The terms histoire and discours go back to the linguist Tzvetan Todorov and comprise two levels of narrative. The point is that the narrative text consists of two levels which are closely related to one another. One describes the sequence of characters, ie the text itself. This is called discours. This text tells a story, the histoire.
The essential distinction is between histoire and discours. The level of the histoire includes a real or fictitious event and thus shows what happens. The level of the discours thus includes all the elements that convey this story, so the story is told.
The histoire is thus the chronological listing of all contents, which are conveyed to the recipient (reader, recipient) within the discours. In contrast to this, the mediation in the discours is very often non-linear, not chronological, but is characterized by flashbacks and anticipations.
As described, these terms go back to Tzvetan Todorov. The concept of histoire, however, was first used by Émile Benveniste, a French linguist. Todorov, however, does not only refer to the original concept, but also incorporates ideas from Boris Tomaševski. This knowledge is important because the terminology used in literary studies is very often blurred.
Note: The origin of the terms histoire and discours is confused. This is due in particular to the fact that different designations were created almost simultaneously, for similar contents, which were mixed together. Therefore, a distinction is useful.
Difference: discours, histoire, fabula and sujet
In the literary sciences there are many terms in connection with the narrative. In order to make the differentiation possible, it makes sense to look at the origins and basic ideas of the individual terms. Therefore, a distinction is made between discours, histoire, fabula, and sujet, whereby the terms story and plot are affected.
Russian formalism considered to evaluate the literary nature of works, the poetic language of the text (material) as well as the form (structure). In the course of the formal school, the terms fabula and sjužet emerged. The artistic construction of a narrative text was called sjužet, whereby the story, independently of its representation, was called fabula.
Within the formal school was Viktor Borisovič Šklovskij, who made this distinction. For him the fabula was the material with which the sjužet was formed. Boris Viktorovič Tomaševskij used the terms in his theory of literature (1925), which could be established in science. In German the terms are used as a fable and a subject.
Fabula to Tomaševskij (English story):
All events and motifs in the causal-temporal, logical connection
independent and therefore autonomous from the respective way of representation
Sujet to Tomaševskij (English plot):
Motifs of the fable, however, in order and linkage, as given in the work
affects the respective way of representing a story
to this presentation include:
1. Structure of time as a sequence of events
2. Structure of space
3. Choice of the narrative perspective
The structuralist Tzvetan Todorov, in his essay “Les catégorie du récit littéraire” (1966) coined the terms histoire and discours, referring clearly to the terms fabula and sujet. The tricky thing is that he lends the terms of his French colleague Émile Benveniste and also enriches them with some aspects of the fabula and the sujets.
Todorov basically separates between the what and the how of the narrative. How something is told can be conceived under the term discours, where the what is left of the histoire is left. Here we see parallels between histoire and fabula as well as between discours and sujet. At the very least, the terms are not completely covering, even if they are often used synonymously.
histoire to Todorov:
The histoire can be told differently. The histoire, therefore, means the actual story which is told entirely independent of its mode of representation
The histoire is an abstract: it does not exist in itself; it is non-existent in this form
The histoire evokes a reality with events and figures
These events (action) and the figures, but of course also the relationship of the figures among themselves (figure constellation), follow certain regularities
Such laws determine the reality of the figures of the narrated world (diegese) and are therefore effective and compulsory for all figures of the narrative
Conclusion: According to Todorov is the histoire
a) … the story, regardless of its mode of representation. However, this is an abstract which is not an existing quantity (the reason is that every content has already been told by somebody in some form and is thus already present as a discourse)
b) … the narrated world of a work. To this world belong the persons and the laws (rules) which determine their lives within the narrative as well as the action.
discours to Todorov:
The discours is the way in which the narrator conveys the events to the recipient
The discours includes:
Narrative aspects: It is about what the narrator knows. Does the narrator know more or less than the figures of his world? (for Genette, this is referred to as “focalization”).
Story mode: Who takes the story? Relationship between narrative speech and figurative speech as well as narrative perspective, what is shown and what said? (in Genette, this is the distance, it distinguishes between narrative, transposed, and dramatic speech, and focalization and distance are then summarized under the concept of mode.)
Time structure and differences of history in relation to histoire and discours
Conclusion: According to Todorov is the discours
a) … the representation of a story; how is this told?
b) … this refers to the narrative aspects (focalization), the narrative mode as well as the time structure
c) … a construct for which the narrator is responsible. Thus, this is part of the discours itself.
Note: The narrator in Todorov becomes an essential element, which itself contains discours. This is due to the fact that the narrator not only conveys a view of things (focalization) and conveys it by showing and saying, but also by arranging the individual events, that is, by placing them in the order in which he assigns them to the Reader shows (time structure).
It is important, therefore, that histoire and discours are not entirely equivalent to fabula and sujet, even if there are similarities between the elements.
A further form of distinction would be the separation into story and plot, whereby the story means the chronological sequence of events, whereby the plot also shows the causal connections and motives. The distinction is made on E.M. Foster back, an English narrator.
Short overview: The most important part of histoire at a glance
The term histoire goes back to the linguist Tzvetan Todorov, which is directly connected with the discours. The histoire, in principle, means what is told, where the discours give information as it is told.
According to Todorov, the histoire is the actual story, entirely independent of the manner in which it is portrayed, which is only an abstract and not existing quantity.
Moreover, the histoire is the narrated world of a text, whereby the reality of this was evoked by the histoire. The story, as well as the persons and the rules / laws governing their lives within history, belong to this narrative world.
The relationship between histoire and discours determines the narrative time of a work. The narrative time means the time a reader actually needs to read a text. If the discours is so extensive, the narrative time is, of course, longer.
