jellyfish rising

Is everything in a narrative functional ? Does everything,
down to the slightest detail, have a meaning? Can narrative
be divided up entirely into functional units? We shall sce
in a moment that there are several kinds of functions, there
being several kinds of correlations, but this does not alter
the fact that a narrative is never made up of anything other
than functions: in differing degrees, everything in it signifies.
This is not a matter of art (on the part of the narrator), but
of structure; in the realm of discourse, what is noted is by
definition notable. Even were a detail to appear irretrievably
insignificant, resistant to all functionality, it would nonetheless
end up with precisely the meaning of absurdity or
uselessness: everything has a meaning, or nothing has. To
put it another way, one could say that art is without noise
(as that term is employed in information theory):2 art is a

2. This is what separates art from ‘life’, the latter knowing only
‘fuzzy’ or ‘blurred’ communications. ‘Fuzziness’ (that beyond which it
is impossible to see) can exist in art, but it does so as a coded element
(in Watteau for example). Even then, such ‘fuzziness’ is unknown to
the written code: writing is inescapably distinct.

system which is pure, no unit ever goes wasted,1 however
long, however loose, however tenuous may be the thread
connecting it to one of the levels of the story.2

1. At least in literature, where the freedom of notation (in consequence
of the abstract nature of articulated language) leads to a much
greater responsibility than in the ‘analogical’ arts such as cinema.
2. The functionality of a narrative unit is more or less immediate
(and hence apparent) according to the level on which it operates: when
the units are situated on the same level (as for instance in the case of
suspense), the functionality is very clear; it is much less so when the
function is saturated on the narrational level – a modern text, weakly
signifying on the plane of the anecdote, only finds a full force of meaning
on the plane of the writing.

2

此后有很多年的时间，我总是把朋友家的猫，店里的猫，农庄中的猫，街道上的猫，墙上的猫，以及记忆中的猫，拿来跟那只呼噜呼噜叫的蓝灰色温柔生物相比，而就只有她，才是我心目中的理想猫咪，独一无二的猫咪，任何猫都无法取代她在我心目中的地位。
另外，在我此后多年的岁月中，我的生命中完全无法容纳任何不必要的额外装饰。一个老是四处流浪，不断搬家的人，并没有资格来饲养猫咪。猫咪不仅需要一名属于它的人，它同时也需要一个自己的地方。
因此一直到整整二十五年之后，我的生活才再次具备让猫容身的空间。

4

在那年冬季过了一半的时候，有人送给我朋友一只小猫。他们朋友家养的暹逻猫，跟街上的土猫生了一窝小猫。这些杂种小猫全都得送人。我那两位朋友的公寓小 得要命，而且他们俩人都有全职工作；但他们一看到那只小猫，就把一切顾虑全都拋到了九霄云外。小猫到他们家的第一个周末，吃的是罐头龙虾汤和鸡肉酱大餐， 而且还把他们夫妻两人的甜蜜夜晚破坏殆尽，因为它硬是要躺在男主人H的下巴底下，至少得紧贴在他身边才肯罢休，他的太太S打电话来抱怨，说她现在活脱脱就 跟柯蕾特（译注：Sidonie-Gabrielle, 1873-1954年，法国二十世纪上半叶杰出女作家，作品大多描述爱情的快乐与痛苦）笔下的妻子一样，丈夫的心快被一只猫给抢走啦。到了星期一，他们俩 人离家上班，让小猫独自留在家里，当他们回到家时，却发现孤单了一整天的小猫不停喵喵哭叫，看起来十分悲伤。他们表示要把小猫带来送给我们。他们果真说到 做到。

这只小猫只有六周大。她真的是非常迷人，精致美丽得简直就像是从童话中走出的梦幻猫咪。她的脸型、耳朵、尾巴，和优雅的身体线条，都带有明显的暹逻猫 特征。她的背部是虎班花纹：从上方或是背面看过去，她是一只灰色和奶油色相间的漂亮虎班小猫。但她的胸口和肚子，却是一种雾雾的暗金色，也就是暹逻猫特有 的奶油色，脖子两侧有些短短的黑色斑纹。她的脸上有着黑色的线条-眼睛周围的漂亮黑环，脸颊上的漂亮黑斑，而在她那小奶油色鼻子的粉红鼻头周围，同样也镶 了一圈黑线。她竖起两条纤细的前腿端坐不动，看起来真是一只充满异国风情的美丽野兽。这个小东西坐在一张黄色地毯中央，被五名崇拜者包围，却显得一点儿也 不怕生。然后她开始缓缓巡视整个楼层，仔细检查过每一个角落，最后跳到我的床上，钻到被单底下，显然是开始把这儿当作自己的家了。

S跟着H离去时表示：快刀斩乱麻，趁早做个了断，否则我就连丈夫都没了。

但H离去时却连声哀叹，说世上再也没有比被温柔的粉红舌头舔醒更美妙的感觉了。