Breaking Out

So what happens when the 'frame', breaks? 

Frame-breaking is exactly as it sounds, a breaking of the frame, in this case, spilling one 'reality' into another.

An example of 'frame-breaking' appears on page 73 of Lost in the Funhouse as a voice interrupts in order to discuss characterisation within texts. “Description of physical appearance and mannerisms is one of several standard methods of characterisation used by writers of fiction.” (Lost in the Funhouse, 1968, page 73-4) In texts where narrators and speaking characters are clearly defined it is much easier to identify 'frame-breaking'. Unfortunately Lost in the Funhouse it is not the easiest of texts to understand in terms of narrators and character speech as previously mentioned, there is no definitive answer as to who is even narrating the story making it difficult to identify frame-breaks in the story.

Julio Cortázar 's Hopscotch is arguably a collection of 'frame-breaks' as his novel splits into two books and can be read in two ways, the 'accepted' way of reading from chapter 1 to the final chapter or the other way listed in the 'Table of instructions' as “Hopscotching” between the 155 chapters.

The idea of 'frame-breaks' in this novel are based on the logic that the narrative is constantly broken up by the instruction to jump to page X or Y. However, the 'best' example of 'frame-breaking' comes at the very end. Having skipped back and forth countless times, the reader finds themselves finally at the end chapter only to be greeted by the words “Wait, I'll finish my cigarette” (Hopscotch, 1966, page 564). It could easily be the case that this in in fact speech from the character, but in my reading I understood it to be Cortázar himself speaking to the reader about his completion of the novel, almost like he was caught off guard in an 'oh I didn't expect you to be here so quickly, I'll just finish my cigarette then continue writing for you' kind of moment. But unfortunately, we are still waiting for him to finish that cigarette it seems...

In Brian Mchale's Constructing Postmodernism he brings awareness to the fact that characters within the text can be used to demonstrate frame-breaking without directly drawing attention to it happening.

['In postmodernist poetics, angels evidently serve, among other things, as realized metaphors of the violation of ontological boundaries... angels call attention to the plurality of worlds and world-versions in postmodernist texts, and to the ontological "seams" or "rifts" between adjacent or rival worlds which often fissure these texts. This is particularly conspicuous in those texts in which the presence of angels correlates with Metafictional boundary violations or frame-breaking,'] (Mchale, 1992, page 104)

The use of angels in this way is particularly effective as it hints at the relationship between multiple worlds within the text as angels are typically 'other-worldly' but also does not draw attention to the outside world of the text in which the author inhabits until the author chooses to branch this gap.

As well as his interesting viewpoint of angels, Mchale has another compelling argument regarding the use of Frame-breaking.

'To reveal the author’s position within the ontological structure is only to introduce the author into the fiction; far from abolishing the frame, this gesture merely widens it to include the author as a fictional character. These consequences of frame-breaking are clear from The French Lieutenant’s Woman. In Chapter 13, the voice of the “author” intrudes upon his fiction to declare its fictionality; (Mchale, 1987. page 198)

Bringing us back an earlier question of, just what is 'real'?