|   Magical 
              realism stands at the centre of some of the most heated debates 
              in contemporary theory and literary criticism: is it a novelistic 
              genre or a convenient marketing label, a fashionable literary practice 
              or a designation of an encompassing philosophical worldview? One 
              of the major aims informing the following discussion is to establish 
              the viability of this literary phenomenon as a significant international 
              mode and attend to its local-historical specificities and variations, 
              particularly in a postcolonial and (post)communist context. The 
              thrust of my enquiry is to identify and discuss ways in which magical 
              realism challenges the conventions of normative ideological representations 
              such as the literary-artistic codes of realism, hegemonic colonial 
              ideologies, totalitarian political systems and, ultimately, overarching 
              ‘grand narratives.’  
            Origins 
              – Early Interpretations 
              In their introduction to as yet the most complete and theoretically 
              well-grounded study on magical realism, Zamora and Faris argue for 
              an understanding of the concept as a quasi a-historical mode of 
              expression, and trace its earliest literary manifestations to the 
              epic tradition of commingling the magical and the real. In the alternative 
              anti-mimetic vision of the ludic, the ironic and the carnivalesque, 
              the critics read a series of periodic disruptions of the otherwise 
              continuous predominance of realistic representation. Likewise, Jeanne 
              Delbraere-Garant, writing on magic realist manifestations in the 
              Anglo-Saxon context, extends the term to include such variations 
              as the psychic, the mythic and the grotesque. The filiations of 
              the magical realist mode with the traditions of carnival and of 
              the Menippean satire, with their reversal of dominant value-systems 
              and polyphonic orchestration of narrative discourses, suggest a 
              possible ‘counter-tradition’ to the great Western realist 
              novel:  
            …a 
              counter [tradition] in which carnivalesque laughter, discursive 
              empowerment, and ludic interactiveness operate in the frame of a 
              dialectical negation of a dominant [ideology] oriented toward ‘adjustment’ 
              to … socio-economic dictates. (in Arnaud & Garnier 39) 
            It 
              is from this counter-tradition, bearing on the intrinsic subversive 
              force of laughter and the replenishing potential of a wonder-full 
              regard on the world, that magical realist literature derives much 
              of its popular and critical appeal.  
              On the other hand, its emergence as a critical term in literature 
              is closely associated with the counter-Expressionist movement in 
              post-war German art known as New Objectivism, whose practitioners 
              depicted ordinary objects in the natural word with a clarity and 
              precision of detail that singularised them and infused the whole 
              with a sense of mystery and strangeness. Clearly indebted to the 
              metaphysical painting of de Chirico, magical realism’s return 
              to the ordinary phenomenal world is accompanied by a defamiliarisation 
              of perspective that places objects in particularly odd contexts 
              – overexposed, isolated, out of proportion, under light and 
              contours so intense that ordinary perceptual experience verges on 
              the bizarre and the eerie. The objectual world is revealed as problematic, 
              and empiric experience no longer suffices to account for its inner 
              nature. It must therefore be supplemented by a sense of wonder at 
              the “magic of Being,” (in Zamora & Faris 19) an 
              acknowledgement of underlying spiritual forces that escape the limitations 
              of our perceptual apparatus. Yet it is not the anthropologic, supernatural, 
              irrational ‘magic’ often associated with primitive cultures 
              that Roh makes reference to; it is, rather, a miracle of rationality, 
              an almost Heideggerian apprehension of the enigmatic harmony of 
              Being.  
              The term seems to fade out in European art criticism during the 
              years to follow, yet it re-emerges on the literary terrain in World 
              War II Flanders in one of its earliest coherent theoretical formulations. 
              Johan Daisne defines magical as a spiritualised transposition of 
              the real, whose home is the elusive borderland separating the latter 
              from the fantastic universe of dreams. It stands, moreover, for 
              the interpenetration of that which is exterior, sensible, experiential 
              with its ‘double’ – the reverse side of the real: 
              the metaphysical, the fantastic, the mystical. The pervasive presence 
              of the ‘border’, that ‘nether zone’ in which 
              distinct and often contradictory universes are uneasily conjoined, 
              makes its first apparition here, and is to remain the defining metaphor 
              of the magical realist fictional space.  
              In a table of oppositions Roh draws between realism and ‘magic 
              realism’, among the chief distinctions he identifies and which 
              serve the purpose of my analysis here are those between mimetic 
              and fantastic/supplemental; rationalisation and imagination; familiarisation 
              and defamiliarisation. One of the major structuring principles of 
              magic realist narration thus rests on a paradoxical unity of contradictions 
              within the framework of the projected fictional world. The term 
              itself is oxymoronic in that it locks together concepts that the 
              traditions of philosophic Cartesianism consider incompatible. In 
              the terminological dichotomy that it encodes, magic realism proclaims 
              its allegiance to various forms of mimetic representation; on the 
              other hand, in keeping with its earliest theoretical formulations, 
              it purports to encapsulate those aspects of the real that lie hidden 
              or submerged – the world of dream, fantasy, superstition, 
              ‘miracle’. Suggesting a binary opposition between the 
              representational codes of realism and those of fantasy, magic realism 
              paradoxically contains both – ‘magic’ coexists 
              uneasily on the same plane with the ordinary and the everyday. As 
              Stephen Slemon points out, it is an opposition that cannot be reconciled 
              within the fictional space that the novel projects; the distinct 
              ‘worlds’ remain locked in a dialectic exchange which 
              creates “disjunction within each of the separate discursive 
              systems rending them with gaps, absences and silences” (in 
              Zamora & Faris 409). The dialectic is never resolved; it remains 
              suspended in between competing discursive codes. It is in this sense, 
              too, that magical realism inhabits an ‘interstitial’ 
              fictional space, in which generic overlaps contribute to the notorious 
              confusion surrounding the term’s various aesthetic determinations, 
              particularly in relation to realism and fantasy.  
              While surrealists endowed ordinary objects with ‘magical’ 
              eerie qualities, most often this served as a pure textual artifice, 
              programmatically unmotivated and resistant to interpretation; the 
              ‘magical aura’ projected by magical realist texts, however, 
              tends to reveal deeper psychological or social motivations after 
              some scrutiny (Faris 171). The object is not completely detached 
              from its referent – though, in many cases, that referent is 
              wilfully obscured and hard to pin down, as happens, for instance, 
              when it functions as an allegorical or symbolic stand-in in heavily 
              censored and therefore highly ‘oblique’ literary environments. 
              It is this ‘de-realisation’ of the natural order of 
              things that magical realism will pursue, challenging the very mimetic 
              impulse out of which it has initially emerged. 
              
              Toying with Peripheries: The Location(s) of Magical Realism 
              It comes as no surprise that a mode expressing liminal states of 
              being and incorporating hybrid ontologies should become the literary 
              benchmark of those parts of the world that are similarly ‘liminal’, 
              hybridic, inhabiting a space of “in-between peripherality” 
              (Tötösy de Zepetnek 11). Magical Realism has accordingly 
              been described as a mode of writing which arises out of postcolonial 
              or unevenly developed societies, where cultures and civilisations, 
              often incompatible, overlap and mix uneasily; where modern and ancient, 
              scientific and magical world-views coexist. It thrives in transition, 
              border zones and crossroads, “capturing the boundaries between 
              spaces” (Cooper 1) and striving to create an interstitial, 
              ontologically inclusive space, where it would become possible to 
              see with the ‘third’ eye of Hindu mythology. In a 1982 
              review of García Márquez’s Chronicle of a Death 
              Foretold, Rushdie defines the mode as expressive of “a genuinely 
              ‘Third World’ consciousness, [dealing] with what Naipaul 
              has called ‘half-made’ societies, in which the impossibly 
              old struggles against the appallingly new” (1992:301). Its 
              presence is not limited to the ‘Third World’, however; 
              appropriately enough, the territory of some of the mode’s 
              earliest manifestations is located in a similarly ‘peripheral’ 
              space, East-Central Europe. 
              As the comparative study on the varieties of magic realism edited 
              by Jean Weisgerber indicates, the inception of the term in literature 
              is not a Latin-American event, since it had been used with regard 
              to particular tendencies in German-Austrian and Central European 
              fiction as early as the 1930s. These were ‘transitional’ 
              spaces as well, recently modelled out of the disintegrated Austro-Hungarian 
              cauldron, and – like the decolonised nation-states half a 
              century later – they were indelibly marked by the imperial 
              imprint, both materially and imaginatively. It is from within the 
              cultural horizon of this most continental of empires that the Kafkaesque 
              universe of excessive rationalism and absurd bureaucratisation emerges; 
              and it is its incompletely rotten corpse, infiltrating as a ghostly 
              presence the subsequent interwar history of the newly created states, 
              that will unleash the material, spiritual and psychological devastation 
              of the Second World War. 
              In his analysis of D. M. Thomas’s The White Hotel, John Burt 
              Foster Jr. is among the very few critics to point to the origins 
              of magical realism “in the intractable and agonising historical 
              situation [of the Second World War]” (271), whose horrifying 
              consequences form the substance of much grotesquely ‘magical 
              realist’ fiction in the region. As Danow argues somewhat debatably, 
              this type of magical realist fiction describes a universe that has 
              been excessively carnivalised, one in which the most fundamental 
              human boundaries have collapsed; it is the dark side of the carnival, 
              its ‘hell’ (Danow 6). It is in this context that the 
              European modernist novel will evolve into the expression of a terrifying, 
              monstrous, unrepresentable reality – taken to logical extremes 
              in the post-war ‘literature of silence’ and of the absurd, 
              and forming the bedrock of minimalist, ludic-symbolic magical realism 
              practiced in post-totalitarian East-Central Europe. Together with 
              Wendy B. Faris, who signals Milan Kundera as a significant practitioner 
              of the genre, the critic locates one of the major strands of magical 
              realism in this border-zone of Europe, where it functions either 
              as a compensatory or illuminating vision of brutal and unaccountable 
              historical circumstances (mainly before and immediately after World 
              War II), or as a symbolical means of ideological system-subversion 
              (during the subsequent totalitarian decades).  
              On the other hand, Stephen Slemon defines magical realism as an 
              important literary manifestation of the postcolonial spirit. In 
              his seminal article “Magical Realism as Postcolonial Discourse,” 
              the critic appropriates the mode’s lack of theoretical specificity 
              for postcolonial uses, seeing in both its narrative discourse and 
              thematic content an adequate representation of “real social 
              and historical relations obtaining within the post-colonial culture 
              in which they are set” (408). Slemon notices an “incompatibility 
              of magical realism with the more established genre systems,” 
              (408) arguing that it “seems most visibly operative in cultures 
              situated at the fringes of mainstream literary tradition” 
              (408). Taking as paradigmatic examples a number of literary works 
              produced in Canada, most notably by Robert Kroetsch and Linda Canyon, 
              the critic sees magical realism as implicitly ‘ex-centric’, 
              a literary practice closely linked with a perception of “living 
              on the margins,” and encoding a system of resistance (408) 
              – a specific mode of oppositional discourse. In this sense, 
              Slemon pertinently argues, it is not incidental that magical realism 
              has come to signify the experience of the subversive and the resistant, 
              since it is in itself a genre-transgressing mode, falling in-between 
              established generic systems, belonging to several, but to none in 
              its entirety (408). It can also be seen as an instance of “textual 
              mimicry” that replicates in the realm of fiction Bhabha’s 
              concept of colonial mimicry (Faris 2000:113). One of Bhabha’s 
              points is that colonial mimicry is necessarily an exercise in hybridity, 
              because the ‘aping’ is always incomplete and always 
              ‘at an angle’. In a similar manner, magical realist 
              texts introduce enchantment, the fantastic and the extra-ordinary 
              within the seamless fictional fabric of realism – the privileged 
              discourse of the coloniser – thus undermining its authority 
              and power and foregrounding the very gaps and absences characteristic 
              of the mode’s disjunctive language of narration (Slemon 412). 
              It is this latter thematisation of a postcolonial discourse, involving 
              the recuperation of silenced voices and the imaginative reconstruction 
              of reality that I find most fruitful in the analysis of the transgressive 
              potential of the mode. By foregrounding gaps, absences and silences, 
              the text invites plurality to step in, allowing space for multiplicity 
              and subversion. In a way similar to the workings of textuality itself, 
              this thematisation allows for a supplementation of discourse with 
              that which the discourse attempts to suppress. Magical realism thus 
              reveals itself as  
            the 
              mode of a conflicted consciousness, the cognitive map that discloses 
              the antagonism between two views of culture, two views of history 
              (European history being the routinisation of the ordinary; aboriginal 
              or primitive history, the celebration of the extraordinary), and 
              two ideologies. (Wilson 222-3) 
            This 
              antagonism at the heart of magical realism replicates its oxymoronic 
              composition, and points to the double-coded nature of the mode (Roman 
              de la Campa 211). Its double inscription articulates, on the one 
              hand, the ontological and political symptoms of emergent or postcolonial 
              cultures; on the other hand, it offers a potent critique of teleological 
              reason and dominant systemic master-tropes. This internal split, 
              however, is not to be seen as a sign of conceptual duality and inconsistency; 
              rather, in line with the self-conscious deconstructive moves present 
              in much contemporary fiction, magical realist texts are wary of 
              privileging any particular reading at the expense of another: epistemic 
              indeterminacy and historical and political critique are allied in 
              a textual whole that playfully both installs and subverts paradigmatic 
              modes of thinking and representation.  
              One particularly astute observation that Roman de la Campa makes 
              as regards the overall import of magical realism concerns the genre’s 
              “globalising agency” (206), a contemporary synchronisation 
              “capable of slipping unabatedly between aesthetic values, 
              epistemological indeterminacy, and liberationist longings (206). 
              The vast majority of postcolonial writers practicing this mode are 
              seeped in metropolitan cultural models and have found about the 
              myths and legends of their native lands indirectly, through the 
              interpretations of European anthropologists and ethnologists. As 
              Brenda Cooper remarks, magical realism in African fiction, for instance, 
              is the product of mostly Westernised West African writers, who live 
              out in their own lives the spiritual and cultural amalgamations 
              that form the stuff of their fiction. Hence the ironic distance 
              that compounds the nostalgia and the recuperative impulse, the ‘reticence’ 
              of the narrative viewpoint to fully embrace that which it narrates, 
              as is the case with most novels produced in more ‘conservative’ 
              West African literature, such as those of Amos Tutuola or Chinua 
              Achebe. Similarly, writers such as Garcia Marquez, Asturias, Fuentes 
              or Rushdie cannot be thought to rely mostly on ‘unsophisticated’ 
              folklore. They are highly literate practitioners of intertextuality, 
              owing at least as much to European cultures as to the ‘primitive’ 
              traditions of their native countries. In Durix’s words, “their 
              allegiance is to Rabelais, post-modernism and surrealism as much 
              as it is to orature” (1998:131). Their ‘authenticity’ 
              springs from the intercultural engagement of their works, the hybridity 
              of a border-zone where metamorphosis and contradiction are the dominant 
              features of a multiply determined reality.  
              In its conjoining of deconstructive postmodern modes and Third World 
              critiques of Western ideological legacies, magical realist fiction 
              projects a split world of enfolded possibilities, and its practice 
              and reception alike require the mental faculty of boundary-crossing. 
              Indeed, one of the few common critical loci is the agreement that 
              most critics seem to manifest in regarding magical realism as “a 
              mode suited to exploring – and transgressing – boundaries, 
              whether the boundaries are ontological, political, geographical, 
              or generic” (Zamora & Faris 5). Magical realist fiction 
              negotiates between normative oppositions and blurs, transgresses 
              and deconstructs dichotomic pairs such as real/imaginary, mind/body, 
              self/other, male/female – displacing privileged significations 
              and thus operating on the terrain of ideological subversion (Zamora 
              & Faris 6). In its concern with the nature of reality and representation, 
              it belongs in the modernist tradition of epistemologic questioning; 
              in its projection of alternative ontological orders, it radically 
              revises the epistemological assumptions which it questions – 
              and on which it is indirectly predicated.  
              In light of the above, magical realism emerges the most appropriate 
              term to describe some of the artistic and literary tendencies manifested 
              both in Europe and in the formerly colonised world as a reaction 
              against the institutionalisation of normative genres and discursive 
              codes. Whether one regards it as uniquely an artistic mode or as 
              a larger aesthetic concept, “an attitude towards reality” 
              even, to use Luis Leal’s formulation, one way to at least 
              tentatively solve the problem of its theoretical diffuseness is 
              to point to its distinctive manifestations in terms of a) the ontology 
              of the world(s) represented, b) the phenomenology of perception 
              in the narrator’s attitude towards reality, c) narrative tone 
              and style and, fundamental to my line of argumentation, d) ideological 
              implications – its double-inscription as a discourse of both 
              complicity and resistance, accommodation and subversion. 
              In ‘Other’ Worlds: Towards a New Ontology of the Real? 
              In terms of the ontology of the worlds represented, Gonzales Echeverria 
              identifies two strands of magical realism, the ontological (in which 
              the marvellous is an intrinsic quality of the extratextual world) 
              and the epistemological (in which the marvellous is an effect of 
              the observer’s vision). This distinction I find particularly 
              useful in terms of differentiating among otherwise dissimilar literary 
              practices that have been heaped together under the same label. He 
              associates the former (ontological strand) with a Latin-American 
              understanding of magic realism, one predicated on the erasure of 
              boundaries between what we take as ‘real’ and what we 
              see as ‘the marvellous’ by the inclusion of both in 
              a continuous definition of reality. The latter, epistemological 
              strand, derives from surrealist and absurdist European traditions, 
              is primarily ‘metropolitan’, and its preferred location 
              is East-Central Europe. Magical realist practice is defined in this 
              context as a “reflexive act of perception” (Simpkins 
              in Zamora & Faris 146-147) in which it is the gap between the 
              world of impenetrable objects and that of the inner universe of 
              the subject that generates the eerie feeling of defamiliarisation 
              and wonder. In rather less scrupulously theoretical terms, Wendy 
              B. Faris associates the two strands with “a tropical lush 
              and a northerly spare variety of this plant [of magical realism]” 
              (165). In an ironic replication of the good old dichotomies between 
              the North and the South, Faris calls the epistemological variety 
              “programmatic magical realism,” exemplifying it in the 
              works of Patrick Süskind, Günter Grass, or Milan Kundera, 
              and the ontological strand “pervasive magical realism” 
              – the ‘typical’ examples of which are to be found 
              in South American writings, or indeed other Southern postcolonial 
              variations, such as those produced on the Indian subcontinent or 
              in Africa. Somewhere in-between these two major varieties lurks 
              the “occasional magic” of a Toni Morrison, or D. M. 
              Thomas.  
              In terms of the phenomenology of perception in the narrator’s 
              attitude towards reality, Jean Weisgerber similarly distinguishes 
              between a “scholarly” type of magical realism which 
              “loses itself in art and conjecture to illuminate or construct 
              a speculative universe,” and a “mythic” or “folkloric” 
              type, mainly found in Latin America (26-27). The critic sees Borges 
              as the prototype of the former strand, in whose stories the pure 
              gymnastics of the abstract spirit, culminates in a complete break 
              with the world of empirical verification as a-referential logic 
              turns into metaphysical vertigo or anxiety. Imprisoned by its own 
              logic, reason loses itself in its self-constructed labyrinth. Borges’s 
              excessive intellectualisation is nevertheless exemplary in that 
              it unveils the philosophical roots of magical realism, indicating 
              the ontological aspirations of the movement, its ambition of laying 
              bare ‘the thing-in-itself’, the essence of ‘thing-ness’ 
              under the surface of sensible manifestations. Though it seeks to 
              transcend phenomenal appearances, this desire for ontological plenitude 
              – whether it has philosophical-idealist underpinnings, or 
              religious-mystical ones – identifies the ‘magic’ 
              as pertaining to the essence of objects. In this sense, it constitutes 
              a substantial principle of the world, similar to the one propounded 
              by Carpentier’s ‘marvellous real’ (Weisgerber 
              27) – the immanent character of magic thus bridging the gap 
              between epistemological problematisations and the apprehension of 
              an ontological given. What forcefully differentiates the latter 
              version of the ‘marvellous real’ is its insistence on 
              the anthropological and mythical roots of a social, cultural, ‘factual’ 
              – and in this sense, phenomenal – reality, at the expense 
              of abstract idealism. In other words, what for European commentators 
              appeared as the occulted ‘essence’ of the objectual 
              world which artistic perception had to bring to light, becomes in 
              the Latin American version of the ‘marvellous real’ 
              the basis of existence itself, an almost banal presence: “everything 
              is real,” says Garcia Marquez (in Weisgerber 27). 
              As concerns matters of voice, perspective and style, magical realist 
              fiction has most often been described as yet another uneasy coupling 
              of baroque figuration and inventive ebullience with the restraint 
              of distanced, circumspect, often tongue-in-cheek, highly ironic 
              narrative viewpoint. The carnivalesque spirit to which magical realism 
              is heir manifests itself in linguistic excess, baroque figuration 
              and ontologic surfeit, which often speak of the desire of postcolonial 
              writers to imaginatively re-appropriate and reconstruct their colonised 
              worlds through a ‘re-invention’ of language (Durix 7). 
              The Latin American novel is replete with hyperboles and metaphors 
              which serve to characterise a contradictory colonial reality. In 
              a baroque prose ripe with florid extravagance and permeated by the 
              miraculous, the figure of the dictator in Marquez’s Autumn 
              of the Patriarch is conceived as that of a wondrous being with almost 
              Godlike powers, who “point[ed] at trees for them to bear fruit 
              and at animals for them to grow and at men for them to prosper” 
              (59). The mythicised figure appears as the end result of a collective 
              autarchic pathology, as is the fantastic description of the King 
              of the Road in Okri’s The Famished Road that speaks obliquely 
              not only of the archaic part, but also of the contradictory and 
              bloody colonial present.  
              The rhetoric of excess and surfeit points to a discourse that seeks 
              to attain the ‘plenitude’ of signification which eludes 
              realist representations. In their effort to conjure the absent meanings 
              and make them visibly present in the text, magical realist texts 
              use language ‘in excess’ in a compensatory movement 
              that tries to make up for the inadequacies and limitations of realist 
              representation. Yet in trying to overcome textual limitations, magical 
              realist fictions always “fall short of their numinous goal” 
              (Simpkins 140). However often they multiply worlds, double identities 
              or accumulate words and significations, they can never achieve fullness 
              of meaning. Hence the perpetual movement of supplementation and 
              deferral that compounds their linguistic expansiveness, the metafictional 
              self-consciousness that undercuts the presence of the marvellous. 
               
              The inherent duality of the mode is also revealed in the opposing 
              stylistic tendencies it accommodates. If postcolonial variants of 
              magical realism tend towards a maximum valorification of linguistic 
              resources, its East-Central European version springs from a more 
              ‘intellectualised’ and visionary carnivalesque, heir 
              to the surrealist tradition of objectual transfiguration, linguistic 
              restraint and figurative minimalism. It is a fiction dense with 
              philosophical musings where preference is given to the playful and 
              the ‘intellectual’ over the sentimental, the magical 
              and the archetypal. The Romanian writer Mircea Horia Simionescu’s 
              cycle The Well-Tempered Ingenious is among the most spectacular 
              cases of the ‘revolt against realism’ in a surrealist, 
              intellectual vein. If the ‘magic’ is present, it is 
              a “programmatic” one, and symbolic explanations of its 
              occurrence are more favoured than in the “ontological” 
              varieties of magical realism (Faris 165). Kundera’s fiction 
              is replete with such surreal images: park benches from the city 
              of Prague, colored red, yellow and blue, float inexplicably on the 
              Vltava River; a “splendid wreath of bodies glid[e] over the 
              city” (Kundera 2000:95) in a “charmed circle of ideological 
              bliss” (Faris 172) that speaks ‘magically’ of 
              the “unbearable lightness” engendered by totalitarian 
              regimes. Yet  
            the 
              prose is sparer here, and the Garcia Marquez levitations are not 
              events now, but ideas. There is less clutter in the prose, less 
              of the stuff of life, as if the author had decided to send the myriad 
              furnishings of novels, its particulars, down the Vltava, after the 
              benches. (Doctorow in online review) 
            As 
              Cooper remarks, ironic distancing is a crucial feature of the magical 
              realist narrative perspective (49), for the incorporation of myth, 
              legend and folklore in the fictional fabric often serves as a point 
              of departure in interrogating those traditions they are part of. 
              It does not offer an easy return to some ‘pristine’ 
              pre-colonial or ancient times, and the nostalgic tone that permeates 
              many such novels is as much a recognition of the inevitability of 
              change as is a herald of it. In the East-Central European context, 
              it forms an integral part of the metaphysical irony characteristic 
              of the fiction produced in the region. Like the comedy of futility 
              and the Kafkaesque absurd, it goes back to a carnivalesque tradition 
              that seeks to debunk and expose the incongruities of totalising 
              systems. In the novels of “symbolic fictiveness” emerging 
              in East-Central Europe in the final decades of totalitarian rule, 
              narrative structure is duplicated in the introduction of a meta-novelistic 
              level interrogating the relations of the fictional worlds with its 
              author/narrator/reader (Cornis-Pope 153-4). This double-structure 
              a la Borges, Cortazar or Calvino foregrounds the process of signification 
              and meaning-constitution as essentially implicative of the subjects 
              that construe it for cognitive purposes. A similar process can be 
              seen at work in many a postcolonial novel, where the narrative voice 
              that is part of the fictional world, and which promotes identification 
              with and naturalisation of its magical-real attributes, is constantly 
              undermined by a slant authorial reticence as regards the accuracy 
              of the events and the credibility of the world-views exposed (Cooper 
              51). Often, it is stylistic ‘excess’ that contributes 
              to the ironic effect. Events and personal characteristics are spectacularly 
              exaggerated, made absurdly larger than life, yet in a style that 
              takes the hyperbole for granted, as though it were a meticulous 
              fact. They are far-fetched but logical exaggerations of real situations, 
              as is, for instance, the unlikely occurrence of a period of rain 
              that lasts “four years, eleven months, and two days" 
              (Marquez 320) in One Hundred Years of Solitude. The very specific 
              numerical value associated with such an overstated description creates 
              a sense of parodic exaggeration that simultaneously serves to naturalise 
              its out-of-the-ordinary quality and to point to its fictional status. 
              The playfully ironic voice is revealed as both distanced from and 
              complicit with that which it narrates.  
              Magical realism thus viewed appears as a construct of epistemic 
              transgression, larger in scope than a literary genre, but less encompassing 
              in its sphere than a philosophical worldview. It can best be described 
              as a mode of aesthetic interrogation and imaginative perception. 
              Such a definition accounts for the variety of forms it has assumed 
              during its long literary history; it also accounts for its subversive 
              and replenishing potentialities – which is why, perhaps, it 
              has become the preferred literary mode of those regions of the globe 
              where various forms of totalitarian ‘terror’ have attempted 
              to suppress or censor the unbridled freedom of thought and imagination. 
              There is a certain magical realist spirit underlying all literary 
              production – a sort of ‘recessive gene’ which 
              in given historical and cultural circumstances makes itself visible, 
              and even becomes dominant. It is from this assumption that I propose 
              a significantly different understanding of magical realism, which 
              no longer sees it as the exclusive province of postcolonial modes 
              of discourse.  
            Magical 
              Realism as Anti-totalitarian Discourse 
              Identifying similar artistic responses to conditions of ideological 
              and cultural colonisation, I construe magical realism as a significant 
              aesthetic reaction to shared conditions of marginality in relation 
              to both metropolitan cultures and hegemonic totalitarian powers. 
              As such, it constitutes a mode of discourse that grows from specific 
              ideological and political circumstances as an aesthetic means of 
              system-subversion operating by means of disguised, over-encoded 
              and symbolical textual practices. More specifically, I deem it to 
              also encompass a significant bulk of literary works produced in 
              East-Central Europe during the long decades of communist ideological 
              imposition. As a mode of transgression, magical realism is particularly 
              apt to articulate ideological and geopolitical dissent and many 
              writers in Central and Eastern Europe have relied on its defamiliarising 
              and subversive mechanisms to effect an “epistemic unhinging” 
              (de la Campa 208) of the dominant power-system. Such an understanding 
              of Magical Realism departs from but also incorporates the ‘mainstream’ 
              acceptation, insisting on its discursive ambivalence and emphasising 
              its subversive and deconstructive potential at the expense of its 
              radical ontological difference from Western systems of representation. 
               
              As I have tried to substantiate in the first section of this article, 
              it is when the sense of reality becomes strange, unfathomable, incomprehensible 
              that magical realist manifestations occur, and this is definitely 
              also the case of a reality grown hideously and inexplicably amiss. 
              Major European fictions of a magical realist bent have appeared 
              in particularly turbulent historical circumstances, and numerous 
              commentators link these unlikely ‘disruptions’ of the 
              realist tradition with an artistic reaction to the horrors of war 
              and the subsequent violence perpetrated by the forceful ideological 
              and political colonisation of East-Central Europe. In the versatility 
              of its practices, magical realism operates multiple subversions 
              in the ‘natural order of things’, unsettles the ontological 
              stability of the real and is subversive of hegemonic discourses. 
              Its uneasy conjoining of contradictory world-orders subverts the 
              singularising and objectifying effects of realist discourse, with 
              its insistence on the rational, the ordinary, the common sense – 
              in short, on that which falls within recognised and accepted limits. 
              The preferred locus of enunciation of these magical realist fictions 
              is the ‘in-between’ space theorised by Bhabha, the zone 
              of the border, that which “creates space for interactions 
              of diversity” (Zamora & Faris 3). Moreover,  
            in 
              magical realist texts, ontological disruption serves the purpose 
              of political and cultural disruption: magic is often given as a 
              cultural corrective, requiring readers to scrutinise accepted realistic 
              conventions of causality, materiality, motivation. (Zamora & 
              Faris 3) 
            It 
              is in this latter sense that magical realism has been seen to function 
              as an ‘oppositional’ discourse that in its intrinsic 
              subversive potentialities operates as a corrective to various kinds 
              of power-enforcement and ideological dominance. It signals in its 
              ‘unruliness’ the nonconforming nature of the characters 
              in the novels – and is, as such, marvellously suited to anti-totalitarian 
              uses. In their commingling of a plurality of worlds, views and voices, 
              magical realist texts are politically enabling, testifying to a 
              desire for narrative freedom that rejects totalising, hegemonic 
              and univocal narrative stances. They go all the way back to that 
              literary ‘counter-tradition’ of the carnivalesque and 
              the grotesque that I have referred to earlier, whose most inclusive 
              theoretical formulation was given by Mikhail Bakhtin, appropriately 
              enough, in the Soviet Russia of the thirties. 
              Bakhtin’s conception of the polyphonic novel and the carnivalesque 
              in his analyses of Dostoyevsky and Rabelais provide invaluable tools 
              for approaching modern magical realist novels. Bakhtin’s book 
              theorising the carnivalesque was itself written in defiance of the 
              “official prohibition of certain kinds of laughter, irony 
              and satire [that was] imposed upon the writers of Russia after the 
              revolution” (Pomorska in Bakhtin 1984:x), and it is in this 
              sense that carnival has subsequently been seen as a useful symbolic 
              shorthand standing for a variety of modes of resistance. It proposed 
              a concept of ‘grotesque realism’ that went against the 
              central tenets of Socialist Realism, and fashioned a symbolic space 
              (that of the carnival) of irreverent behaviour, bodily exultation, 
              laughter, play and parody. Bakhtin describes carnival as “sharply 
              distinct form the serious, official, ecclesiastical, feudal, and 
              political cult forms and ceremonials” for it offers “a 
              completely different, nonofficial, extra-ecclesiastical and extra-political 
              aspect of the world, a second life outside officialdom” (1984:4-5). 
              All the symbols of the carnival idiom “are filled with the 
              pathos of change and renewal, with the sense of the gay relativity 
              of prevailing truths and authorities” (11). It is a world 
              of “topsy-turvy, of heteroglot exuberance, of ceaseless overrunning 
              and excess, where all is mixed, hybrid, ritually degraded and defiled” 
              (Stallybrass & White 1986:8).  
              The typical chronotope of the carnival is the recurrent fair, corresponding 
              to cyclical time – a time of becoming, degeneration and regeneration, 
              in which all is mobile and hybrid, “disproportionate, exorbitant, 
              outgrowing all limits, obscenely decentred and off-balance” 
              (Stallybrass & White 9). Irreverence and riot are key concepts 
              in any magical realist novel – hence their constant parodic 
              inversions, as well as their baroque idiom and hyperbolic aggrandizement. 
              It is the carnivalised universe of grotesque realism, or supernatural 
              realism, that can accommodate figures such as Bulgakov’s devilish 
              trio Woland, Azzazello and Behemoth in The Master and Margarita, 
              Okri’s abiku child in The Famished Road or Melquiades in Marquez’s 
              One Hundred Years of Solitude. In attempting to ‘correct’ 
              official versions of reality by supplementing it with the very elements 
              the discourse of power strives to exclude, magical realist texts 
              operate as potent aesthetic reactions against totalising and totalitarian 
              systems of all kinds. 
              Embedding ideological clashes in the linguistic fabric of their 
              fictional worlds, magical realist writings suggest enabling strategies 
              whereby the suppressed, the silenced, the censored, the expurgated 
              can find their way back into the text in precisely those gaps and 
              absences the linguistic system makes possible – thus allowing 
              for a variety of imaginary deconstructions and re-constructions. 
              Such works are, as I have already pointed out, double-coded discourses: 
              “The act of colonisation, whatever its precise form, initiates 
              a kind of double vision or ‘metaphysical clash’ within 
              the colonial culture,” (410, my emphasis) Slemon tells us 
              in relation to the post-colonial magical realist texts that he analyses. 
              In a different context, this double textual inscription becomes 
              evident in the articulation of a peculiar kind of ‘false consciousness’, 
              discursively assumed by subjects in totalitarian regimes in order 
              to hide the real nature of their thoughts. By the assimilation of 
              a number of set-phrases, a whole new type of discourse is born, 
              one used in ‘official’ contexts and coming at constant 
              cross-purposes with the inner language of the characters. Thus Jaroslav, 
              one of Kundera’s characters in The Joke, becomes at one point 
              in the novel so split between the two discursive orders battling 
              in his head that he almost slips from one into the other, coming 
              close to betraying the real nature of his thoughts.  
              A linguistic duality similar to the post-colonial one is installed 
              in communist systems: language splits, on ideological lines this 
              time. If the colonised have often been forced to renounce their 
              native tongue and adopt the language of the coloniser, in communist 
              countries the split occurs within one’s own language. The 
              inner ‘private’ language finds itself at odds with ‘public’ 
              discourse, a sort of Orwellian Newspeak one has to have at least 
              a smattering knowledge of if one wants to survive the regime and 
              go about one’s business in as inconspicuous a manner as possible. 
              How well one can switch back and forth between the two distinct 
              discursive regimes is often a measure of social success or simply 
              survival. However, one reaches a stage where it becomes increasingly 
              difficult to keep them apart, and they merge seamlessly into each 
              other, inducing the kind of metaphysical double vision that Slemon 
              speaks about with reference to the imposition of a foreign language 
              on the indigenous colonised populations. 
              One can thus identify ‘magical’ disruptions even in 
              the most realistically engineered of propaganda texts. As inescapably 
              linguistic structures, they too incorporate gaps and foreground 
              ruptures through which the ‘Other’ occasionally erupts. 
              Thus, in socialist realism, though no such direct surface intrusion 
              can be perceived, the textual effect is often subversive-against-its-own-will, 
              since ‘realism’ is brought to such extremes of purgation 
              and distortion, that it ceases to be real in the sense of giving 
              an adequate representation of the extratextual world. The forceful 
              expulsion of the ‘other’ (in this case the actual reality 
              of the matters presented) ends up in an effect of disbelief similar 
              to the one produced by a work of fantasy: the ‘real’ 
              constructed by socialist realism is so fantastically far from what 
              is actually the case that in a paradoxical twist it subverts itself, 
              producing laughter and disbelief.  
              Nowhere does this ‘unreality of the real’ reveal itself 
              more potently than in Bulgakov’s novel The Master and Margarita, 
              where the repressed returns as an explosion of the unknown and the 
              uncontrollable coming to haunt the censored, ordered and ‘safe’ 
              world of an expurgated Soviet reality. The Master and Margarita 
              departs from the aesthetic order of modernist art, as many of its 
              contemporary Central European novels did; the chapters dedicated 
              to the Master’s narrative find their Janus-like carnivalesque 
              parallel in the ‘other’ half of the novel, inhabited 
              by the grotesquely funny devilish figures of Woland, Koroviev, Behemoth 
              and Azzazelo. The Master himself inhabits the subversive realm of 
              the ‘mad’, in a parodic inversion of the real world 
              of Soviet socialism, whose ‘soundness’, rationality 
              and order are disrupted and annihilated by the intrusion of devilish 
              magic. Very realistic minor characters freely intermingle with deliberately 
              abstract and archetypal figures; the conjuring of an inverted theologian’s 
              world constitutes both a parodic reworking of major Dostoyevskian 
              themes (such as the recurrent debate over the existence of God and 
              the Devil) and a covert attack on a self-professed atheistic society 
              in which the magic, the unexplainable and the ‘irrational’ 
              are regarded with suspicion. The intrusion of the unexplainable 
              reveals the irrational and absurd at the heart of socialist hyper-rationality, 
              its own profoundly destructive nature, its layer of totalitarian 
              madness under the surface skin of ‘normality.’  
              It is fitting, therefore, and very much in the tradition of Bakhtinian 
              subversive inversion, that it should be the Devil who forces contemporary 
              atheist Moscow into a recognition of supra-natural forces. The ‘devilish’ 
              performance at the Moscow Variety Theatre where ‘all hells 
              broke loose’, and then Satan’s grand ball, are among 
              the most ‘magical’ of magical realist episodes, “Bulgakov’s 
              answer to his era’s denial of imagination and its wish to 
              strip the world of divine qualities” (Proffer 367). In many 
              senses, Bulgakov’s novel can be seen as an ur-Magical Realist 
              text, its multi-layered structure allowing it to function on several 
              levels as re-writing and deconstruction of history and myth; parodic 
              re-writing of several canonical literary texts; and covert critique 
              of its contemporary Soviet society in the carnivalesque and parodic 
              interpenetrations of the three major story-lines. Yet despite the 
              abundant display of ‘magic’ and the rhetoric flourishes 
              that go into the making of its magical realist surface, the same 
              theme of individual responsibility that would recur a couple of 
              decades later in various literary forms in East-Central Europe lurks 
              as a unifying thread of the novel. Characteristically, his response 
              to this fear-struck era was a multi-faceted ‘joke’. 
              Like Kundera’s works later, it calls for a skeptical but compassionate 
              ethics that would respect the individual and the values of enlightened 
              rationalism. Pilate’s fear, based on what he knows awaits 
              him if he allows anyone who talks against the emperor to go free, 
              is based on the contemporaneity of a Soviet era in which disturbing 
              examples of what happens when ethics is divorced from politics abound. 
              It is, Bulgakov seems to be saying, what happens when enlightened 
              rationalism ends in totalitarian hyper-rationality. The carnivalesque 
              inversions and the fantastic episodes, though structurally fundamental 
              in Bulgakov’s novel, are functionally similar to those more 
              sparse episodes in Kundera’s fiction which stand symbolically 
              for a world turned awry, in which hyper-rational ‘really existing 
              socialism’ is revealed in all its violent, absurd and grotesque 
              irrationality. 
              The repressed ‘other’ returns to haunt the ‘expurgated’ 
              and ‘censored’ real in other instances as well. Repressed 
              memories suddenly take ghostly form in many a postcolonial novel, 
              testifying to an essential indelibility of historical trauma and 
              calling for remembrance and atonement. Beloved’s spectral 
              appearance in Sethe’s life in Toni Morrison’s eponymous 
              novel induces a painfully fought out coming to terms with a repressed 
              past that refuses to be erased out of existence; similarly, in Vikram 
              Chandra’s story “Dharma,” the revenant is an earlier 
              self of the protagonist, whose return “frustrates the linear 
              attempts of memory and history” (Punter 85). Like the gaps 
              and silences of dreams, those of the magical realist text are filled 
              with the unaccountable presences of those who are not supposed to 
              inhabit them, the ‘banished’ voices which return in 
              the guise of ghosts, hallucinations, grotesque figures and surreal 
              apparitions. This postcolonial “rhetoric of haunting” 
              (Punter 79) shows how not only the houses, but the words and very 
              bodies of the postcolonials are inhabited by the History they cannot 
              escape, by the memory of their pasts; the language of their writings 
              remains forever split, schizoid, in a state of self-alienation, 
              haunted by the vanished voice which, just like Morrison’s 
              Beloved, will resurface and try to break through again and again, 
              in a permanent “revisitation of the site of trauma” 
              (Punter 98).  
              Fredric Jameson identifies this alternative recuperative vision 
              in the analysis of three features which he regards as constitutive 
              of magical realism: its sense of history; its sense of pleasure, 
              fascination, or magic; and its particular narrative dynamic that 
              works toward a transfiguration of the objective world (1986:305-6). 
              In Jameson’s view, historical representation in postmodernist 
              fiction is characterised by nostalgia, the substitution of an authentic 
              sense of historicity with ‘images’, simulations that 
              function as a compensatory substitute and displacement of a sense 
              of experienced, graspable past. They become cultural and psychological 
              commodities. In magical realist texts, on the contrary, the “remembrance 
              of things past … is not primarily nostalgic” (Faris 
              2000:111) and historical representation foregrounds the gaps and 
              absences occulted by hegemonic discourses. They presuppose the organic 
              integration of levels of the past and archaic human consciousness 
              that are no longer available to Western culture, and that can therefore 
              only be conjured as ‘images’, fetishes, ghosts.  
              To conclude, magical realism operates as the mode of a disjunctive, 
              essentially subversive sensibility. Its double-coded nature in terms 
              of both content and style has often facilitated the expression of 
              various forms of dissent, by allowing the ‘silenced’ 
              to find its way back into the text, often in carnivalised form. 
              That such critical potentialities are inherent in its unstable, 
              highly ambiguous form partly explains its occurrence in cultural 
              and ideological contexts variously marked by political and epistemic 
              violence. In light of the above, it becomes possible to formulate 
              a more inclusive theoretical model of magical realism. Professing 
              a totalising conception of the universe and insisting, at the same 
              time, on the phenomenal, sensible manifestations of the real, magical 
              realist art and literature strives towards an intellectual, intuitive 
              or imaginative apprehension of the ontological foundations (whether 
              metaphysical, religious or mythical) of empirical reality. Immanent 
              in either the exterior world or in the perception of the observer, 
              the ‘magic’ of magical realism defines itself against 
              ‘rational’ understandings of the real, aiming at the 
              incorporation of the ‘irrational’, the unexplainable, 
              the miraculous and the supernatural into the fictional universe 
              it projects. Hence its hybrid ontology and generic instability; 
              hence, as well, the disturbing imaginative possibilities that it 
              opens. Its double-coded nature speaks for those regions of the world 
              in which cultures and worldviews clash and commingle, and which 
              have been ‘peripheralised’ in one way or another by 
              hegemonic Western discourses. It can therefore be seen as a liminal, 
              ex-centric mode of aesthetic apprehension, whose filiations with 
              the counter-tradition of the carnivalesque and its constant subversion 
              of boundaries (whether generic, ontologic or ideological) makes 
              it best suited for the expression of a resistant and sceptical imagination. 
            REFERENCES 
            Primary 
              Borges, Jorge Luis. Ficciones. Trans. Anthony Kerrigan. New York: 
              Grove Press, 1962. 
              Bulgakov, Mikhail. The Master and Margarita. Trans. Diana Burgin 
              and Katherine Tiernan O’ Connor. London: Picador, 1997. 
              Chandra, Vikram. Red Earth and Pouring Rain. London: Faber& 
              Faber, 1995. 
              Cortazar, Julio. “Feuilletons from A Certain Lucas.” 
              Trans. Gregory Rabassa. The Paris Review 82 (Winter 1981). 74-88. 
              Kundera, Milan. The Book of Laughter and Forgetting. Trans. Aaron 
              Asher. (1979). London: Faber & Faber, 2000. 
              - - -. The Joke. Trans. Aaron Asher. (1967). London: Faber& 
              Faber, 1992. 
              - - -. The Unbearable Lightness of Being. Trans. Michael Henry Heim. 
              (1984). London: Faber & Faber, 1985. 
              Grass, Günter. The Tin Drum. Trans. Ralph Manheim. London: 
              Vintage, 1998. 
              Marquez, Gabriel Garcia. The Autumn of the Patriarch. Trans. Gregory 
              Rabasssa. London: Penguin, 1996. 
              - - -. One Hundred Years of Solitude. Trans. Gregory Rabassa. Harmondsworth: 
              Penguin, 1972. 
              Morrison, Toni. Beloved. London: Picador, 1987. 
              Nedelciu, Mircea. Tratament Fabulatoriu. Bucuresti: Cartea Romaneasca, 
              1986. 
              Okri, Ben. The Famished Road. London: Vintage, 1992. 
              Rushdie, Salman. Midnight’s Children. 1981. London: Vintage, 
              1995. 
              - - -. Shame. 1983. London: Picador, 1984. 
              - - -. The Satanic Verses. 1988. London: Vintage, 1998. 
              Simionescu, Mircea Horia. Bibliografia generala. LiterNet: 2004. 
              Online at http://editura.liternet.ro/ebooks/mhsimionescubibliografia/mhsimionescubibliografia0.html 
              Thomas, D. M. The White Hotel. Harmondswoth: Penguin, 1981 
            Secondary 
              Arnaud, Jacqueline and Garnier, Xavier (eds). Le réalisme 
              merveilleux (Université Paris-13, Centre d'études 
              littéraires francophones et compares). Paris: Harmattan, 
              1998. 
              Bakhtin, Mikhail. The Dialogic Imagination. Trans. Caryl Emerson 
              and Michael Holquist. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1981. 
              - - -. Rabelais and His World. Trans. Helene Iswolsky. Bloomington: 
              Indiana UP, 1984.  
              Bhabha, Homi. The Location of Culture. London: Routledge, 1994. 
              Burt Foster Jr., John. “Magical Realism, Compensatory Vision, 
              and Felt History: Classical Realism Transformed in The White Hotel.” 
              In Zamora & Faris (eds). 267-284. 
              Camayd-Freixas, Erik. “Reflections on Magical Realism: A Return 
              to Legitimacy, the Legitimacy of Return.” Canadian Review 
              of Comparative Literature/Revue Canadienne de Littérature 
              Comparée 23. 2 (June 1996). 580-89. 
              Campa, Roman de la. “Magical Realism and World Literature: 
              A Genre for the Times?” Revista Canadiense de Estudios Hispanicos 
              23. 2 (Winter 1999). 205-219. 
              Carpentier, Alejo. “On the Marvellous Real in America.” 
              In Zamora & Faris (eds). 75-88. 
              Chanady, Amaryll Beatrice. Magical Realism and the Fantastic: Resolved 
              versus Unresolved Antinomy. New York: Garland, 1985. 
              Cooper, Brenda. Magical Realism in West African Fiction: Seeing 
              with a Third Eye. (1998) London: Routledge, 2004. 
              Danow, David K. The Spirit of Carnival: Magical Realism and the 
              Grotesque. Lexington, Ky.: University Press of Kentucky, 1995. 
              Delbaere-Garant, Jeanne. “Le domaine anglais.” In Weisgerber 
              (ed). 44-72. 
              - - -. “Psychic Realism, Mythic Realism, Grotesque Realism: 
              Variations on Magic Realism in Contemporary English Literature.” 
              In Zamora& Faris (eds). 249-265. 
              Doctorow, E. L. “False Documents.” In Essays and Conversations. 
              Princeton: Princeton UP, 1983. 
              Durix, Jean-Pierre. Deconstructing Magical Realism. London: Macmillan, 
              1998. 
              Faris, Wendy B. “Scheherazade’s Children: Magical Realism 
              and Postmodern Fiction.” In Zamora & Faris (eds). 163- 
              190. 
              - - -. “The Question of the Other: Cultural Critiques of Magical 
              Realism.” Janus Head (online at http://www.janushead.org) 
              5.2 (Fall 2000). 101-119. 
              Flores, Angel. “Magical Realism in Spanish American Fiction.” 
              In Zamora & Faris (eds). 109-118. 
              Holquist, Michael. “Prologue.” In Bakhtin 1984: xiii-xxiii. 
              Jameson, Fredric. “On Magic Realism in Film.” Critical 
              Inquiry 12 (Winter 1986). 301-323. 
              Leal, Luis. “Magical Realism in Spanish American Literature.” 
              In Zamora& Faris (eds). 119-124. 
              McHale, Brian. Postmodernist Fiction: A Reader. London: Routledge, 
              1987. 
              Menton, Seymour. Magic Realism Rediscovered 1918-1981. London: Art 
              Alliance Press; Associated University Presses, 1983. 
              Pomorska, Krystyna. “Foreword.” In Bakhtin 1984: vii-xii. 
              Cornis-Pope, Marcel. The Unfinished Battles: Romanian Postmodernism 
              before and after 1989. Iasi: Polirom, 1996. 
              Proffer, Ellendea. “Afterword.” In Bulgakov 1997: 357-367. 
              Punter, David. Postcolonial Imaginings. Edinburgh: Edinburgh UP, 
              2000. 
              Roh, Franz. “Magic Realism: Post-Expressionism.” In 
              Zamora& Faris (eds). 15-32. 
              Rushdie, Salman. Imaginary Homelands: Essays and Criticism 1981-1991. 
              Harmondsworth: Granta Books, 1992. 
              Simpkins, Scott. “Sources of Magic Realism/Supplements to 
              Realism in Contemporary Latin American Literature.” In Zamora 
              & Faris (eds).145-162. 
              Slemon, Stephen. “Magic Realism as Postcolonial Discourse.” 
              In Zamora& Faris (eds). 407-426. 
              Stallybrass, Peter and Allon White. The Politics of Transgression. 
              London: Methuen, 1986. 
              Tötösy de Zepetnek, Steven (ed). Comparative Central European 
              Culture. West Lafayette, Indiana: Purdue UP, 2002. 
              Weisgerber, Jean (ed). Le réalisme magique: roman, peinture 
              et cinéma (publié par le Centre d'Étude des 
              Avant-Gardes littéraires de l'Université de Bruxelles). 
              Lausanne: L'Age d'homme, 1987. 
              Williams, Raymond. “Dominant, Residual and Emergent.” 
              In Marxism and Literature. Oxford: OUP, 1977. 
              Wilson, Rawdon. “The Metamorphoses of Fictional Space: Magical 
              Realism.” In Zamora& Faris (eds). 209-234. 
              Zamora, Lois Parkinson and Wendy B. Faris. Magical Realism: Theory, 
              History, Community. Durham & London: Duke University Press, 
              1995. 
             
               
               
            
             
              
  |