《法國中尉的女人》中的元小說敘述策略研究

AStudyoftheNarrativeStrategiesofMetafictioninTheFrenchLieutenant’sWoman《法國中尉的女人》中的元小說敘述策略研究摘要約翰·福爾斯是二戰(zhàn)后英國當(dāng)代著名小說家之一，被譽(yù)為戰(zhàn)后英國最有才華、最嚴(yán)肅的小說家。其代表作《法國中尉的女人》因極高的藝術(shù)成就，獲得了學(xué)術(shù)界的普遍贊賞。該書為元小說的敘事策略提供了一個范例。本文在深層次了解《法國中尉的女人》的內(nèi)容、主題和充分探究元小說理論的基礎(chǔ)上，對元小說敘述策略在《法國中尉的女人》的具體應(yīng)用進(jìn)行分析，大致分為三大方面：敘述角度、敘述結(jié)構(gòu)和人物刻畫的不確定性。最后總結(jié)出元小說敘述策略的意義：突出小說的虛構(gòu)性和表達(dá)福爾斯的存在主義思想。通過對元小說敘述策略的分析，使讀者在更好地閱讀《法國中尉的女人》的同時，進(jìn)一步了解元小說這一后現(xiàn)代敘述手法。關(guān)鍵詞：元小說；敘述策略；不確定性AbstractJohnFowles,oneoftheillustriouscontemporaryEnglishnovelistsafterWorldWarII,wasregardedasthemosttalentedandseriousnovelistafterWorldWarII.Hismasterpiece,TheFrenchLieutenant’sWoman,hasenjoyedhighprestigeforitsgreataestheticachievements.Thisbookhasbeenregardedasthebestexampleofthenarrativeskillsofmetafiction.BasedonunderstandingtheplotsandthemeofTheFrenchLieutenant’sWomanandthetheoryofmetafictioncomprehensively,thispaperaimsatanalyzingtheapplicationofnarrativestrategiesofmetafictioninthisnovelfromthreeaspects:theuncertaintyofthenarrativeperspective,thenarrativestructureandthecharacter.Intheend,thefunctionofthenarrativestrategiesofmetafictioncanbeconcluded.Oneistostrengthenthefictionalityofnovel,andtheotheristoshowtheideasofexistentialismfromtheperspectiveofFowles.ToanalyzethenarrativestrategiesofmetafictioninTheFrenchLieutenant’sWomancannotonlyhelpreadersunderstandthisnovelbetter,butalsobebeneficialtocomprehendingthemetafiction,oneofthepost-modernwritingskills.Keywords:Metafiction;narrativestrategies;uncertaintyContents1.Introduction 12.TheFrenchLieutenant’sWomanandmetafiction 52.1ThebriefintroductiontoTheFrenchLieutenant’sWoman 52.2Thebriefintroductiontometafiction 63.ThenarrativestrategiesofmetafictioninTheFrenchLieutenant’sWoman 63.1Uncertaintyofnarrativeperspective 63.1.1Parody 73.1.2Theintrusionoftheauthor 73.2Uncertaintyofnarrativestructure 83.2.1Anachronism 83.2.2Theopenendings 93.3Uncertaintyofthecharacter 93.3.1TheimageofSarahinCharles’seyes 103.3.2TheimageofSarahinothers’eyes 104.Thefunctionsofnarrativestrategiesofmetafiction 114.1Exposingthefictionalityofthenovel 114.2Showingtheideasofexistentialism 125.Conclusion 12References 10Acknowledgements 111.IntroductionTherewerefewauthorsthatgotbothcommercialsuccessandcriticalacclaim,whileJohnFowleswasoneofthem.In1969,hisworkTheFrenchLieutenant’sWomancameoutandwasconsideredtobehismasterpiecewidely.OlshenwroteinhisbookJohnFowles,“Nevertheless,itwasonlywiththepublicationofTheFrenchLieutenant’sWomanthatFowles’sworkappearedasabestselleronbothsidesoftheAtlanticandthathisreputationwasextendedintothemorerarifiedatmosphereofacademy”(Olshen,1987:63).In1970,Fowleswonthe“W.H.SmithAward”forthemostoutstandingcontributiontoEnglishliteratureduringtheyear.IntheUnitedStates,TheFrenchLieutenant’sWomanwasontheNewYorkTimesbestsellerlistformorethanoneyear.Metafiction,asanewnovelstyle,appearedinthepostmodernperiodandwasthesignofthisnovel.Therefore,thispaperwouldliketocomprehendthisnovelfromtheperspectiveofmetafiction.BasedonthepreviousstudyonTheFrenchLieutenant’sWomanandmetafiction,thispaperendeavorstomakeaconcreteanalysisofthenarrativestrategiesofmetafictioninthisbook.Itwillclarifyitfromthreeparts:thenarrativeperspective,structureandcharacterandthendrawaconclusiononmetafiction’sfunctions:toexposethefictionalityofthenovelandtoshowtheideasofexistentialism.2.TheFrenchLieutenant’sWomanandmetafictionJohnFowlesisatypicalpostmodernnovelist,andhismasterpieceTheFrenchLieutenant’sWomanenjoysagoodpopularity.Thepostmodernnarrativestrategy,metafiction,appliedinthisnoveldeservesanalyzing.2.1ThebriefintroductiontoTheFrenchLieutenant’sWomanJohnFowleswasoneofthemosttalentednovelistsafterWorldWarII.HehadbeenateacheruntilthesuccessfulpublicationofTheCollector.Thenheresignedandbecameafull-timenovelist.Inhiswholelife,hewrotesevennonfictionsandsevenfictions,ofwhichthreeweremadeintofilms.In1999,hewasnominatedforNobelPrizeforLiterature.Asanexistentialist,JohnFowlestriedtoexpressthemiseryandhesitationofpeoplewhostruggledtopursuefreedomandexistenceinsuchridiculous,uglyandcoldrealworld.Fowlesdugintotheinnerpartofpersonalityandprobedintotheaccesstotherealfreedom.OfFowles’works,TheFrenchLieutenant’sWomanwaswidelyregardedashismasterpieceforitshighartisticachievements.IttracedarelationshipbetweenSarahandCharles.Theirfirstencountertookplaceonthecoast.TherumorssaidthatSarahwasseducedandabandonedbyaFrenchLieutenant.Gazingattheblackback,Charlesfeltpatheticandmysterioustothiswoman.Later,Charlesfeltintolovewithher,whileatthesametime,hebegantoreconsidertheengagementwithhisfianceewhowasaperfectgentlewomaninVictorianage.Therewasnodefiniteendinginthisstory.Theauthorleftthreeforreaderstochoose.ThefirstonewasthatCharlesgaveintotraditionalVictorianthoughtsandmarriedhisfiancee.ThesecondwasthathebrokeofftheengagementandlivedwithSarahandtheirdaughter.ThelastonewasthatSarahrefusedtolivewithhimfortherealfreedom.CharlesrealizedthatSarahhadacommandofhisfeelings,sohelefttopursuehisownfreedom.Intheliterarycircle,thestudyofthisnovelvaries.Somescholarsanalyzeitfromtheperspectiveoffeminism.TheytrytounderstandtheinnerthoughtsofSarahandtosummarizeherimage.TheybelievethatSarahistherepresentativeofthenewwomenandherstoryhassetanexampleofpursuingindependencetothewomen.Somescholarspayalltheirattentiontothequestionofexistence.Fromthenovel,theyfindthatexistenceisfreedom.Thecharactersinthenovelhavedifferentideasoffreedom.AsfarasSarahisconcerned,freedomisabsolute,whileforCharles,itisrelative.Manyscholarsbelievethatonlyanalyzingthisnovelfromtheangleofmetafiction,canreadersunderstandwhatinearththeauthortriestoexpressinthepostmoderncontext.2.2ThebriefintroductiontometafictionInthe1960s,thepost-modernnovelistsappeared.Theychallengedtheofficialstorywhichwaswritteninthetraditionallinearnarrativetechniquewiththeabsoluteending.Inthepost-modernismstyle,thenovelistspaidmoreattentiontothevarietyofnarrativeformandstyleandtriedtobreaktherulesofthetraditionalwritingtechniques.Suchapost-modernliterarytrendledtotheideologicaltrendofself-reflection,whichmadethebaseoftheappearanceofmetafiction.Metafiction,namedasthesurfiction,wasthemainstyleinAmericanpost-modernliterature.ThetermfirstappearedinWilliamH.Gass’sbookFictionandtheFiguresofLife.Infact,Gasshadrealizedthatnovelhadabilitytoexpressitself.Novelwasnotjustatooltorevealtherealworldbuthadself-awarenessmeanwhile.Thebasicdefinitionofmetafictionwasanovelonhowtowriteanovel.Whentheauthorstoldthestoryinmetafiction,theywouldliketojumpoutfromthenarrators.Theyevaluatedthecharactersdescribedinthenovel,hadcommentsontheplotsandsharedtheskillsofnarratingasiftheywereobservers.Ifthetraditionalnovelcouldberegardedasabuilding,themetafictionnovelistaimedtodestructitandanalyzethedesign.Comparedwiththetraditionalnovelswhichconcentratedonplotsandcharacters,metafictionwasmorelikeanovelofthenovel,whichthoughthighlyoftheprogressofnarratingandthesignificanceofthenovel.Itswritingfeatureconsistedoftwoparts:intertextualityandself-reflexivity.3.ThenarrativestrategiesofmetafictioninTheFrenchLieutenant’sWomanTheFrenchLieutenant’sWomanisfamousforitsparticularnarrativestrategiesofmetafiction.Therefore,thefollowingpartisaboutthethoroughdiscussionofstrategiesinthisnovel.3.1UncertaintyofnarrativeperspectiveWhenitcomestothenarrativestrategies,thefirstonemustbethenarrativeperspective.Itistheperspectivethattheauthorusestoobserveandtellthestory.Generallyspeaking,itcanbedividedintothreeparts:theomniscientperspective,internalperspectiveandexternalperspective.Inthetraditionalnovel,theauthorsapplyonecertainperspectivethroughoutthenovel.Tobreaktherule,themetafictionnovelistspreferthefollowingtwonarrativestrategies:parodyandtheintrusionoftheauthortomakethenarrativeperspectiveuncertain.3.1.1ParodyInAmericantraditionaldictionary,parodyisdefinedasanarrativestrategy,thatis,authorimitatesthespecialnarrativestyleofoneauthorornovelinordertomockorcriticize.Ingeneral,theauthorkeepsthestyleandformoftheoriginalnovelandreplacesitwithdifferentthemeandcontent.InthebookofTheFrenchLieutenant’sWoman,JohnFowlestriestoimitatethetraditionalVictoriannovel.Inthisnovel,inordertomakeitlikethetraditionalVictoriannovel,JohnFowlesimitatedthewritingstyleandwritingskillsoftheauthorsinthatage,suchasThomasHardy.Ofthesestrategies,theimitationofthenarrativeperspectivewasthemosttypical.InVictorianage,theauthorsusedtoapplytheomniscientperspective,inwhichtheytoldthestoryfromtheperspectiveofGod.Theyobservedthestoryfromeveryangleandlookedintotheinnermindofcharacters.Thenarrativemodewasn’tlimited,andtheperspectivecouldshiftanytime.Suchnovelsalwaysgavethereadersanillusionthatthestorywasobjectiveandreal.Beforechapterthirteen,FowlesrevealedthebasicinformationofthetownanddescribedthebehaviorsofthevillagersasifhewereGodwhocouldoverlooktheland.“Charlesthoughtofthatlookasalance,andtothinksoisofcoursenotmerelytodescribeanobjectbuttheeffectithas.Hefelthimselfinthatbriefinstantanunjustenemy;bothpiercedanddeservedlydiminished”(Fowels,2003:7).Fromthesentence,itwasapparentthattheauthorcoulddigouttheinnermindofthecharacter,Charles.Itwasatypicalfeatureinomniscientperspective.Insteadofapprovingthisnarrativeangle,Fowlesaimedatcriticizingit.Asanexistentialist,Fowlesthoughtthatauthenticityistheessentialoneintheprocessofwriting.Inthereallife,nobodycouldobserveeverythinghappening.Itwasagainstthenaturalrule.Therefore,Fowlesmockedatthiswritingskillbyimitatingitandthenmadecommentsonit.3.1.2TheintrusionoftheauthorTheintrusionoftheauthorrefersthattheauthoralwaysstopstellingthestoryabruptlyandchangestheidentitytotheobserverorthecharacterinthenovel.“IfIhavepretendeduntilnowtoknowmycharacters’mindsandinnermostthoughts,itisbecauseIamwritingin(justIhaveassumedsomeofthevocabularyandthe‘voice’of)aconventionuniversallyacceptedatthetimeofmystory:thatthenoveliststandsnexttoGod.Hemayknowall,yethetriestopretendthathedoes”(Fowles,2003:70).ThissentencewascitedfromchapterthirteenofTheFrenchLieutenant’sWoman.Beforethischapter,Fowlesusedtheomniscientperspectivetotellthestory.While,inthischapter,hejumpedoutofthestory,andchangedhisidentitytoacommentatorandinvitedthereaderstomakecommentsontheplotstogether.Inthefollowingparts,heused“I”tobreakthestorytellingandshowedhisprogressofwritingatmanytimes.ItwasonewayforFowlestointrudeintothisnovel.What’smore,Fowlessometimesbecamethecharacterinthenovel.Inchapterfifty-five,whenCharlestookthetraintoseekforSarah,FowlesdisguisedasatouristsittingoppositetoCharles.Theyhadnotalk,butFowlesstaredatCharlesallthetimesothathemadehimuncomfortable.Untilleavingthetrain,Charlestriedtofindwhetherthisstrangemanstillfollowedhim.AboveweretwowaysofFowles’intrudingintothisnovel.Thereadersmightbeastonishedatthiswritingskill.Fowlesaimedatavoidingthefactthatthereadersgotlostintheplots.Hetriedtotellthemthenovelwasnottrueandledthemtofindthedeepsignificance.Whenheinvitedthereaderstocommendthenovel,healsoguidedthemtojoininthenovel.3.2UncertaintyofnarrativestructureIntraditionalVictoriannovels,thenarrativestructureislinearinaparticularspacewithonedefiniteending,whilemetafictionisdifferentfromit.Theauthorsoftenuseanachronismandseriousendingstochangeittomakenarrativestructureuncertain.3.2.1AnachronismInthetraditionalnovel,therearestronglogicalrelationshipsinthespacetime.Nevertheless,metafictionhopbetweentimeandplace.Thesceneschangecasuallyaccordingtotheauthor’sthoughts.Anachronismcanbeseenanywhere,whichcausesastrongdisorderoftimeandspace.Thereadersmaybeuncertainofwhatkindofnoveltheyarereading.Victoriannovelormodernnovel?Inthewholebook,whileFowlestoldthestorythathappenedinVictorianage,hesometimesmentionedwhatonlyappearedinthe20thcentury.Forexample,inchapterthree,hewrote“ThoughCharleslikestothinkhimselfasascientificyoungmanandprobablynothavebeentoosurprisedtohavenewsreachhimoutofthefeatureoftheairplane,thejetengineandradar:whatwouldhaveastoundedhimwasthechangeattitudetotimeitself”(Fowles,2003:8).Inthecitedsentences,itwaseasytofindthatairplane,jetengineandradarwhichweren’tinventeduntilthe20thcentury.What’smore,Fowlesalsocitedmanymodernmeninthisstory,suchasMarshallandHitler.ThepurposesFowleswroteinthiswayweretwo.Thefirstonewastoexposethefictionalityofthisnovel.Whenthereadersgotintothenovel,hementionedthemodernthings.Howcouldthemodernthingshappeninthatage?Itcouldn’thappenintherealworld.So,whatthereaderswerereadingweren’ttherealstory.ThesecondonewastousethemodernthingstoremindthereadersthattheyweremodernpeopleandledthemtojudgeVictorianagefromtheviewofamodernman.3.2.2TheopenendingsThemostappealingnarrativestrategyinthisbookisitsopenendings.TheauthortriestoimitatethetraditionalVictoriannovel,whileatthesametime,hebreakstherulesthateverynovelshouldhaveadefiniteending.Thisnovelhasthreeendingswhichconveysdifferentthemes.Thefirstendingwasinchapterforty-threeandforty-four.Charleschosetomarryhisfianceeandhadsevenchildren,thenhebecameasuccessfulbusinessman.ItwasahappyendingwhichaccordedwiththetraditionalconceptinVictorianage,whileinFowles’smind,Charlesgaveupthepursuitoffreedom,freeloveandfreelife.Fowlescriticizedthisendingandchangeditinchapterforty-five.Hewrote:“Andnow,havingbroughtthisfictiontoathoroughlytraditionalending,IhadbetterexplainthatalthoughallIhavedescribedinthelasttwochaptershappened,itdidnothappenquiteinthewayyoumayhavebeenledtobelieve”(Fowles,2003:253).Thenthesecondendingcame.Charlesbrokehisengagementwithhisfiancee.Havingexperiencedlotsofbitternessandsufferings,hefoundedSarahandtheylivedtogetherwiththeirdaughter.Comparedwiththefirstone,itwasagainstthetraditionalconcept,whileitwasalsoahappyendingbecausethepeoplewholovedeachothergottogether.Surprisingly,Fowleswasnotsatisfiedwiththisendingyet,sohewrotethethirdone.Inthethirdending,CharlesfoundSarahandaskedtolivetogether,whileSarahrefused.Havingunderstoodtherelationshipbetweenthem,Charlesdecidedtoleaveandpursuetherealfreedom.Inthisending,atotallynewwoman,Sarah,wasdepicted.SherefusedCharlesbecauseshecherishedfreedomandindependence.HavingunderstoodtheideasofSarah,Charlesrealizedhisemotionaldependenceonher.So,intheend,hedeterminedtofindtherealfreedomofhimself.Comparedwiththepreviousendings,itseemedlikeatragicending.ForFowles’spart,findingtheinnerfreedomwasthebestending.What’smore,theplotthatSarahrefusedCharleswasdifferentfromwhatmanyreaderscouldimagine,whileitsunpredictabilityinthestorywasmorelikethetrueworldwherenothingwaspredictable.ItwasalsoanotherreasonFowlespreferredit.Fowlessetthreedisparateendingsinthisbook,notforconfusingthereadersbutforthefollowingtworeasons.Ontheonehand,hetriedtoexposethefictionalityofthenovel.Intherealworld,everythingoncehappened,nobodycouldchangeit,while,intheworldofnovel,theauthorcouldchangetheresultifhewasn’tsatisfiedwiththepreviousone.Ontheotherhand,asanexistentialist,Fowlesdislikedtogiveadefiniteendingtothereaderswithoutregardtotheirideas.Therefore,hemadethreeendingswhichsatisfiedthevariouskindsofpeopleindifferentages,statusandconcepts.Thereadersgotthechancestochoosewhichonetheypreferredandparticipatedinthenovel.Italsoembodiedthefreedomofthereaders.3.3UncertaintyofthecharacterItisknowntoallthatdescribingafreshandtypicalcharacterisalwaystheindispensableelementtojudgeanovel.Therefore,inthetraditionalnovel,theauthorswoulduselotsofmethodstomakethecharactersalive,suchasexposingtheirinnermindanddescribingtheirbehaviors.Intheend,therewouldbeadefiniteimage.Comparedtothecharactersinthetraditionalnovel,SarahthatFowlesdescribedinTheFrenchLieutenant’sWomanismysterious.Inchapterone,Fowlesdidn’tdescribeSarah’sappearancedirectlybutonlydescribedherback.Andtheblackbackbecamethefirstappearancelefttothereaders.Allthereaderswouldhavecuriositytolookatherfrontandwanttoknowmoreaboutthismysteriouswoman.3.3.1TheimageofSarahinCharles’seyesInCharles’smind,theimageofSarahchangedalot.Atfirst,whenhesawSarah’sbackatthebay,hehadastrongcuriosityabouther.Afterseveralcontactswithher,Charlesfoundherunique.Hecouldn’tfindgentlenessanddignitythatwereusuallyusedtojudgeaperfectladyfromher.Sarah’srarecharacterappealedhim.Then,hisappreciationchangedintolove.Inthattime,forhispart,therewassomethingmostbeautifulinSarah’seyes.Inchapterforty-sixandforty-seven,CharleswenttoseeSarahinahotelandtheyhadthesex.Hesaid:“Ohmydearest.Mydearest.Mysweetestangel...Sarah,Sarah,,,ohSarah”(Fowles,2003:261).Andhedecidedtobreaktheengagementandmarryher.Whenhewasreadytoleave,hefoundtherewasbloodinhisshirtandknewthatshewasvirgin.Findingthissecret,hewasupsetandsufferingandmadeaconclusionthatallthesethingsdonebySarahwereforherlove.Afterthat,SarahtookFrenchleave.Untilthis,theimageofSarahwasstilluncertain.Thereaderscouldn’tunderstandthereasonswhySarahtoldthelietodefameherselfandwhysheleft.Throughseveralyears’searching,Charlesfoundher,andthefollowingtwoendingsmadethereasonsalittlebitclear.Inchaptersixty,Charlessawthelittlegirlwholookedlikehim.Heknewthereason.Shethoughtshedidn’tdeservehimandchosetoleavehim.WhatshedidaimedthatCharleshadagoodfuture.Inchaptersixty-one,thetimewentbacktofifteenminutesago,CharleswasrefusedbySarahandregardedherasaliar,andstillcouldn’tunderstandthesecrets.3.3.2TheimageofSarahinothers’eyesTomaketheimageofSarahmysterious,FowlesalsochosetoshowtheimageofSarahthroughdifferentpeople’seyestoconfuse.Everycharacterinthisnovelcouldonlyseeonepartofherevenwiththeirownprejudice.Theircommentswerepartialandweren’tworthyoftrust.MostofthecharactersinthenovelhadnodirectrelationshipwithSarah.MostofthemjustknewherstoryfromtherumorthatSarahwasseducedandabandonedbyaFrenchlieutenantandhadprejudiceagainsther.IntheeyeofCharles’fianceeErnestina,Sarahwasapoorandimpurewomanatthebeginning.Whenothersmentionedher,Ernestinaalwaysshowedtheattitudeofcontempt.WhenCharlesfellinlovewithSarahandbroketheengagementwithher,ErnestinachangedherattitudeandregardedSarahasameandevil.Atfirst,Mrs.PoulteneythoughtSarahincriminatorybecausetheexperienceofSarahwasagainstthecreeds.Todogooddeeds,Mrs.Poulteneyaccommodatedherandgaveherajob.Whenworking,Sarahwasdiligentandgoodatdealingwithchores.Mrs.Poulteneywassatisfiedwithher.While,shefoundSarahoftenwenttothemountaininthesparetime.ShebelievedthatSarahmustgotheretodosomethingguiltyandbegantothinkofherasacunningwoman.Atfirst,DoctorGrogandiagnosedthatSarahhaddepressionwhichcausedherweepfornoreasonandthenhepersuadedhertoleaveMrs.Poulteney’shouse.AfterSarahrefusedandheknewherrelationshipwithCharles.HebelievedthatSarahhadhypochondriasisandSarahbelievedshewasillandtriedtogetsympathyfromothers.Therefore,hetoldthistoCharlesandpersuadedhimtobringhertothepsychiatrichospital.Thesepeopledidn’tknowSarahmuch.TheyjustusedsomethingsandbehaviorstojudgeSarahbasedontherumorsandnevertriedtogiveinsighttoherfromtheirheart.OnedayMillieforgottowatertheplantsinMrs.Poulteney’shouseandannoyedMrs.Poulteney.SarahaskedaboutherhealthcleverlyandherillnesswereknownbyMrs.Poulteney.Forfearofhurtingherreputation,Mrs.PoulteneyforgaveMillie.Afterthat,Sarahalwayssleptwithher.Althoughtheyrarelytalked,itwaswarm.Fromthisstory,itwaseasytofindthatshewaskind.Inthestory,therewasnoconversationbySarah,sothereaderscan’tunderstandherinnerminddirectlyandmightthinkofherbehaviorridiculousbeyondcomprehension.Duetotheunreliabilityofotherpeople’scomments,readerscouldn’thaveadefiniteimageofher.IntheendofChaptertwelve,therewasasentence“WhoisSarah?Outofwhatshadowdoesshecome?”(Fowles,2003:70).ItwasatimewhenFowlesdoubtedtheexistenceofSarah,whichmadetheimageofSarahmoreuncertain.4.ThefunctionsofnarrativestrategiesofmetafictionBasedonwhathasbeensaidinthepreciousparts,asafeconclusiononthefunctioncanbedrawnasfollows.4.1ExposingthefictionalityofthenovelThefundamentalpurposeofmetafictionnarrativestrategieswastoexposethefictionalityofthenovel.Thetraditionalnovelneverreflectedthefictionalitybecauseitrepresentedakindofatruelifeandeverythingproceededunderthecontrolofthegod-likenarrator,onthecontrary,themetafictionnovelistsalwaysremindedtheirreadersthatthestorywasafalsestory.FowlesusedparodytoimitateVictoriannovel,atthesametimeadoptedtheintrusionoftheauthortobreaktherules.Oncethereadersbelievedthestory,hejumpedoutofitandalertedthereadersthatitwasafiction.Hemaderemarksonthestoryandhadcommunicationwithreaders,withwhomhesharedhisownthoughtsofwritingandprocessofwriting.Exceptthose,Fowlesalsoexposedthefictionalitythroughtheuncertaintyofthestructure,anachronismandtheopenendings.Theanachronismconfusedthereadersonwhatagethestoryreallyhappened.Theanachronismandtheseveralendingsofastorycouldn’thappenintherealworld.Therefore,thereaderswouldunderstandthestorywasnottrue.Comparedwiththetraditionalnovelwhichoccupiedthereader’smuchattentiononthestory,thisnovelplacedemphasisonthethoughtsofwriting.Suchasinchapterthirteen,Fowlesjumpedoutofthestory,andcriticizedthetraditionalomniscientperspectiveandthereaderscouldknowtheideasoftheauthordirectlyandhavefurtherthinkinginthewritingstrategies.4.2ShowingtheideasofexistentialismExceptexposingthefictionalityofthenovel,Fowlesalsoshowshisideasofexistentialism,ingeneral,whichcanbeunderstoodastheunderstandingoffreedom.Thethemeofexistentialismcouldberevealedinthepursuitoftheheroine,Sarah.ThebehaviorsofSarahseemedtobedubiousinthisnovel.Shedefamedherselfbytherumor.AsaproverbinChinasaid,therecouldbenoconstructionwithoutdestruction.SarahchallengedtheauthorityofthetyrannyandtheapologistofLymetomakeallvillagersshunanddisgustwithher.Onlyinthiswaycouldshegaintheopportunityandcouragetoseekfortherealfreedom.Moreover,inthisnovel,sexwasanothersymboloffreedom.HavingsexwithCharles,Sarahrefusedhisproposal.Itwasagainsttraditionalconcept,whichwasthegreatenemyforwomentoseekforfreedom.Sarah’sextremepursuitforfreedomalsoshowedFowles’sideasoffreedom.Freedomwaspureandcouldbeboundedbynothing.Thetraditionalauthorsusedtomakeanelaboratescheduleoftheplotsandcharacters,accordingtowhichtheyaccomplishedtheirnovel.Nonetheless,anauthenticworldcouldn’tbeplannedandcouldn’tworklikeamachine.Fowlesbelievedthatthecharactersshouldbeequippedwithfreedom.Inchaptertwelve,thenarratoraskedCharlestoreturntoLyme,whileherefusedandwenttothemilkroom.Itwasapparenttodiscoverthatinthisnovel,thecharacterswerefreeandtheycouldfollowtheirheart.Italsowasanotherformtorevealexistentialism.Fowlesinvitedthereaderstojoinhimtojudgethestoryandwrotethreeopenendingsforreaderstochoose.Thoseofferedfreedomforreaderstojointhecreationofthenovelandchooseanyendingtheyreferredastherealending.What’smore,Fowlesdidn’tsetupaspecificimageofSarah.Throughherbehaviorsandherimageinotherpeople’seyes,thereaderscouldhaveauniqueimageintheirmindwiththeirownunderstanding.Ineveryreader’smind,theimageof