Narrative Difference: Jacques Rancière, Gilles Deleuze and Uncle Boonmee Who Can Recall His Past Lives

How should critics approach narrative temporality in times of ecological disorder? Literary critics have attempted to bridge eco-criticism with narrative theory, shifting attention from narrative content to narrative form. Econarratology studies how narrative shapes our understanding of the environment. Yet, eco-critical interrogations of narrative form are lacking. Grounded in a homogeneous conception of time, narratology often relays a dichotomy between narrativity and “dysnarrativity”. This dichotomy fails to translate the variety of temporal processes in film. I shall highlight the problem underlying Jacques Rancière's critique of Deleuze's film-philosophy and its relevance for narrative theory. My discussion of this dispute is grounded in the examination of Apichatpong Weerasethakul's Uncle Boonmee Who Can Recall His Past Lives (2010). Critics invariably base their analyses on Boonmee's remembrances and reduce narrative complexity to dysnarrative indeterminacy by accommodating non-human storylines into a human plot. I argue that Uncle Boonmee both confirms and bypasses the critique of linear narrative that is at heart of the Rancière-Deleuze discussion. In doing so, Weerasethakul's feature calls for a new paradigm – different, yet unlike the crystalline narrative, positively determined. By bringing the event to the fore, Deleuze offers another theoretical backdrop for event narratology, that in turn proves useful to econarratology.