Event Title
Confining the Body, Confining the Voice: Framing Prison Narratives
Start Date
14-2-2015 2:00 PM
End Date
14-2-2015 3:20 PM
Panel
Literary Explorations of the Margins
Paper/Panel Track (if known)
Ideoscapes
Abstract
Confining the Body, Confining the Voice: Framing Prison Narratives
Prison narratives are not a new form of writing dating back to The Odyssey. What situates modern prison literature is the writing of narratives is no longer only the province of well-educated male writers. The last several centuries have witnessed the increasing presence of marginalized voices. In discussing the political work of narratives, Owen Whooley claims that in “challenging master narratives though counter narratives, individuals attempt to carve out an identity and oppose oppressive systems” (297). Writing is a way for an offender to claim subjectivity, though their body may be confined.
Prison literature and its study has been increasing in political and academic settings in the late 20th and early 21st centuries and covers a wide range of formats from ethnographies, interviews, and non-fiction to novels, plays, poetry, and short stories. According to D. Quentin Miller, “Prison literature has become more personal, and the obsessive subject of contemporary prison literature is the way identity is shaped, compromised, altered, or obliterated by incarceration” (3). Using prison literature this paper provides an overview of the issue of framing prison narratives with a legitimizing voice. What is discovered is that legitimacy is a relative term based on the context of the “inside” versus “outside” world and is similar to the framing of slave narrative.
The introduction or framing of a narrative by a legitimizing voice is common in literature. Framing allows the audience to provide witness at a safe distance. However, this can seem to increase the individual’s indebtedness. As Robin Riley-Fast notes “sponsors, while they explicitly share this aim of winning a hearing for the subjects, may actually muffle the slaves’ [prisoner’s] voices, by the very nature of their interventions” (6). Framing varies depending on the editor and purpose; however, a concern is how the framing voice may control the content. The framing of prison literature (fiction, poetry, narratives, autobiographies, film) by legitimized voices is the focus of this research.
Key words: slave narrative, prison narrative, identity, framing, and subjectivity
This document is currently not available here.
Confining the Body, Confining the Voice: Framing Prison Narratives
Confining the Body, Confining the Voice: Framing Prison Narratives
Prison narratives are not a new form of writing dating back to The Odyssey. What situates modern prison literature is the writing of narratives is no longer only the province of well-educated male writers. The last several centuries have witnessed the increasing presence of marginalized voices. In discussing the political work of narratives, Owen Whooley claims that in “challenging master narratives though counter narratives, individuals attempt to carve out an identity and oppose oppressive systems” (297). Writing is a way for an offender to claim subjectivity, though their body may be confined.
Prison literature and its study has been increasing in political and academic settings in the late 20th and early 21st centuries and covers a wide range of formats from ethnographies, interviews, and non-fiction to novels, plays, poetry, and short stories. According to D. Quentin Miller, “Prison literature has become more personal, and the obsessive subject of contemporary prison literature is the way identity is shaped, compromised, altered, or obliterated by incarceration” (3). Using prison literature this paper provides an overview of the issue of framing prison narratives with a legitimizing voice. What is discovered is that legitimacy is a relative term based on the context of the “inside” versus “outside” world and is similar to the framing of slave narrative.
The introduction or framing of a narrative by a legitimizing voice is common in literature. Framing allows the audience to provide witness at a safe distance. However, this can seem to increase the individual’s indebtedness. As Robin Riley-Fast notes “sponsors, while they explicitly share this aim of winning a hearing for the subjects, may actually muffle the slaves’ [prisoner’s] voices, by the very nature of their interventions” (6). Framing varies depending on the editor and purpose; however, a concern is how the framing voice may control the content. The framing of prison literature (fiction, poetry, narratives, autobiographies, film) by legitimized voices is the focus of this research.
Key words: slave narrative, prison narrative, identity, framing, and subjectivity