1
DOES AUGUSTINE PUT HIS FINGER ON TIME?
In Time and Narrative, Ricoeurâs recourse to Augustineâs Confessions is primarily as a philosophy of time, and it is remarkable, given his theme of time and narrative, how little attention he devotes to Augustine the narrator. I want to shift the perspective by considering Augustine in the first place as the narrator of his restless search for knowledge of God and of his own self from which his reflections on time emerge â reflections that focus on himself as author, reader and interpreter of texts. Why do issues of textuality â acts of reading, of writing, of language use and interpretation â loom so large in considerations of the human experience of time, and not only in Ricoeur? In the first section of the chapter, I explore the temporal dynamics involved in the narrative of the famous scene of the âconversionâ in the garden at Milan, and in particular the moment when Augustine responds to the prompt to âpick up and readâ the codex containing the writings of Paul. In the second section, I seek to relate Augustineâs narrative and the temporalities it constructs to his philosophy of time, with particular attention to the way he manipulates tenses and the trope of apostrophe to construct a distinction between the flux of experiential time and a discursive time which seeks to look beyond that flux. The figures of the author and the reader are central to Augustineâs thinking, and in the final section I explore how the Confessions can help us to think about how the temporal aspects of authorship and authorial intention, and how the interpretation of texts in and over time have been bound up with theological thinking â though not always in ways Augustine himself may have intended. The title of the chapter may sound flippant, but I trust the point of it will emerge in due course.
PICKING UP AND READING
Augustineâs Confessions pose a considerable challenge to the modern reader. Often treated nowadays as autobiography (the first nine books draw on some events in his life, and in chronological order), the work does not sit comfortably in that category,1 especially when it turns to reflect on memory in Book 10 and then to interpret the opening of Genesis in Books 11â13. Shortly before narrating his conversion, he addresses his âLord, my helper and redeemerâ and says (8.6.13): âI will now tell the story, and confess to your name [narrabo et confitebor nomini tuo] of the way in which you delivered me from the chain of sexual desire, by which I was tightly bound, and from the slavery of worldly affairs.â2 However, although confession and narration are linked here, they are not identical. The act of narration is not addressed to God, who is all-knowing. When Augustine turns from the books he has written on himself and on the subject of memory (1â10), he addresses God and says (11.1.1): âLord, eternity is yours, so you cannot be ignorant of what I tell you. Your vision of occurrences in time is not temporally conditioned. Why then do I set before you an ordered account of so many things [cur ergo tibi tot rerum narrationes digero]?â Augustineâs God isnât a reader and doesnât narrate â existing outside time, he doesnât need to.3 A few lines later he draws attention to the limitations of human narration: âSee, the long story I have told to the best of my ability [ecce narravi tibi multa, quae potui].â Augustine exists in time, but is trying to make sense of a relationship with a being who exists outside time, and to understand himself in a way that, he believes, that being knows him. âMay I know you, who know me. May I âknow as also I am knownâ (1 Cor. 13: 12)â are the words with which he introduces Book 10, in which he turns from the narration of the events of his life to explore the theme of memory, a key concern of any narration of the self. As Garry Wills puts it,
More than any other writer â more than Bergson, even, or Proust â memory is the key to Augustineâs thinking because he thought it the key to his identity. He knows who he is only because memory connects events in his life over time. Without memory he is a series of disjunct happenings â like an amnesiac he has no name, no connections with other human beings, and no clues to the existence and action of God. Memory creates the self.4
The Confessions reflect Augustineâs âinward turnâ in search of the truth.5 For whom, then, does he narrate? This is the question he posed to himself in 2.3.5 (cui narro haec?): âNot to you, my God. But before you I declare this to my race, to the human race, though only a tiny part can light on this composition of mine.â If narrative is a constative act, to use the terminology associated with J.L. Austinâs speech act theory,6 designed to set out a state of affairs for Augustine and his human audience to the best of his ability, confession is a performative one, that seeks to bring about a state of affairs, his relationship to God. Each of these modes manipulates grammatical tense in distinctive ways, and that will be one of our concerns in what follows.
First, the role of narrative. If God is all-knowing, and thus only Godâs âversionâ of Augustineâs life could be the definitive one,7 the readers of Augustineâs text are beings in time and differ in what they regard as the climax of that narrative. In the words of Augustineâs commentator, James OâDonnell, âBks 7, 8, and 9 each present crucial and essential scenes.â8 Thus for Henry Chadwick, Augustineâs encounter with Platonism and his attempts to achieve a union with God in Book 7 are a mystical experience âthrough which he was confronted by the antithesis between his own impermanence and the eternal changelessness of the God who isâ;9 but it is also the case for Chadwick that âthe vision of Ostia and the last hours of Monica form a climax in emotional intensity, and Book 9 is a turning point in the Confessions.â10 However, Augustineâs narration of his âconversionâ in the garden in Milan with which Book 8 concludes marks a pivotal distinction in this first-person narrative between a past and a present self, for this is a structuring division which the Confessions seeks to move beyond.11 âConversionâ has recently been seen as something of a misnomer, though it has become so deeply embedded in discourse about the Confessions that it is now difficult to uproot â though, as we shall see, the temporal perspective of the Confessions also gives it some rationale. Augustine did not âconvertâ to Christianity in the garden (his encounter with the Neoplatonists of Milan had dissolved his intellectual objections to Christianity); rather he made the resolve to give up sex and to be baptised.12
The garden scene is actually the third of three interrelated stories of renunciation of the world in Book 8 of the Confessions. Earlier, his Neoplatonist confidant Simplicianus had recounted to Augustine the story of his friend Marius Victorinus, who, though a Christian believer in private, was reluctant to be baptised for fear that his pagan admirers would turn against him. Then Augustineâs fellow-countryman Ponticianus tells him and his friend Alypius the story of two imperial agents who gave up their positions to become hermits after coming upon Athanasiusâs Life of the hermit Antony (8.6.14â15).13 Scholarship dates the scene in the garden in Milan to 386AD, and Augustineâs account in the Confessions to about 397 or shortly thereafter, though notably Augustine himself does not use the public chronologies that were available to him. The Confessions is only incidentally an account of his âpublicâ life and does not seek to be interpreted in accordance with the limits such modes of ordering bring with them. As Donald J. Wilcox has put it, âWriting of his private life, Augustine chose the dating system most appropriate to that subject: his own age. Furthermore he used his age to direct the reader away from a simple numerical chronology and towards the deeper realities Augustine saw in time.â14 Or, as that other great North African philosopher of texts, meaning and time, Jacques Derrida, would put it: dates, timetables, property registers, place names are all âcodes that we cast like nets over time and space â in order to reduce or master differences, to arrest them, determine them.â15
An important aspect of those âdeeper realitiesâ Wilcox refers to lies in the narrative form Augustine has adopted. From a narratological perspective, first-person narratives characteristically have what is termed a deictic past tense in relation to the moment of utterance or writing of the first-person narrator which constitutes the present of the teller of the story: the narrator âpoints toâ a moment in the experience of his or her earlier self (âdeicticâ is derived from the Greek verb deiknumi, âto showâ). Some recent experiments in first-person narrative, particularly in fiction, have sought to manipulate or even suppress aspects of this teller function, such as a determinable teller figure or moment of speaking, adopting what has been called the âreflectorâ mode. This focuses on the experiences of the âIâ figure âwithout evaluating them from the perspective of a teller who retrospectively views his or her former life and ensures narrative closure.â16 The first nine books of the Confessions emphatically adopt the âtellerâ mode, and in a manner that makes great demands upon the reader. James OâDonnell remarks,
We are presented throughout the text with a character we want to call âAugustineâ, but we are at the same time in the presence of an author (whom we want to call âAugustineâ) who tells us repeatedly that his own view of his own past is only valid if another authority, his God, intervenes to guarantee the truth of what he says.17
In what follows, I shall jettison the ambiguous âAugustineâ in favour of a useful, if cumbersomely expressed, distinction between the narrated self and the narrating self who looks back on the narrated self. Each has his own temporality, his own experience of past, present and future. This junction of temporalities, which can be felt throughout the narrative portion of the Confessions, comes to dominate the narration in Book 8, and provides the framework for Augustineâs subsequent meditations on time in Book 11. The narrating self, in the light of subsequent events, discovers significance in details and actions that have limited or no significance at the time for the narrated self; that significance was in some sense already there, had his earlier self but known it. Thus at the very beginning of Book 8, the narrating self addresses God and says, âYou put into my heart, and it seemed good in my sight that I should visit Simplicianusâ (8.1.1), who tells him the story of the conversion of Victorinus. The narrating self, with the benefit of hindsight in the aftermath of conversion, sees Godâs providence (etymologically âforesightâ) in what his narrated self experiences largely as a personal impulse.18 The temporality of the narrated selfâs point of view is richly contextualised, and in this instance given a strong orientation towards a desired future that for the narrating self is now an achieved state: âAs soon as your servant Simplicianus told me this story about Victorinus, I was ardent to follow his example. He had indeed told it to me with this object in viewâ (8.5.10). The narrative weaves together these temporal contextualisations and re-contextualisations.
The disjunction between narrating and narrated self and the associated contrasts of perceived significance are particularly emphatic in the introduction to the second story of conversion in Confessions 8, that of the imperial agents, which Ponticianus will go on to relate (8.6.14):
One day when Nebridius was absent for a reason I cannot recall, Alypius and I received a surprise visit at home from a man named Ponticianus, a compatriot in that he was an African, holding high office at the court. He wanted something or other from us. By chance he noticed a book on top of a gaming table which lay before us. He picked it up, opened it, and discovered, much to his astonishment, that it was the apostle Paul. He had expected it to be one of the books used for the profession [that of teacher of rhetoric] which was wearing me out. But then he smiled and looked at me in a spirit of congratulation. He was amazed that he had discovered this book and this book alone open before my eyes. He was a Christian and a baptized believer.
Some elements here (âa reason I cannot recallâ; âhe wanted something or other from usâ) clearly mark out the temporality of the narrating self. In that retrospective view, details that may at the time have been important for the narrated self and for Alypius and have motivated their behaviour at that point fade into insignificance in contrast with others that have, in terms of what eventuated, come to take on a significance that they did not at the time have for his narrated self. For that earlier self, the visit of Ponticianus is a âsurpriseâ (the Latin uses the demonstrative ecce plus the present tense venit â âlook, Ponticianus arrivesâ â thus drawing the reader into the point of view of the narrated self); Ponticianus noticed the book of the apostle Paul âby chanceâ. Its position on the gaming table may even serve symbolically to heighten the sense of the contingency of these events for the actors within the narrative, while from the narratorâs perspective providing (i.e. âlooking forward toâ) a piquant juxtaposition of the narrated selfâs gaming past and his Pauline future.19 Ponticianusâs action of picking up the book and opening it â the very same codex that will play such a climactic role in the garden at Milan â foreshadows (for the narrating self and for readers already familiar with the outcome) what the narrated self will do with the book there. Ponticianus acts as a half-way house between the narrated and the narrating selves. While his astonishment and amazement signals that he shares the narrated selfâs sense of the surprise at seemingly âchanceâ events, his smile suggests that he, a baptised Christian, shares some of the narrating selfâs sense that these are part of a pattern â a story â in which their causation will eventually (i.e. âin the outcomeâ) become clear.
As readers of Augustineâs account of his conversion, we are drawn into the complex of temporalities the narrative constructs. The point of view of the narrated self is past in relation to the point of view of the narrating self. From the readerâs perspective, the present time is taken to be that of the narrating selfâs utterance â and the narrating selfâs utterance is always the textâs âpresentâ (no matter when, chronologically, the moment of reading takes place, late antiquity or the twenty-first century). Recall how OâDonnell remarked that âWe are presented with a character...but we are at the same time in the presence of an author...â Thus, in representing (making prese...