Cover not available
Article published In:
When Dialogue Fails
Edited by Anja Müller-Wood
[Language and Dialogue 12:1] 2022
► pp. 91–109

“Decorum will be strictly observed”

Generic tensions and failed dialogue in Martin Amis’s London Trilogy

| Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz
Martin Amis’s London Trilogy constitutes a body of work that has variously been categorised as comic, satirical, or simply postmodern. Given these assessments, the present essay concentrates on forms and functions of dialogue in these novels to identify its use as a generic marker. What emerges is that – while individual passages of dialogue are demonstratively structured along conventional generic lines – their function is to temporarily mislead the reader into trusting those ostensibly univocal signals, and thus contributing to their undermining by the remainder of the text. Fusing divergent generic aspects together into a form that is here termed anti-comedy, and consistently establishing and undermining readers’ expectations is one of the central functions of dialogue in Amis’s London Trilogy, the essay claims.
Keywords: dialogue, anti-comedy, comedy, satire, postmodern, genre, discrepant awareness, distribution of knowledge, humor
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction: Martin Amis, form and failed dialogue
  • 2.Comedy: Divergent expectations
  • 3.Satire: Distribution of knowledge
  • 4.Postmodernism: Intertextual references
  • 5.Conclusion: Failed dialogue and the question of genre
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 7 March 2022
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ld.00113.gil
References (17)
References
Amis, Martin. 2011 [1984]. Money: A Suicide Note. London: Vintage.Google Scholar
. 2003 [1989]. London Fields. London: Vintage.Google Scholar
. 1996 [1995]. The Information. London: Flamingo.Google Scholar
Begley, Jon. 2004. “Satirizing the Carnival of Postmodern Capitalism: The Transatlantic and Dialogic Structure of Martin Amis’s Money .” Contemporary Literature 45(1): 79–105. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bentley, Nick. 2015. Martin Amis. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press.Google Scholar
Dern, John A. 2000. Martians, Monsters and Madonna: Fiction and Form in the World of Martin Amis. New York: Lang.Google Scholar
Diedrick, James. 1995. Understanding Martin Amis. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press.Google Scholar
Gill, Patrick and Florian Kläger. 2013. “‘You didn’t set me up. Did you?’: Genre, Authorship and Absence in Martin Amis’s London Fields and Night Train .” Trespassing: An Online Journal of Trespassing Art, Science, and Philosophy 21: 36–51. [URL]
Holman, Clarence Hugh. 1981. A Handbook to Literature, 4th edition. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill Educational Publishing.Google Scholar
Hopton, Marilyn and Christina Ruse. 1992. The Cassell Dictionary of Literary and Language Terms. London: Cassell.Google Scholar
Kincaid, James R. 1971. Dickens and the Rhetoric of Laughter. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Kläger, Florian. 2009. “‘Negative Hilarity’: Anti-Comedy in The Information and Troilus and Cressida .” “My age is as a lusty winter”: Essays in Honour of Peter Erlebach and Thomas Michael Stein. Ed. Bernhard Reitz. Trier: WVT.Google Scholar
Lodge, David. 1990. After Bakhtin: Essays on Fiction and Criticism. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
McGrath, Patrick. 1987 (1 January). “Martin Amis by Patrick McGrath.” Bomb Magazine 181. [URL]
Pfister, Manfred. 1988. The Theory and Analysis of Drama. Trans. John Halliday. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shaffer, Elinor S. 1968. “Iago’s Malignity Motivated: Coleridge’s Unpublished ‘Opus Magnum.’” Shakespeare Quarterly 19(3): 195–203. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tredell, Nicolas (ed.). 2000. The Fiction of Martin Amis: A Reader’s Guide to Essential Criticism. Cambridge: Icon. DOI logoGoogle Scholar