happening.11 Its main protagonist, a rather pushy older lady, is all but exceptional, hence two
of the primal elements of the narration,12 setting and characters, belong to a decidedly realistic
representation of reality, bordering the uninteresting - the general unpleasantness of the
character upon which the narration focalizes suggest an ill-tempered disposition which
precludes any likable quality. As it often happens in representative modern fantastic narrations,
such as Maupassant’s versions of “Le Horla,”13 “La Chevelure" ( “The Head of Hair”), and “Qui
Sait?" (“Who Knows?”),14 setting and characters appear deprived of any ability to produce
narrative authority - neither this bitter old maid nor her dull existence in such lifeless
environment appear susceptible to attract, let alone hold our attention. This lack of narrative
interest will be maintained throughout the syntagm, functioning as an underlining semiotic code
which constantly reminds us of our own reality, from her cozy but utterly banal interior to her
checkered bedspread, from her linguistic register and tone to her daily activities, which consist
mainly in drinking tea and playing cards with the lady who tends to her needs. Logically, in
order to establish narrative authority, the conflict begins very quickly, and significantly during
perhaps the least spectacular moment in the protagonist’s utterly uninteresting life, that is in
bed during her sleep, and is initially caused by a very credible event - an unexpected phone
call in the middle of the night. As the protagonist picks up the receiver, however, she is unable
to make out who is on the other end of the line before the communication is cut off. When she
calls the phone company the next morning, she is told that the storm knocked off many lines
the night before and that the call she received was most likely caused by some interference.
11 Maupassant’s distinction between the fantastic and the marvelous, as exposed in his famous chronicle “Le
fantastique" (Le Gaulois, October 7 ,1 8 8 3 ), is still perfectly valid; it does not however clearly identify the uncanny
as different from the fantastic but instinctively fuses both notions with the cautious use of the word ualmost.”
12 See Jam es Potter’s classical Elements o f Literature, which establishes the primary structural elements of all
narrations, nam ely setting, characters and plot; incidentally, we may update Potter’s terminology and replace
“plot" by “conflict," for narrative tension is created through binary oppositions which translate into conflicts
between two or more manifestations of these primal elements, usually but not necessarily the characters: Jack
London’s novels for instance often set the character against the environment. Potter does not include the very
postmodern possibility of language against itself, an interesting idea brought forward by Roas in his definition of
the fantastic, and which could apply to experimental texts such as Joyce’s Finnegan’s W ake or Perec’s La
disparition-, however, when it comes to traditional as well as contemporary popular narrative production, Potter’s
classification is still highly functional.
13 Along with the two versions of the Horla (1886 and 1887), we can as well mention the short story published one
year before the first version (Gil Bias, February 1 7 ,1 8 8 5 ), entitled “Lettre d’un fou” (“Letter from a Madman")
which already introduces one of the most memorable sequences of both versions of “Le Horla," when the
impossible creature, standing between the narrator and a full size mirror prevents him from seeing his own
reflection.
14 This archetypical fantastic narration happens to have been Maupassant’s very last creation, which indicates the
commitment of the author of Bel Am i towards this particular narrative mode.
54