What do you think?
Rate this book
Doubling and Incest / Repetition and Revenge: A Speculative Reading of Faulkner
Applies structuralist and psychoanalytic theories to Faulkner's novels, centering on Absalom, Absalom! and The Sound and the Fury, tracing the complex patterns of doubling, incest, repetition, and revenge in their filial and fraternal settings
192 pages, Paperback
First published September 1, 1975
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews
April 11, 2025
8/10
so much to think about — ignoring the grandfather/father/son Freudian/Nietzchean reading which is basically the basis of this whole thing (it's not like it wasn't interesting, i just don't want to explore that vein at all in my dissertation, especially with basically no prior knowledge of Freud or Nietzche) ignoring that reading, there's some wonderful stuff about repetition and doubling here which could come very much in handy:
instead of thinking psycho-analytically of repetition and doubling as products of castration-, Oedipal-, narcissistic, brother-avenger-, and brother-seducer-complexes, i'd like to think more spiritually of repetition as a form of resurrection, and the ghostliness of Faulkner's characters — they all seem to float somewhere between life and death, if only because we know that they will die , or that they have already died, but, because Faulkner's temporality is so incoherent, those two categories eventually become the same thing — so at a certain point, they're dead before Faulkner even writes down their name. so repetition, realisation, recollection, and retelling all become forms of resurrection, as they bring to the attention of both his very alive readers' and his half-alive characters' attentions the existence and continual influence of dead characters, who exist as narrative echoes, ghosts.
and in performing these actions of repetition, recollection, retelling, etc. Faulkner's characters (as well as Faulkner himself) are actually performing a kind of possession, whereby their own perspectives begin to effect the narratives which they relate — and it works both ways; through the act of 'involuntary repetition', this realisation of doubling, characters in the 'present' impact the past just as violently as characters in the 'past' impact the present.
in Absalom, for example: in the logic of temporal continuity, Quentin is the double of both Henry and Bon, in that he exists after them, and repeats their actions of the brother-avenger and the brother-seducer, by a) killing himself as Henry killed Bon, and b) loving his own sister as Bon loved Judith. But in narrating to Shreve Henry's and Bon's actions which occurred many years before his (Quentin's) birth, he is both possessing them AND resurrecting them, such that they seems to exist at the same time as Quentin, their actions occurring in the 'present' of Quentin's narration. Hence, not only is Quentin the double of Henry and Bon, Henry and Bon are also the double of him; from his (and our) perspective, they repeat his actions just as much as he repeats theirs. So there's a mutual possession which moves both forwards through time and backwards simultaneously.
the unborn and the dead occupy a similar space; Quentin is as much a ghost to Henry and Bon as they are ghosts to him — the only difference being that Quentin becomes very suddenly aware of it, and is possessed by Henry's desire for revenge. but because he is both the double of Henry and of Bon, his desire for revenge is directed at himself, which results in his inevitable suicide.
also: obvs gonna have to bring some Proust into the equation #insufferable
so much to think about — ignoring the grandfather/father/son Freudian/Nietzchean reading which is basically the basis of this whole thing (it's not like it wasn't interesting, i just don't want to explore that vein at all in my dissertation, especially with basically no prior knowledge of Freud or Nietzche) ignoring that reading, there's some wonderful stuff about repetition and doubling here which could come very much in handy:
instead of thinking psycho-analytically of repetition and doubling as products of castration-, Oedipal-, narcissistic, brother-avenger-, and brother-seducer-complexes, i'd like to think more spiritually of repetition as a form of resurrection, and the ghostliness of Faulkner's characters — they all seem to float somewhere between life and death, if only because we know that they will die , or that they have already died, but, because Faulkner's temporality is so incoherent, those two categories eventually become the same thing — so at a certain point, they're dead before Faulkner even writes down their name. so repetition, realisation, recollection, and retelling all become forms of resurrection, as they bring to the attention of both his very alive readers' and his half-alive characters' attentions the existence and continual influence of dead characters, who exist as narrative echoes, ghosts.
and in performing these actions of repetition, recollection, retelling, etc. Faulkner's characters (as well as Faulkner himself) are actually performing a kind of possession, whereby their own perspectives begin to effect the narratives which they relate — and it works both ways; through the act of 'involuntary repetition', this realisation of doubling, characters in the 'present' impact the past just as violently as characters in the 'past' impact the present.
in Absalom, for example: in the logic of temporal continuity, Quentin is the double of both Henry and Bon, in that he exists after them, and repeats their actions of the brother-avenger and the brother-seducer, by a) killing himself as Henry killed Bon, and b) loving his own sister as Bon loved Judith. But in narrating to Shreve Henry's and Bon's actions which occurred many years before his (Quentin's) birth, he is both possessing them AND resurrecting them, such that they seems to exist at the same time as Quentin, their actions occurring in the 'present' of Quentin's narration. Hence, not only is Quentin the double of Henry and Bon, Henry and Bon are also the double of him; from his (and our) perspective, they repeat his actions just as much as he repeats theirs. So there's a mutual possession which moves both forwards through time and backwards simultaneously.
the unborn and the dead occupy a similar space; Quentin is as much a ghost to Henry and Bon as they are ghosts to him — the only difference being that Quentin becomes very suddenly aware of it, and is possessed by Henry's desire for revenge. but because he is both the double of Henry and of Bon, his desire for revenge is directed at himself, which results in his inevitable suicide.
also: obvs gonna have to bring some Proust into the equation #insufferable
May 29, 2025
If you want to understand The Sopranos, then you gotta be reading esoteric psychoanalytic literary analysis about books written decades before the show aired. Trust me, Doubling and Incest / Repetition and Revenge serves as an excellent alternative title for The Sopranos, which is Faulkner for New Jersey anyways. Sparked a lot of thoughts about the Chris/Tony relationship (the son may sacrifice the phallus to remain with the father), Livia/Tony/AJ (the passing down of defeat and decay via General Compson's watch vs the generational transmission of "It's all a big nothing"), AJ alone (his failed attempted suicide mirrors Quentin's successful attempt), and the role of generational repetition (Johnny Boy and Tony and AJ, Dickie and Chris, Livia and Janice and Meadow) and doubling (Tony S./Tony B., Tony & Chris/Chris & Adriana, Tony/Meadow, Carmela/Chris, Carmela/Adriana, Livia/Gloria, etc., etc.).
In this case the ego's towering self-love and consequent overestimation of its own worth lead to the guilty rejection of all instincts and desires that don't fit its ideal image of itself. The rejected instincts and desires are cast out of the self, repressed internally only to return externally personified in the double, where they can be at once vicariously satisfied and punished. The double evokes the ego's love because it is a copy of the ego, but it evokes the ego's fear and hatred as well because it is a copy with a difference.
It is a theme that Faulkner never tires of reiterating: by courageously facing the fear of death, the fear of castration, the fear of one's own worst instincts, one slays the fear: by taking the risk of being feminized, by accepting the feminine elements in the self, one establishes one's masculinity. And it is by allowing the fear of death, of castration, of one's own instincts, of being feminized, to dominate the ego that one is paralyzed, rendered impotent, unmanned, as in the case of Quentin.
For Faulkner, doubling and incest are both images of the self-enclosed--the inability of the ego to break out of the circle of the self and of the individual to break out of the ring of the family--and as such, both appear in his novels as symbols of the state of the South after the Civil War, symbols of a region turned in upon itself.
In this case the ego's towering self-love and consequent overestimation of its own worth lead to the guilty rejection of all instincts and desires that don't fit its ideal image of itself. The rejected instincts and desires are cast out of the self, repressed internally only to return externally personified in the double, where they can be at once vicariously satisfied and punished. The double evokes the ego's love because it is a copy of the ego, but it evokes the ego's fear and hatred as well because it is a copy with a difference.
It is a theme that Faulkner never tires of reiterating: by courageously facing the fear of death, the fear of castration, the fear of one's own worst instincts, one slays the fear: by taking the risk of being feminized, by accepting the feminine elements in the self, one establishes one's masculinity. And it is by allowing the fear of death, of castration, of one's own instincts, of being feminized, to dominate the ego that one is paralyzed, rendered impotent, unmanned, as in the case of Quentin.
For Faulkner, doubling and incest are both images of the self-enclosed--the inability of the ego to break out of the circle of the self and of the individual to break out of the ring of the family--and as such, both appear in his novels as symbols of the state of the South after the Civil War, symbols of a region turned in upon itself.
Read
August 18, 2022Absalsom, one of David’s sons, kills his brother Amnon for raping their sister Tamar
Read: Robinson Jeffers narrative poem “Tamar” (1924)
Read: Robinson Jeffers narrative poem “Tamar” (1924)
Want to Read
December 16, 2025813.95 FauI
October 1, 2016
I read this a long time ago. I need to reread it.
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews