who explici ly exp essess his igno ance abou his cha ac e s and hei de elopmen , while, pa adoxically, a high ened c i ical awa eness o ms pa o he dialogues o he cha ac e s. E en Ch is ie himsel , nea he end, d aws a en ion o his s uggle o independence, and he possible exis ence o an al e na i e ending o ha imposed by con en ion and he au ho . The li e a y modes and con en ions made use o by Johnson a e all ealis ic and he non-li e a y modes aken om eligión and accoun ing a e also conside ed as au ho i a i e. Howe e , he exis ence o an al e na i e is sugges ed and, placed wi hin a na a i e cons uc whe e hese dis inc modes a e jux aposed, in a sense ying o au ho i y, we ind ha he idea o any kind o au ho i a i e o o icial discou se is unde mined. Mo e han ha , we see ha any mode o discou se ends o cons uc a he han ep esen eali y, imposing he o ms and con en ions ha i b ings wi h i (in his case he igidi y o he imposed alúes o accoun ing and ch is iani y a e ob ious) and he dis inc on ological na u e o hese cons uc s imposed on expe ience become appa en : hei ic i ious na u e becomes jus as ob ious as ha o he no el i sel , and he g ea es i ony o all is ha Johnson is making use o he modes o discou se which a e hose o he g and na a i es o ou ime. We make use o hem o gi e o m and signi icance o ou own exis ence, which Johnson, h ough Ch is ie's a he exagge a ed applica ion o hem, shows o be no only unny, bu , in he end, absu d. The limi a ions and a i ice o he no el o m a e made e e mo e appa en and Johnson's opposi ional discou se, in pa , consis s in calling on pa icula con en ions in o de o la e ejec hei u ili y o show up hei limi a ions. The ypical 18 h cen u y chap e heading en i led "Ch is ie Desc ibed; and he Sh ike C ea ed," is i onic in ha he chap e ails o desc ibe Ch is ie, and " he Sh ike c ea ed" ob iously alludes o he ic i ious na u e o he whole hing. In his chap e he "au ho " calis o he collabo a ion o he eade o help wi h he cons uc ion o his cha ac e , al hough his migh lead o a alse iden i ica ion by he eade wi h one whom he eade himsel (like any o he omnipo en god-like igu e) migh y o c éa e in his own image. Tha some kind o desc ip ion is expec ed is made clea om he ou se , which is a clea allusion o he no elis ic con en ion ha is abou o be abused and is clea ly pa o he dialogic na u e o he no el. The e usal o he na a o o play he con en ional game ensues and he u ili y o ying o equa e eali y wi h a simulac um is made e iden : An a emp should be made o cha ac e ise Ch is ie's appea ance. I do so wi h di idence, in he knowledge ha such physical desc ip ions a e a ely o alué in a no el. I is one o i s limi a ions and he e a e many o he s. The sa casm becomes mo e appa en as he chap e con inúes and he eade is le o make up he cha ac e o himsel , as we said, in his (in his case) own image, al hough ha oo 62 Re is a Alican ina de Es udios Ingleses is seen o be go e ned by con en ion (in e ms o moles e c.)- We e en ind ha Ch is ie's mo i es, which a e sugges ed and which a e bound o he Ch is ian-ma e ialis alúes sugges ed ea lie , when we ge o hem, a e unde mined, o such an ex en ha i all seems a ma e o chance: Ño a e his mo i es impo an . Especially a e his mo i es o no impo ance o us, hough he usual clues will ce ainly be gi en. We a e conce ned wi h ac ions. A man may be de ined by his ac ions, you will emembe . We may guess a his mo i es, o cou se; he may do so as well. We may also guess a he winne o he h ee- í een a Ma ke -Rasen. (51-52) Johnson, i onically, makes a poin o dis inguishing be ween "we" and "him," when "we" a e clea ly a ic ional cons uc placed a i icially and ealis ically a wo dis inc le éis wi hin he ex . Really, we can y o p edic he winne a a ace mee ing, and a a dis inc ic i ious le el we can p edic o ask ou sel es abou Ch is ie's ( eal o ic i ious?) mo i es o wha he does. "Really," we do end o judge people by hei ac ions, bu in he no el a e bound o he ealis ic and accep ed con en ions imposed, his ime, no by he au ho bu by he cha ac e : double-en y, Ch is iani y, mode n socie y, he c edi -debi sys em is clea ly applicable and is applied in bo h cons uc s. Johnson is an an i- eligious w i e and e e s i onically o God as he p ime mo e o all hings in Ch is ie's mo he 's e sión o he s o y o c ea ion. I onically, his igu es as one o Ch is ie's main mo i es o seeing eali y and ac ing as he does al hough he implica ions wi hin an a bi a y wo k o ic ion a e ha he s o y o c ea ion is equally ic i ious. The pa allels be ween he no elis 's ole and ha o God-Almigh y, his cha ac e s and hose o he Bible, soon become clea : He e is he s o y p omised you on page 29, as old o Ch is ie a his Ca holic mo he 's shapely knee: I seems ha he e has always exis ed a God, o i may be ha He c ea ed Himsel . The e is no doub , howe e , ha He claims o ha e c ea ed some hing He calis he wo ld, hough in con ex his mus be ex ended o co e he uni e se o uni e ses, oo. In o his wo ld He places a ious c ea ions, oughly in e dependen hough a ce ain amoun o jockeying o posi ion is e iden in he ea ly s ages. Amongs hese c ea ions is Man and (sho ly a e wa ds) Woman. God gi es his couple, known as Adam and E e, some hing called ee will, which means hey can ac as hey like. The pa allels be ween he o icial Biblical s o y and he equally au ho i a i e no el a e clea as o he na u e o he omnipo en and omniscien c ea o o cha ac e in bo h. Some o he inhe en pa adoxes common o bo h s o ies also become appa en . E en in he s yle we can no ice he cu ious use o he e is and he e has always exis ed which deny he exis ence o cause, implying a andom s a e o a ai s wi hou explana íon; he ob ious con as be ween "no doub " and "he claims" is he kind o con adic ion which cas s u he aspe sions on he exis ence o God. The ac ha he c ea ed himsel (a sel -made man?) clea ly alludes o he pa allel be ween he au ho and God, na a o s who a e ic ional en i ies c ea ed by hemsel es. The e is a u he allusion o he whole hing as "s o y," and, as i is na a i e, e e y hing ha is sugges i e o o de mus , in he end, be B. S. Johnson's Opposi ional Discou se 63 seen as a kind o ic ional cons uc . The eligious implica ions a e ob ious, bu hey a e u he eaching by alluding mo e di ec ly o he no el i sel whe e he omniscien au ho essen ially ques ions he con en ions ha allow him o b ing himsel in o exis ence. The p e ious quo a ion con inúes and we a e old ha "God has been making i all up as he goes along, like ce ain kinds o no elis ..." (79-80). The s o y o he C ea ion coincides a e e y poin wi h Ch is ie's s o y, e en as ega ds he c ea ion o a ma e o he p o agonis , which d aws a en ion o he ic i ious na u e o bo h na a i es, ha he e is no plan, nei he in he no el, ño in C ea ion, ha he supposed o de ha exis s in he Uni e se and in Ch is ie's G ea Idea a e bo h equally ic i ious and, inally, absu d: some people, like Ch is ie (o you o maybe somebody you know) belie e i all. I becomes clea ha he cha ac e s a e placed in a wo ld ha is o ganised in e ms o an a i icial o de . Thei ee-will is ob iously ic i ious as, in spi e o Ch is ie's a emp s o eason wi h he au ho , he is killed o in a manne ha denies he e being any poin o his exis ence. The ob ious links be ween he no el's na a i e and he g and na a i e o Wes e n eligión, ha is, he ic ion ha appea s in a no el and he ic ions ha we c éa e o a e c ea ed o ou sel es in eal li e, is made clea , and he implica ion is he same: we a e also s uck in an a i icially o de ed wo ld, bound by a i icial con en ions and denied ee-will. This is all e y pessimis ic, bu akes place in a ypically play ul and comic pos mode nis no el. In a wo k which emphasises he na u e o he no el as opposi ional discou se, Johnson success ully in eg a es he no el and he an i-no el, he ex and i s me a ex , he ic ion and i s commen a y, in a way he had ne e ied be o e. Pa o his echnique is o make use o e ac ion: o make clea his in en ion o do some hing and hen e use o do i . This highligh s he na a i e p ocess and o en alludes o con en ions ha he in ends o b eak wi h. On o he occasions he simply men ions he na u e o he s yle he is abou o use o e en he i ness o a pa icula echnique he has employed. The jux aposi ion o dis inc modes o discou se, and delibe a ely playing wi h he dimensions o si ua ional cons ain (he o en uses language in a manne con en ion would deem inapp op ia e, mixing o mal and in o mal egis e s), is ano he way in which he na u e o he na a i e is o eg ounded. On he one hand, he does his o highligh he possibili ies o he na a i e, bu a he same ime d aws a en ion o he limi a ions o whiche e mode he uses ( he e a e explici e e ences o he use o "o a io obliqua" and "o a io ec a" and hei espec i e limi a ions among many o he examples). Ea lie , we men ionedAí Swim-Two-Bi ds by Flann O'B ien, which bea s compa ison wi h Ch is ie Mal y. Bo h ake ad an age o a numbe o di e en modes o discou se bo owed om di e en pe iods o li e a y his o y. One in pa icula , he pa odie chap e headings a e he ashion o eigh een h cen u y na a i es, p ecisely because hey a e pa odie, implies a dialogue wi h o m which unc ions in a numbe o ways. Ob iously, hey an icípa e wha comes nex , bu hey a e o en used as ed he ings. They emphasise he selec ion p ocess ha is going on in he head o he au ho , sugges he possibili ies a ailable o him and, in pa icula , d aw a en ion o he adi ional and con en ional na u e o he na a i e s uc u e. Chap e One bea s he i le, "The Indus ious Pilg im: An Exposi ion wi hou which You migh ha e el Unhappy." The e a e a numbe o poin s he e: he p o agonis 's ques o sea ch (a adi ional li e a y heme and s uc u al elemen )