1.4. The presentation of the environment

Which cultural specific narratological techniques are used to present the setting?

1.5. The reception of the environment

Which symbolical meanings, moods and atmosphere are connected to the time and space presented?

1.6. The concept of the environment

Different settings are classified and combined, concerning the dynamics, their complexity, their mysteriousness, the applicability of the setting.

2. The analysis of the plot (87-127, 290-324)

2.1. The elements of the plot

Of which single-events is the plot composed? How does the density of the plot change? Which episodes of the plot/which sequences are comparable with one another, which are exceptional?

2.2. The importance of the elements

Which are the most important elements of the narrative? Which are the less important?

2.3. The plot presentation: narrative time versus plot length

The order of the plot presentation: Do we find analepses (=a "flashback") and/or prolepses (="flash-forward")?

The pace of the presentation: Where is time compressed, time stretches? Where does the time stand still? Do we find ellipses - certain parts of the text are missed, to create a certain tempo and atmosphere - or even a pause? Is there a specific and general temporhythm? For example, how does time change when the Europeans enter the plot? Does it become slow and prolonged or fast and/or even hectic because of the use of many ellipses?

The rate of the plot presentation: Are there any specific events which are told repeatedly? Which kind of events are they? Tragic or Triumphal?

2.4 The structure of the plot and the type of plots

Can we classify the text within a certain genre? Where is the introduction to the plot placed? Where is the climax and the decline of the plot placed? How does the 'curve of luck and fortune' of the figures proceed?

2.5 The course of action

Is the recepient able to guess what will happen next in the plot or is he always surprised? Where and in what way does the author use the moment of surprising? Which characters assert their intentions?

2.6. Conflicts as a central part of the plot

Do we find conflicts which push the plot forward? What type of conflict is presented in the plot? For example a conflict of unfulfilled wishes or duties, a conflict because of a lack of knowledge, a moral or inner conflict, a reality conflict or a conflict of wishes; Does the plot contain mainly political and party conflicts - and which are these? Where does the conflict of the plot start and where does it end? How does the bend of conflicts change during the plot?

2.7. The plot line

Does the text have different plot lines with different places and figures. And in which way are the scenes linked with?

2.8. The beginning and the end of the plot:

The beginning of the plot: Do we find certain contents of the narrative, which are emphasized because of their initial position? How high is the expositionality of the plot (is the recipient 'thrown' into the middle of the action or he is introduced in the content of the narrative?)

The end of the plot: How did author create the end of his text? For example through the fulfilled destiny of the characters, the solution of the main conflict/several conflicts, through a point (= e.g. does the main figure gain knowledge at the end?) - and, do we find parallels to the beginning, which would help to analyze the closure of the text. Is the end and expected one or a surprising one or is it even implausible. What are the final emotions of the reception, is it a happy end for example?

3. The Analysis of the figures (125-166, 325-364)

3.1. The existence of the figures and their configuration:

Which kind of figures appear in the scenes? Do they have a certain pattern, when they appear?

3.2. The features of the figures:

Which features of the figure are mentioned by the author? And is the intended recipient able to understand these features with his cultural knowledge? The features can be listed as following: The identity of the figure, its characteristics and traits, its opinion and experiences, its emotion and way of behaviour, its appearance (its look, its sex and its age), its social context, its wisdom and duties, its wishes and emotions.

The constellation of the figures features: In which way are these features interlinked? Do we find main- or optional features?

The comparison of the figures (features): Does the author compare one figure with another figure of the text, with figures of other narratives, with historical idols? Are they parallelized or contrasted? What is the spectrum of the figures features in general?

3.3. The constellation of the figures:

Here, the relationship of the figures (sympathy, rejection, familiar relationship) among themselves will be analyzed.

3.4. The figure and the action:

The importance of the figure in the narrative. Next to the main figure, is there another main figure or a minor figure, which might be important as well? Is it a helping figure or a marginal figure? A background figure or a an 'episode-figure' (a figure, which is just mentioned once in a scene, respectively in a chapter). The function of the figure within the narrative: which role of action does the figure takes up? A protagonist/antagonist, the trigger figure, a decision maker, a perceiver or helper?

3.5. The presentation of the figures:

Which are the techniques of the author to describe his figures? That means, are the features presented in the text explicit or implicit. Also, is it always the author, who introduces other figures or is it done as well by other figures (through which we would see the authors distance towards the described object)? Is the description of the figure made en bloc, or separated, detailed or shortly, several times or just once? And is this characterization [un]believable? Which are the techniques of the characterization of the figures in general?

3.6. The figures conception:

How can the figure be described in general? Is it a static or dynamic figure a brief or detailed one, one-dimensional or multidimensional, a typical figure or an individual, transparent or mysterious, realistic or unrealistic, coherent or incoherent, specific or symbolic/trans-psychological? In short: is it a simple figure or a complex one, a "deep" or "round" one?

4. The Analysis of the perspective (164-185, 365-391)

4.1 The Participation:

How strong is the narrator involved into the action? As a main/minor/marginal figure, as a watching figure (first-person narrator) or as an uninvolved narrator?

4.2. Distance of speech:

In which immediacy is the speech of the figure presented? Is it a short call report, indirect/free and direct speech, does the modus change during the speech/thought? Are there specific persons of certain religions, classes, ranks, sex, etc. who always use (in)direct speech)?

4.3. The center of perception and inner view (fokalisation):

Inner view: How much does the author know about the figures, their perception, wisdom, their feelings, the intention of a figure.

Center of perception: Which figure is accompanied permanently in his perception (fokalisator).

4.4. The narrator:

What kind of picture does the author produce of himself for the recipient? Where and when does he start to tell his stories? What does the reader know about the author, about his age, his sex, his social heritage and about the personality of the author? How present is the author in the text and which techniques does he use? In general: What does the recipient know and what not?

4.5. The narrators standpoint:

How does the narrator evaluate certain figures, their attributes and ways of acting, settings, events? Which norms and values can we find behind the narrators value judgement? In which facts does the narrator truly believe in, where is he skeptical? How does the narrators standpoint conduct to those of the other figures?

The addresses of the narrative: In which context is the story told? How much can we find out about the addresses of the narrative?

5. The Analysis of the reception (186-243, 393-438)

5.1. Empathy:

How close does the recipient feel itself towards a figure of the narrative? Will the empathy-factors of the figure change during the text? What about the Europeans (if they are mentioned)? Will they always be described in a negative way or do they have their certain empathy-factors?

5.2. Sympathy:

How does the recipient judge a figure? What are the reasons for sympathy or antipathy towards a figure?

5.3. Reality effect:

How deep can the recipient dive into the narrative? Which factors support the immersion (Does the narrator use plenty of details and clearness for example?)

5.4. Excitement:

How exciting is the narrative in different parts? Where can we find bends of exciting? Which kind of exciting exist?

5.5. The recipients emotions:

Which emotions does the recipient relate with one of the figures? Hope, joy, fear, relieve, compassion, frustration, anger? Which emotions do the attributes of the environment, of the figures or events awake? Shiver, lust, joy or hilarity? Does the author use aesthetic emotions, e.g.: astonishment, strong attractions, latent resistance?

5.6. Intended application:

Are we able to refer certain elements of the narrative to the world of the recipient? What is said about important (historical) events? For example: the application of the figures: Is the recipient able to find himself, another person or the struggle of human existence in general within a certain figure? What are the aspects this identification refers to?

5.7. The narrators intended change of the recipients opinion and behavior:

First of all, which pre-settings and former convictions might the recipient have? Therefore, which beliefs, attitudes and convictions want the narrator influence or change with his narrative? Which factors support the change? Is the narrative told in a reflective way or do we find rather periphery-cues/signals? What might be the reason, the recipient changes and acts in the intended way? In general: what configuration of persuasion does the author (Persuasionskonfiguration) use?

This whole field of narratological investigations on Arabic, Farsi or Ottoman texts is absolutely new and, as mentioned above, there are only a very, very few studies and scholars dealing with it. However, their results are highly welcome, not to mention important contributions to the field of inter-cultural historical investigations. [8]

Finally, Sönke Finnern provides us with an excellent and detailed 'tool-kit to be used when starting a narratological analysis of 'our' sources, be these the Bible, the ʾaḥādīṯ, Islamic chronicles, etc . He provides the reader with several innovative and informative tables (e.g. 240-243), as well as a detailed and excellent evaluation (439-486) of each concrete methodological step he used. Considering all these elements, therefore, this splendid book can only be recommended.

Anmerkungen:

[1] Tzvetan Todorov: Grammaire du Décaméron, in: Approaches to Semiotics 3, publ. by Th. A. Sebeok, Den Haag/Paris 1969, 10. This term is often used especially to define the French structualistic approaches to the narrative and is confronted to the German "Erzähltheorie" ("theory of the narrative"). In addition to Finnern and Nünning, I will use them both synomynous.

[2] Peter Wenzel: Einführung in die Erzählanalyse. Kategorien, Modelle, Probleme, Trier 2004.

[3] Simone Winko: Art. Methode, in: RLW II, 581-585.

[4] Stefan Ark Nitsche/Helmut Utzschneider: Arbeitsbuch literaturwissenschaftliche Bibelauslegung. Eine Methodenlehre zur Exegese des Alten Testaments, Gütersloh 2001.

[5] In German, once have to choose between the following options: "Erzähltextanalyse, Erzählanalyse, narrative Analyse, narratologische Analyse."

[6] Brian Richardson: Recent Concepts of Narrative and the Narratives of Narrative Theory, in: Style 34 (2000), 168-175, 170.

[7] Concerning the field of Islamic Studies, there just a very few but therefore even more important studies dealing with the actual tendencies and possibilities of 'Kulturwissenschaften', which stays in contrast to the Anglo-American 'Cultural-Studies', see Stephan Conermann: Islamwissenschaft als Kulturwissenschaft. Historische Anthropologie. Ansätze und Möglichkeiten, Schenenfeld 2007, p.1; Marco Schöller: Methode und Wahrheit in der Islamwissenschaft. Prolegomena, Wiesbaden 2000. See also Volker Hubert-Köster: Rezension von: Rüdiger Lohlker: Islam. Eine Ideengeschichte, Stuttgart: UTB 2008, in: sehepunkte 11 (2011), Nr. 3 [15.03.2011], URL: http://www.sehepunkte.de/2011/03/19732.html.

[8] How this would look like in practice, will be shown in the review of Nader Purnaqchebad's study within the current issue of the 'Islamische Welten'.

Tilmann Kulke