Cover not available
Article published In:
Real Fictions: Fictionality, factuality and narrative strategies in contemporary storytelling
Edited by Sam Browse, Alison Gibbons and Mari Hatavara
[Narrative Inquiry 29:2] 2019
► pp. 391–417

The “dissolving margins” of Elena Ferrante and the Neapolitan novels

A cognitive approach to fictionality, authorial intentionality, and autofictional reading strategies

| Sheffield Hallam University
Using Elena Ferrante’s Neapolitan novels as case study, this article presents a cognitive approach to fictionality and authorial intention using Text World Theory and Mind-Modelling. It investigates two forms of ontological distortion: readers’ (mis)classification of the novels’ genre (as autofiction or autobiography) and the problem posed by the author’s pseudonymic identity. The analysis has three parts: first, I conduct a Text World analysis of the novels’ syntactic/stylistic similarities to autobiography and, in doing so, reveal its ontological structure; second, I consider the ontological liminality of narration and the ways in which readers build an authorial mind-model of Ferrante; thirdly, I explore the assessment of critics and/as readers of the text’s fictionality and the impact of Ferrante’s pseudonym on perceptions of authorial intentionality and the authorial mind-model. Ultimately, I argue that a cognitive approach offers greatest insight into readers’ interpretations of authors and of fictionality.
Keywords: author, authorial intentionality, autofiction, cognitive narratology, cognitive stylistics, Elena Ferrante, fictionality, mind-modelling, pseudonym, Text World Theory
Article outline
  • Introduction
  • Narrative inquiry and fictionality
  • Foundations for a cognitive approach to fictionality
  • The cognitive approach: Text World Theory and mind-modelling
  • Dissolving margins in Elena Ferrante’s Neapolitan novels
    • Dissolving fictionality
    • Dissolving authorship
    • Dissolving intentionality
  • Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 16 October 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ni.19017.gib
References (89)
References
Abraham, A., von Cramon, D. Y., & Schubotz, R. I. (2008). Meeting George Bush versus meeting Cinderella: The neural response when telling apart what is real from what in fictional in the context of our reality. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 20(6), 965–976. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Altmann, U., Borhn, I. C., Lubrich, O., Menninghaus, W., & Jacobs, A. M. (2014). Fact vs fiction – how paratextual information shapes our reading processes. Scan, 91, 22–29.Google Scholar
Altmann, U., Bohrn, I. C., Lubrich, O., Menninghaus, W., Jacobs, A. M. (2014). Fact vs Fiction – How Paratextual Information shapes our Reading Process. SCAN 91: 22–29.Google Scholar
Bakopoulos, N. (2016). We are always us: The boundaries of Elena Ferrante. Michigan Quarterly Review, 55(3), 396–419.Google Scholar
Banfield, A. (1982). Unspeakable sentences: Narration and representation in the language of fiction. Abingdon/New York: Routledge & Kenan Paul.Google Scholar
Bojar, K. (2018). In search of Elena Ferrante: The novels and the question of authorship. Jefferson, NC: McFarland.Google Scholar
Booth, W. C. (1983). The rhetoric of fiction. (2nd ed.). Chicago, IL,/London: University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Briggs, J. (2015). I was blind, she was a falcon. London Review of Books, 37(17), 11–12. Online: [URL]
Burke, S. (2008). The death and return of the author: Criticism and subjectivity in Barthes, Foucault and Derrida. (3rd ed.). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Busselle, R. & Bilandzic, H. (2008). Fictionality and perceived realism in experiencing stories: A model of narrative comprehension and engagement. Communication Theory, 181, 255–280. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cohn, D. (1978). Transparent minds. Princeton: Princeton University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1999). The distinction of fiction. Baltimore/London: The John Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Cummins, M. (2018, December 11). The struggles of Karl Ove Knausgaard – and those of his readers – are finally over. Prospect. Retrieved from [URL]
Darwin, V. (2016, September 25). Book Review: Elena Ferrante’s Neapolitan Novels. [Review of the Neapolitan novels, by E. Ferrante]. A Novel Journal. Retrieved from [URL]
Doležel, L. (1998). Heterocosmica: Fiction and possible worlds. Baltimore, MA: The John Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Dow, G. (2016). The ‘biographical impulse’ and pan-european women’s writing. In J. Batchelor and G. Dow (Eds) Women’s writing, 1600–1830: Feminisms and futures (pp. 193–213). London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Duchan, J. F., Bruder, G. A., & Hewitt, L. E. (eds) (1995). Deixis in narrative: A cognitive science perspective. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Dyx, H. (2018). Introduction: Autofiction in English: The story so far. In H. Dyx (ed.) Autofiction in English (pp. 1–23). Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Emmott, C. (2002). “Split selves” in fiction and in medical “life stories”. In E. Semino & J. Culpeper (Eds). Cognitive stylistics: Language and cognition in text analysis (pp. 153–181). Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Emre, M. (2018, October 31). Elena Ferrante Stays Out of the Picture. The New York Times. Retrieved from [URL]
Expert System Semantic Intelligence. (2017). Who is Elena Ferrante? Retrieved from [URL]
Ferrante, E. (2012). My Brilliant Friend. (A. Goldstein, Trans.). New York: Europa Editions.Google Scholar
(2013). The Story of a New Name. (A. Goldstein, Trans.). New York: Europa Editions.Google Scholar
(2014). Those who Leave and Those who Stay. (A. Goldstein, Trans.). New York: Europa Editions.Google Scholar
(2015). The Story of the Lost Child. (A. Goldstein, Trans.). New York: Europa Editions.Google Scholar
(2016). Frantumaglia: A writer’s journey. (pp. 16–20), New York: Europa Editions.Google Scholar
Fiske, S. T. & Neuberg, S. L. (1990). A continnum of impression formation, from category-based to individuating processes: Influences of information and motivation on attention and interpretation. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.) Advances in experimental social psychology, Volume 23 (pp.1–74). London: Academic Press, Inc.. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fludernik, M. (2018). The fiction of the rise of fictionality. Poetics Today, 39(1), 67–92. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gatti, C. (2016, October 2). Elena Ferrante: An Answer? [Review of the Neapolitan novels, by E. Ferrante]. The New York Review of Books. Retrieved from [URL]
Gavins, J. (2007). Text world theory: An introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gavins, J. & Steen, G. (2003). (Eds.) Cognitive poetics in practice. London/New York: Routlege. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Genette, G. (1993). Fiction & diction. (C. Porter Trans.). Ithacha/London: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Genilloud, G. & Roten, C-A. (2016, October 11) Determination by Stylometry of the Probable Author of the Ferrante Corpus: Domenico Starnone. OrphAnalytics. Retrieved from [URL]
Gerrig, R. (1993). Experiencing narrative worlds: On the psychological activities of reading. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Gerrig, R. & Rapp, D. (2004). Psychological processes underlying literary impact. Poetics Today, 25(2), 265–282. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gibbons, A. (2014). Fictionality and ontology. In P. Stockwell & S. Whiteley (Eds) The cambridge handbook of stylistics (pp. 408–423), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2018). Autonarration, I, and odd address in Ben Lerner’s autofictional novel 10:04 . In A. Gibbons & A. Macrae (Eds.) Pronouns in literature: Positions and perspectives in language (pp. 75–96), London: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2019). Using life and abusing life in the trial of Ahmed Naji: Text world theory, Adab, and the ethics of reading. Journal of Language and Discrimination, 3(1): 4–31. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gorman, D. (2005). Fiction, theories of. In D. Herman, M. Jahn, & M.-L. Ryan (Eds) Routledge encyclopedia of narrative theory (pp. 163–167), London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hamburger, K. (1973). The logic of literature. Bloomington/London: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Hatavara, M. & Mildorf, J. (2017). Hybrid fictionality and vicarious narrative experience. Narrative, 25(1), 65–82. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Herman, D. (2002). Story logic: Problems and possibilities of narrative. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
(2013). Introduction. In D. Herman (Ed.) Emergence of mind: Representations of consciousness in fiction (pp. 1–42). Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Hidalgo Downing, L. (2000). Negation, text worlds and discourse: The pragmatics of fiction. Stamford, CT: Ablex.Google Scholar
Irvin, S. (2006). Authors, intentions and literary meanings. Philosophical Compass, ½1, 114–123. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Iser, W. (1993). The fictive and the imaginary: Charting literary anthropology. Baltimore, MD; London: The John Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Iversen, S. & Nielsen, H. S. (2016). The politics of fictionality in documentary form: The act of killing and The ambassador . European Journal of English Studies, 20(3): 249–262. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jensen, M. (2018). How art constitutes the human: Aesthetics, empathy and the interesting in autofiction. In H. Dyx (ed.) Autofiction in English (pp. 65–83). Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Klauk, T. & Köppe, T. (2014). Fiktonalität: Ein interdisziplinäres Handbuch. Berlin: de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuiken, D., Miall, D. S., & Sikora, S. (2004). Forms of self-implication in literary reading. Poetics Today, 25(2), 171–203. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kukkonen, K. & Nielsen, H. S. (2018). Fictionality: Cognition and exceptionality. Poetics Today, 39(3), 473–494. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G. (1996). Sorry, I’m not myself today: The metaphor system for conceptualizing the self. In. Fauconnier & E. Sweetser (Eds) Spaces, worlds, and grammar (pp. 91–123). Chicago, Il: Univeristy of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lanser, S. (2005). The “I” of the beholder: Equivocal attachments and the limits of structuralist narratology. In J. Phelan & P. Rabinowitz (Eds.) A Companion to Narrative Theory (pp. 206–219). Malden: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lejeune, P. (1989). On autobiography. (K. Leary, Trans.). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Leslie, A. M. (2001). Theory of mind. International encyclopedia of the social & behavioural sciences (pp. 15652–15656). Pergamon. Online. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lewis, D. (1973). Counterfactuals. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Mallick, H. (2015, April 25). Elena Ferrante and Karl Ove Knausgaard are writing true life in fiction. The Star. Retrieved from [URL]
McCleen, G. (2018, May 22). Auto-nauts: Voyages of the self to the end of the novel. Boundless. Retrieved from [URL]
McLoughlin, N. (2013). Negative polarity in Eavan Boland’s ‘The famine road’. New Writing: The International Journal for the Practice and Theory of Creative Writing, 10(2), 219–227. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2016). Being gone: A text world analysis of ambiguity in Eavan Boland’s ‘Suburban woman: A detail’. In J. Kroll, A. Melrose & Jen Webb (Eds). Old and New, Tried and Untried: Creativity and Research in the 21st Century University (pp.123–140). Champaign, IL: Common Ground Publishing.Google Scholar
(2019). Resonance and absence: A text world analysis of ‘Tuonela’ by Philip Gross. New Writing: The International Journal for the Practice and Theory of Creative Writing, 16(1), 89–99. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nielsen, H. S., Phelan, J. & Walsh, R. (2015). ‘Ten theses about fictionality’, Narrative 23(1), 61–73. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Oatley, K. (1999). Why fiction may be twice as true as fact: Fiction as cognitive and emotional simulation. Review of General Psychology, 3(2), 101–117. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pavel, T. (1986). Fictional worlds. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Phelan, J. (2016). Local fictionality within global non-fiction: Roz Chast’s Why can’t we talk about something more pleasant? . Enthymema, 161, 19–31.Google Scholar
(2017). Fictionality. a/b: Auto/Biography Studies, 32(2), 235–238. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ronen, R. (1994). Possible worlds in literary theory. New York: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ryan, M.-L. (1991). Possible worlds, artificial intelligence and narrative theory. Bloomington/Indiapolis, IN: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
(2011). Meaning, intent, and the implied author. Style, 45(1), 29–47.Google Scholar
Schaeffer, J.-M. (2012). Fictional vs. factual narration. In P. Hühn et al. (Eds.) The living handbook of narratology. Retrieved from [URL]
Searle, J. R. (1975). The logical status of fictional discourse. New Literary History, 6(2), 319–332. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Segnini, E. (2017). Local flavour vs. global readership: The Elena Ferrante project and translatability. The Italianist, 37(1), 100–118. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stockwell, P. (2002). Cognitive poetics: An introduction. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
(2009). Texture: A cognitive aesthetics of reading. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
(2013). The positioned reader. Language and Literature, 22(3), 263–277. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2016). The texture of authorial intention. In J. Gavins & E. Lahey (Eds.) World-building: Discourse in the mind (pp.147–163), London/New York: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Tuzzi, A. & Cortelazzo, M. A. (2018a). What is Elena Ferrante? A comparative analysis of a secretive bestselling Italian writer. Digital Scholarship in the Humanities, 33(3), 685–702. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2018b). (Eds.) Drawing Elena Ferrante’s Profile: Workshop Proceedings – Padova, 7 September 2017. Padova: Padova University Press.Google Scholar
Walsh, R. (2007). The rhetoric of fictionality. Columbus, OH: The Ohio State University Press.Google Scholar
Werth, Paul. (1999). Text worlds: Representing conceptual space in discourse. Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar
Whiteley, S. (2010). Text world theory and the emotional experience of literary discourse. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Sheffield). Retrieved from [URL]
(2011). Text world theory, real readers and emotional responses to The remains of the day . Language and Literature, 20(1), 23–42. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Whiteley, S. & Canning, P. (2017). Reader response research in stylistics. Language and Literature, 26(2), 71–87. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wilderkamp, A., van Montfoort, I. & van Ruiswijk, W. (1980). Fictionality and convention. Poetics, 91, 547–567. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wimsatt, W. K. & Beardsley, M. C. (1946). The intentional fallacy. The Sewanee Review, 54(3), 468–488.Google Scholar
Yang, Jie & Xue, Jin. (2014). ‘Distinguishing different fictional worlds during sentence comprehension: ERP evidence’, Psychophysiology, 511, 42–51. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2015). ‘Reality/fiction distinction and fiction/fiction distinction during sentence comprehension’, Universal Journal of Psychology, 3(6), 165–175. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zetterberg Gjerlevsen, S. (2016). Fictionality. In P. Hühn et al. (Eds.) The living handbook of narratology. Retrieved from [URL]
Zunshine, L. (2006). Why we read fiction: Theory of mind and the novel. Columbus: Ohio State University Press.Google Scholar
Cited by (5)

Cited by five other publications

Effe, Alexandra & Alison Gibbons
2022. A Cognitive Perspective on Autofictional Writing, Texts, and Reading. In The Autofictional [Palgrave Studies in Life Writing, ], ► pp. 61 ff. DOI logo
Giovanelli, Marcello
2022. Revision. In The Language of Siegfried Sassoon [Palgrave Studies in Language, Literature and Style, ], ► pp. 143 ff. DOI logo
Gibbons, Alison
2021. Chapter 6. “Why do you insist that Alana is not real?”. In Style and Reader Response [Linguistic Approaches to Literature, 36], ► pp. 101 ff. DOI logo
Gibbons, Alison
2022. A Cognitive Model of Reading Autofiction. English Studies 103:3 ► pp. 471 ff. DOI logo
Statham, Simon
2020. The year’s work in stylistics 2019. Language and Literature: International Journal of Stylistics 29:4 ► pp. 454 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 25 october 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.