Tales intertwined: an analysis of the narrative structure of Jonathan Safran Foer's Everything is...

Tales intertwined:An analysis of the narrative structure of Jonathan Safran Foer’s Everything is Illuminated

Isak Zachariasen, 20073113, Modern Literature, April. 20111

Table of Contents1: INTRODUCTION:..........................................................1

1:1 Thesis:................................................................................................................................................. 1

2:0 INTERTWINED NARRATIVES:...............................................2

2:1 Layered realities:................................................................................................................................ 42:2 Perceptions of time:........................................................................................................................... 52:3 Symbiotic unrealities:......................................................................................................................... 62:4 The final letter:................................................................................................................................... 7

3:0 TRAUMATIC ILLUMINATION:...............................................8

4.0: IN CONCLUSION:.......................................................9


1: Introduction:Jonathan Safran Foer’s first novel Everything is illuminated, does not

at first sight, seem particularly illuminating. Published in

2002, it is a hodgepodge of interwoven narratives with

different narrators and narrative styles, and even different

perceptions of time. Broadly speaking, the novel focuses on

the question of the possibility of reconciliation between

second and third generation Holocaust survivors and

perpetrators, seeming in the end, to take an ultimately

negative stance on the subject – that reconciliation is not

possible (The keyword here being “seeming”). The novel is

exceedingly complex, in terms of narrative structure, built

out of three, possibly four, interspersed narratives. It is

this narrative structure which is the focus of this essay.

In the following, I intend on the one hand, to analyze this

narrative structure, and evaluate its impact upon the story

itself. On the other, to analyze the nature of the interaction

between the different modes of narration employed within the

text.

1:1 Thesis:

”Everything is Illuminated” violates traditional norms of

composition. It makes use of three different genres,

interspersed and juxtaposed, without explanation.

The two primary genres - Mythical/fairytale and realist

travel-narrative - oppose each other in thematic focus as well

as temporal perception, and one might argue that their forced

fusion simultaneously violates the conventions of both genres.


A possible result is that the forced merging and consequent

mutual violation of the mythical and realist narratives spawns

a third hybrid genre.

The aim here is not to attempt a definition of this third

genre, but rather to trace and analyze the genesis of this

peculiar bastard child.

2:0 Intertwined narratives:“We are being very nomadic with the truth, yes? The both of us? Do you think that this is acceptable when we are writing about things that occurred?”1 (Foer 179)

“Everything is Illuminated” consists primarily of two

different narratives, the first being the realist travel-

narrative by Alexander Perchov, the second being the fantastici

semi-mythical narrative by the Jonathan Safran Foer-

character.ii Francisco Collado-Rodriguez remarks, that “…Foer

- possibly taking a cue from his former teacher Jeffrey

Eugenides – uses modernist myth-oriented and magical-realist

strategies which he contrasts with other, more conventional

literary sources that adhere to a pre-modernist realism.”

(Rodriguez, 55)2 An interpretation of the reasons behind thisi Fantastic here denotes the genre.ii For ease of reference, I shall refer to the Author Jonathan Safran Foer as “Foer”, and the Character Jonathan Safran Foer as “Jonathan”.


choice of genres will be postponed to the next chapter. While

referring to Alexander’s narrative as “realist” is

conventionally useful, it is not quite precise. According to

Menachem Feuer, Alex’s narrative is a quest romance.

According to Northrop Frye, the comic mode often

presents a hero who is pitted against a villain or

antagonist; in the end, the villain is either

banished or transformed by the actions of the hero.2iii

The quest Romance draws on this mode, but often

includes the hero, his antagonist, and others, who

travel to find a lost object and who, in the process,

transform the land, which has become depleted, back

to it’s original splendor. (Feuer, 1)3

Analyzed in light of the above, the hero of Alexander’s

narrative is Jonathan Safran Foer, the villain or antagonist

might be Alex’s grandfather, and he is eventually banished.

The “others” would be Alexander himself and the dog Sammy

Davis Jr. Jr. (who in effect serves the function of providing

comic relief.) The lost object they are seeking is the village

of Trachimbrod which turns out to be eradicated – though they

do find it in the form of Lista / Augustine. The

transformation of the land itself, however, ultimately fails.

The styles of the two narratives are in stark contrast to

each other, though I shall not digress into an analysis of the

use of language, beyond the point of remarking upon this

difference. The realist narrative provides a fictive context

for the creation of the mythical narrative, purporting to be a

description of the travel which inspired the latter.iii The number ”2” is part of the original text, but appears to be an error


Interwoven between these two narratives is a series of letters

written by Alexander Perchov, in response to letters written

by Jonathan, in which Alexander comments upon Jonathan’s

story. It should be pointed out that the letters which

Jonathan supposedly writes, are not represented in the novel.

Amid these three narratives, a fourth narrative emerges

towards the end – related through Alex’s narrative, and the

last letters he writes – the story of Alexander’s grandfather.

As this story is to some extent a sub-narrative, I shall

postpone a thorough analysis for the time being.

I shall begin my analysis, not at the beginning, but at the

point of the fusion of the three narrative strands. This point

of fusion is the second chapter titled “Falling in love –

1934-1941” – specifically, the words: “Seven months later,

June 18th 1941, as the first display of German bombing lit the

Trachimbrod skies electric, as my grandfather had his first

orgasm (his first and only pleasure, of which she was not the

cause) she slit her wrist with a knife that had been made dull

by carving love letters.” (Foer, 234)4 and “An overture to

illumination,” respectively. The former brings the fairytale

up to the point during WWII, where the Jewish Shtetl in which

Jonathan’s grandfather grew up, is annihilated by the Nazi’s.

The latter brings Alexander’s travel-narrative up to the point

where the companions finally find the physical remains of

Trachimbrov – an old woman living in a cottage, named Lista.

“’…who are you’? She was silent for a moment. ‘Lista.’ She

said.”5(Foer, 193) The character Lista is fairly complex in

itself, due to the fact that Jonathan, Alex and the

Grandfather superimpose their various conceptions of Augustine


upon her – “Augustine” here being an idea, more than a real

person. Even though the woman mentioned above has just stated

her name as Lista, Alex continues in the subsequent line: “He

secured Augustine’s hand into his, and gave her a kiss on the

lips.” (Foer, 2002) I am arguing that these lines show Alex

and the Grandfather superimposing the idea that is Augustine,

upon the person that is Lista. In one of his letters,

Alexander makes some further remarks on the nature of

Augustine as an idea:

I do not believe in the Augustine that Grandfather was searching for. The

woman in the photograph is alive. I am sure she is. But I am also sure that she

is not Herschel, as Grandfather wanted her to be, and she is not Father, as he

wanted her to be…. …but it was a situation without winning. The possibilities

were none, between what was possible and what we wanted.6(Foer, 241-2)

Both narratives are heavily laced with blatant fabrications

and outright lies, calling their reliability into question at

every turn. However, these fabrications are employed for very

different ends throughout the main narrative strands. The

fantastic narrative even opens with the words: “It was at

March 18th 1791, when Trachim B’s double-axle wagon either did

or did not pin him against the bottom of the river.” Thus

stating the unreliability of the narrative right from the

onset, but also – perhaps more importantly – hinting that the

novel is not about truth, in any objective sense of the word.

While Foer’s narrative is essentially a fable, it

simultaneously violates the rules of the chosen literary

style. “It could be argued that in its broad outlines,

Jonathan’s narrative is a fable. However, according to Bruno

Bettelheim, the fable is essentially optimistic…while the


section written by the author/character ‘Jonathan Safran Foer’

owes a debt to the fable then, we see something quite

different emerging from it.”(Feuer, 10-11)7

The fabrications of the travel narrative are more subtle

and veiled, and done with a different aim in mind – that of

winning the friendship of the recipient, Jonathan Safran Foer,

who is also the Hero of this strand. This attempt, as shall be

seen later, ultimately fails. Some of these fabrications, like

the following, are commented upon retrospectively, through the

letters: “And thank you, I feel indebted to utter, for not

mentioning the not-truth about how I was tall. I thought it

might appear superior if I was tall.” (Foer, 2002)8 This

statement, while on the one hand illuminating one of several

fabrications on the part of Alex, also sheds light on one of

the reasons for these fabrications – a wish to make himself

appear in a better light than a more rigidly realist narrative

might provide. This, like the fabrication in the fantastic

narrative mentioned above, subtly draws attention to the

question of truth in writing, and perhaps, more generally, how

art should approach truth. Furthermore, Alex’s narrative is

actually unreliable on several levels – in part due to his

wish to make himself appear in a better light, and win the

friendship of Jonathan, and in part due to his poor grasp of

English. Thus the text is layered with intentional lies, and

unintentional double meanings.

The letters, while at least purporting to be truthful,

mainly seem to serve the purpose of drawing attention to the

fabrications in the above mentioned strands, constantly


questioning data that is taken for granted within the contexts

of the individual stories, as we see in the above example.

2:1 Layered realities:

The Alexander-narrator states the problem succinctly, when he

states in one of his letters: “you are all cowards, because

you live in a world that is “once removed,” if I may excerpt

you.” (Foer, 240)9 The keywords here are “a world that is “once

removed” This might be interpreted so as to suggest, that they

(the Jews) perceive the world in a way that distances

themselves from it – and I believe that this is the key to

understanding the function of the various narrative layers –

specifically, I’m arguing that the different narratives of the

novel place themselves at varying distances to the reality of

the reader – the closest being the letters, the furthest being

the Trachimbrov-faerie-tale. The travel narrative, as

previously noted, falls somewhere in between these two

extremes, and following the above logic, its main purpose

would be that of facilitating a fusion between the faerie-tale

and the letter-reality, bridging the temporal gap between the

two.

To elaborate: Jonathan’s faerie-tale is openly fictitious,

spanning most of the seventeenth and eighteenth century, thus

representing the layer furthest from the reality of the

reader. Alex’s narrative is purportedly realist, set in a

recent past, thus representing an intermediate layer, in

relation to the reader. The letters between Jonathan and Alex

are set after the trip to Ukraine recounted in Alex’s

narrative, thus representing the layer closest to the reality

of the reader. The novel itself represents a fourth layer –


the combination and ordering of the above three parts, of

which it consists. Thus the collective trauma recounted in the

fairytale – specifically, the Holocaust – is transferred via

the fairytale through the travel-narrative to the letters -

as close to the reality of the reader as possible, thus

attempting to bridge the generation-gap to the event itself.

The question posed being: how do second and third generation

survivors of the holocaust relate to and deal with the trauma

imposed by the event?

2:2 Perceptions of time:

The three main narrative strands outlined above, are based

within different perceptions of time – perceptions which I

will argue are important, if not vital, to the subject matter

contained within them.

The first narrative – Alexander’s – is a quest romance,

placed within a linear temporal framework, which, to some

extent, moves simultaneously backwards and forwards in time.

“The Chapters about Jonathan’s quest for family roots narrated

by the young Ukrainian – and resulting in the discovery of his

own family roots – clearly belong to historical time.”10

(Rodriguez 60)11 For the purpose of this discussion, I shall

analyze it as moving forward. An argument for the reversed

movement is that as the travelers come closer to their

destination, the subject of their discussions move further

back in time, eventually reaching the Holocaust.

The second narrative, Jonathan’s fantastic tale of the

inception and destruction – or “birth” and “death” of

Trachimbrod falls within the mode of the fable, and as such,


follows a cyclical or mythical perception of time – the main

importance of which is that it is distant, and to some extent,

indefinable. “According to theories Mircea Eliade develops in

his archetypal study The Myth of Eternal Return (1949), ancient

civilizations experienced time as a cyclical process;

individual events were understood to be the result of

irreversible necessity.”12(Rodriguez 58) As such, “Jonathan’s

presentation of events imposes a cyclical understanding of

life centered on the notion that things will necessarily

deteriorate as time advances until the cycle comes to its end.

“13 (Rodriguez 58) While it makes significant leaps in time,

often jumping back and forth, it eventually arrives at 1945 –

thus also reaching the Holocaust. Here the first and second

narratives merge – an event commented upon by Alex.

The third narrative – the letters – are interspersed

between the second and the first, supplied with dates, and

presented in chronological order. These letters are written

during the composition of Jonathan’s and Alexander’s narrative

– temporally after the events described in the former have

taken place, and while chronological, they are interwoven

between the two strands mentioned above, and thus do not

entirely adhere to a coherent temporal pattern.

A fourth narrative emerges towards the end: that of

Alexander’s grandfather. Temporally, it stretches from the end

of the second narrative - Jonathan’s Fairytale - through the

first - Alexander’s quest romance. Thus to some extent, it

bridges the gap between the two, and facilitates the

simultaneous violation of the realist and fairytale genres,

which I mentioned in the initial thesis. “In this chapter,


Alex’s Grandfather – perhaps himself a Jew – explains how he

had to expose his close friend Herschel as a Jew to the Nazis.

This was the only way to save himself and his

family.”14(Rodriguez 63) Only towards the end does this

narrative actually emerge as a strand in its own right, in the

form of a letter written by the grandfather, and translated by

Alex.

Finally, the novel itself – this peculiar bastard child –

itself forms a fifth narrative. A super-narrative shaped by

the conscious act of composition which it represents –

temporally, this final strand succeeds the composition of the

letters. This composite of the four different narratives to

some extent violates the temporal perceptions of the first two

by integrating them into a coherent narrative – as I argued in

my thesis.

Thus, the traumatic event that forms the basis for the

entire novel – the holocaust – is transferred from the myth to

the romance via the letters, eventually reaching the reality

represented by the novel itself. 2:3 Symbiotic unrealities:

In the following, I will attempt an analysis of how the main

narrative strands affect each other. In my thesis, I argued

that the forced fusion of the realist and the fantastic

narrative creates a third, indefinable genre, which is a

fusion of the two. In the following, I will argue that we may

need expand upon this initial thesis. Specifically, as I

argued in the above section, the purpose of these different

genres is, on the one hand, to transport the subject matter of

the Holocaust from one to the other, on the other hand, to


transport it from the past, as close to the present – our

present as readers – as possible. Viewed in this context, the

letters acquire the function of a meta-narrative, constantly

commenting on the other two, and drawing attention to the

artificiality or fictitiousness of both accounts. Robilliard

points out that “Though the individual narratives in EiL are

generally unreliable, together, by speaking to each other in

various ways, they produce a cohesive, perhaps not wholly

reliable, but certainly emotionally honest story”.15

(Robilliard 4) Thus, as indicated by the above analysis of the

temporal relationship of the threads, Robilliard supports the

hypothesis that the various strands can only be read in the

context, which they provide for each other. Exactly what,

then, is this context? Alexander’s realist narrative is set in

a time relatively close to historical present, and provides a

context for the creation of Foer’s mythical fabrication.

Furthermore, the tale of Trachimbrod provides a mythical

context for understanding the traumatic events gradually

disclosed in the realist narratives. The letters, apart from

reflecting upon the content of the above mentioned narratives,

provide a context for the creation of EiL as a whole, while

also, as has been previously mentioned, serving as a means of

addressing the artificiality of both of the main accounts. The

final letter from Alexander’s grandfather is set within the

temporal reality of the letters, and serves the purpose of

forcing the two main strands into the contexts of each other.

I have named this section “Symbiotic unrealities”, on the one

hand, to reflect upon the symbiotic relationship between these

narratives, that is to say, how they impact each other – on

the other hand, to reflect upon the fact that none of the


narratives are “real”, with the possible exception of the

letters, and even these cannot be wholly believed. The reason

behind the unreliability of the letters is the unreliability

of their author, and the inconsistencies which they

continuously illuminate.

Thus, I would argue that the realist narrative is dependent

upon the letters, which are dependent upon the mythical

narrative, which is again dependent upon the realist

narrative. In short, each individual part of the narrative

makes sense, only when viewed as a component of the larger

whole. This becomes particularly clear in the case of the

grandfather, whose story, illuminated only at the very end,

bridges all three strands.

2:4 The final letter:

The book closes with a final letter, written by the

Grandfather and, presumably, translated by Alexander Perchov.

As I argued initially, this final letter might be interpreted

as a 4th narrative strand, superseding the letters.

It opens with the words: “If you are reading this, it is

because Sasha found it and translated it for you. It means

that I am dead, and that Sasha is alive.”16 It is the

following, however, which makes the letter problematic, this

being the reason for the above suggestion that the letter is

presumably translated by Alex: “He told his father that he would

care for Mother and Little Igor. It took his saying to make it

true.”17 (Foer, 2002) The problem is that these words are

echoed at an earlier point in the story, in Alexander’s

narrative, as part of a fictional account which Jonathan has


written in his diary: “I took his diary and opened it. He did

not say that I could read it, but nor did he ask for it back.

This is what I read: He told his father that he would care for

Mother and Little Igor. It took his saying to make it true.”18(Foer, 160) The above passage, then, raises the question of

whether the final letter in the novel is actually written by

Alexander’s Grandfather, forwarded by Alex, and included in

the novel by Foer, in which case it could be construed as an

act of forgiveness on Foer’s part – or whether the letter is

simply the above mentioned fabrication written by Foer in his

diary, during the trip to Ukraine. A third possibility would

be for the actual event to be somehow inspired by the fictive

prediction. The novel itself does not even hint at an answer

to this question.

3:0 Traumatic illuminationEverything is illuminated seems at first glance, to be a

series of loosely interrelated narratives, wrestled into a

resemblance of coherency through sheer force, more than any

such thing as literary finesse. The strategy of brutally

interspersing these narratives may, however be made sensible,

if viewed in light of how traumatic memories are constructed

in the mind. This is a complex argument, but a study by

Jacobs&Nadel provides further illumination:

Traumatic stress… can cause amnesia for the

autobiographical context of the stressful event and

hypermnesia for the emotional memories produced by

them. Because the structure critical to forming and

storing the contextual frame (the hippocampus) is

disrupted by the hormonal cascade initiated by


stress, this aspect of memory is lost. Because the

structure critical to forming emotional memories (the

amygdala) is enhanced by this stress-induced hormonal

cascade, emotional hypermnesia results. Putting these

two together would yield strong emotional memories

divorced from their appropriate frame of reference

(Jacobs&Nadel 1116)19

On a concrete level within the text, I would argue that

this disparity between “…amnesia for autobiographical context…

and hypermnesia for the emotional memories produced by them”

is reflected, both in the level of detail with which Alex’s

grandfather eventually recounts his complicity in the

holocaust, in the impossible level of detail provided in the

magical-realist portion of the story, and ultimately, in the

fragmented structure of the overall narrative itself. To

clarify: I am arguing that the overall structure of Everything is

Illuminated reflects that of an inherently flawed traumatic

recollection.

The first case – the grandfather’s confession – is frayed

and fragmented with lengthy conversations between the

Grandfather and the woman he believes to be Augustine, not

being related in Alex’s account. “I stood with the hero in

front of this monument for many minutes while Augustine and

Grandfather walked off into the darkness… …finally,

Grandfather and Augustine returned.”20 (Foer 190)

The second case – Jonathan’s magical-realist account – is

written with a depth of detail, which cannot in any

conceivable way have been available to the author. The


following passage may serve as evidence: “The women of the

shtetl raised their impressive noses to my great-great-great-

great-great-grandmother. They called her dirty rivergirl and

waterbaby under their breath.”21 (Foer 75)

The impact of Trauma is reflected on several levels

throughout EiL. On the one hand, in the “blindness” of

Alexander’s grandfather, on the other hand, in the overall

organization of the novel itself. The “blindness” of the

Grandfather may be interpreted as a response to the traumatic

impact of the Holocaust. “Many find themselves unable to lead

normal lives after such an event, they continue to repeat the

traumatic past.”22 (Verstrynge 10) This is particularly evident

in the case of the Grandfather, who commits suicide at the end

of the book.

4.0: In Conclusion:The novel as a whole, even Alexander’s purportedly realist

account, has an exceedingly relative relationship to Truth, as

an objective concept. This, as previously noted, seems to hint

that the novel is not about “truth” in any objective sense of

the word. Rather, it is about a different kind of truth, an

emotional kind - a truth which is reached retrospectively

towards the end of the novel.

The internal relationship between the narrative layers

turns out to be even more complex than assumed in the initial

thesis, as is evident from an analysis of the temporal

relationship between the various strands. They constantly

comment and reflect upon each other, and it is only by uniting

them, that a greater understanding of the stories may be


attained. Francisco Collado Rodriguez points out that “Foer –

possibly taking a cue from his former teacher Jeffrey

Eugenides – uses modernist myth-oriented and magical-realist

strategies that he contrasts with other, more conventional

literary sources that adhere to a pre-modernist realism. Foer

combines the two literary modes with the help of narratorial

voices that double and refract each other. The result of the

crossing of two aesthetic traditions is a book that is

characterized by strong ethical claims.”23 (55)

The initial thesis that I presented, suggesting that “the

forced merging and consequent mutual violation of the mythical

and realist narratives spawns a third, indefinable genre

which, by being a union of both, might arguably be perceived

as being something else entirely”, turns out to be only

partially correct. A closer approximation is that the

narrative layers serve the purpose of transporting the subject

matter – the Holocaust – from one to the other, allowing the

myth to be perceived in the reality that inspired it.


Works cited:

Foer, Jonathan Safran. 2002 Everything is Illuminated. Boston: PenguinBooks.

Rodriguez, Francisco Collado, “Ethics in the Second Degree: Trauma and Dual Narratives in Jonathan Safran Foer’s Everything is Illuminated.” Journal of Modern Literature, 32, 55, 30/04/11.

Feuer, Menachem, 2007, Shofar. Lincoln. 25:2 30/04/11

Jacobs, W. Jake and Nadel, Lynn, “Neurobiology of Reconstructed Memory”, Psychology, Policy, and Law, 4, 4, 1998 30/04/11

Robillard, Dennis J. “Postmodernism, the Holocaust and Emotions: an Examination of the Affective Qualities of Everything is Illuminated.” 30/04/11


Verstrynge, Raissa, “Representing Holocaust Trauma: The Pawnbroker and Everything is Illuminated” Ghent University, 2010. 30/04/11

1 Jonathan Safran Foer, “Everything is Illuminated”, p. 1792 Francisco Collado Rodriguez, “Ethics in the second degree: Trauma and dual narratives in Jonathan Safran Foer’s Everything is Illuminated”, P. 553 Menachem Feuer, Shofar.Lincoln P. 14 Jonathan Safran Foer, “Everything is Illuminated”. P. 2345 Jonathan Safran Foer, “Everything is Illuminated”. P. 1936 Jonathan Safran Foer, “Everything is Illuminated”. PP 241, 2427 Menachem Feuer, Shofar.Lincoln PP. 10-118 Jonathan Safran Foer, “Everything is Illuminated”. P. 249 Ibid. P. 240.10 Francisco Collado Rodriguez, “Ethics in the second degree: Trauma and dual narratives in Jonathan Safran Foer’s Everything is Illuminated”, p. 6011 Ibid.12 Francisco Collado Rodriguez, “Ethics in the second degree: Trauma and dual narratives in Jonathan Safran Foer’s Everything is Illuminated”, p. 5813 Ibid.14 Francisco Collado Rodriguez, “Ethics in the second degree: Trauma and dual narratives in Jonathan Safran Foer’s Everything is Illuminated”. P. 6315 Dennis J. Robillard, “Postmodernism, the Holocaust and Emotions: An examination of the Affective Qualities of Everything is Illuminated.”, p. 416 Jonathan Safran Foer, ”Everything is Illuminated”, p. 274.17 Ibid. 18 Jonathan Safran Foer, ”Everything is Illuminated”, p. 160.19 Jacobs and Nadel, ”Neurobiology of reconstructed memory”, p. 111620 Jonathan Safran Foer, “Everything is Illuminated”, p. 19021 Jonathan Safran Foer, “Everything is Illuminated, p. 7522 ”Representing holocaust trauma, The Pawnbroker and Everything is Illuminated” P. 1023 Francisco Collado Rodriguez, ”Ethics in the second degree: Trauma and dual narratives in Jonathan Safran Foer’s Everything is Illuminated”. P. 55

Tales intertwined: an analysis of the narrative structure of Jonathan Safran Foer's Everything is...

Documents

Transcript of Tales intertwined: an analysis of the narrative structure of Jonathan Safran Foer's Everything is...