Symbolic metaphors in f. Durrenmatt’s "The Minotaur" within mythological, postmodern and existentialist contexts

Размещено на http://allbest.ru

Symbolic metaphors in f. Durrenmatt's “The Minotaur” within mythological, postmodern and existentialist contexts

Nataliia Kravchenko Nataliia Kravchenko Doctor of Philology, Full Professor, Foreign Philology and Translation Department, The National University of Life and Environmental Sciences of Ukraine (Kyiv), Mariia Prokopchuk Mariia Prokopchuk PhD in Education, Senior Lecturer English Language and Communication Department, Borys Grinchenko Kyiv University

Анотація

Символічні метафори в "Мінотаврі" Ф. Дюрренматта в міфологічному, постмодерністському та екзистенціалістському контекстах

Метою дослідження є дослідження символічних метафор у баладі «Мінотавр» з огляду на спільне і відмінне у їхньому потрактуванні Дюрренматтом з міфологічною, постмодерністською та екзистенціально-філософською традиціями, що досягається через застосування методів інтертекстуального, структурно-семіотичного і герменевтичного методів літературознавчого аналізу у поєднанні з лінгвістичними методами концептуального блендінгу і інтерактивної теорії метафори.

Символічні метафори в баладі Дюрренматта є полікомпонентними, оскільки в кожній з них один джерельний простір - лабіринту, дзеркал або Мінотавра - водночас координується з кількома цільовими просторами.

Для метафори Лабіринту цільовими просторами є «притулок», «інший» і «самопізнання»; для метафори Дзеркал - «Всесвіт Мінотавра» та «поріг». Образ Мінотавра проектується в цільовий простір «самотності» та «дзеркало Людини». Метафори є засобами герменевтичного кодування, що підтримується семантичним кодом конотацій і символічним кодом опозицій.

Для метафор «лабіринту» метафорична периферія включає, залежно від цільового простору, значення «щастя», «гармонія», «дружелюбність», «взаємозв'язок» - і «розчарування», «недовіра», «нерозуміння»; для метафор «дзеркал» - конотації нескінченності, позачасовості, неосяжності, асоційовані з цільовим простором Всесвіту, та «небезпека», «жорстокість», «смерть», «страх», які інтенсифікують цільовий простір Поріг.

Метафора «Мінотавр -- самотність» підсилюється конотаціями «в'язниця», «неминучість», «зрада», «страх», «розчарування».

У символічному коді метафора «лабіринту» розгортається в опозиціях «довіра і зрада», «життя і смерть», «насолода і біль», «гармонія і хаос», нерозв'язність яких асоціюється з різоматичністю лабіринту. Метафора «Дзеркало-поріг» пов'язана з протиставленнями «я - інший», «людина - тварина» (з інверсією ролей: анімалістичний елемент у людині вчить тварину бути звіром), спільність - чужорідність.

Символічний код, пов'язаний із метафорами «Мінотавр - самотність» і «Мінотавр - дзеркало людини» ґрунтується на опозиціях наївності, довіри, дружелюбності, доброти, які характеризують Мінотавра-тварину до зустрічі з людиною, та вбивства, жорстокість, підступність, що тварина переймає від людини.

Опозиції кодують значення герменевтичного коду тексту: Мінотавр - заперечення тваринного елементу vs. Людина - заперечення людського елементу в Мінотаврі.

Переосмислені у баладі, метафори зберігають алюзивний зв'язок із міфологічними архетипами та моделями метафоричного символізму в постмодернізмі.

У метафорі лабіринту перший рівень символічності тексту спирається на архетипний образ лабіринту як структури світобудови, кругообігу життя, ініціації, другий рівень - пов'язаний із постмодерністським переосмисленням лабіринту як метафори хаосу, втрати сенсу та дезорієнтації свідомості, із руйнуванням розшифрованого лабіринту.

У ракурсі екзистенціалізму, інтерпретація метафори лабіринту в баладі асоційована з ідеями щодо лабіринтової природи Я, зустрічі з самим собою, переходу від існування до сутності, з концептами тривоги, страху та відчаю, що супроводжують перехід.

Метафора Дзеркала, згідно з постмодерністською традицією, поєднується в баладі з архетипним образом лабіринту як в атрибутивно-синтагматичних зв'язках в образі «дзеркального лабіринту», так і в подвійних символічних відношеннях усередині метафори: Дзеркало - Потойбіччя, Дзеркало - Лабіринт, що, як потойбічний світ, затягує в лабіринт. Ремінісценціями до постмодернізму є образи лабіринтових дзеркал як метафор нескінченності і Всесвіту як дзеркальної ілюзії. Архетип Мінотавра алюзійно перетинається з його постмодерністською інтерпретацією як зіткнення людини зі своєю звіриною сутністю і з екзистенціалістськими концептами «Самість і Інший», «Інший і погляд», ідеєю «безвинної провини».

Ключові слова: символічна метафора, концептуальна інтеграція, постмодернізм, наративно-семіотичні коди, міф, екзистенціалізм.

Introduction

The problem of reinterpreting ancient myths is one of the favourites in postmodern literature, and, accordingly, it serves as the focus of numerous philological studies from this perspective. The deconstruction and reconstruction of myths in postmodernism undermines the very essence of mythology - to offer a clear, stable, and comprehensive understanding of the world. Instead, in poststructuralist tradition, myth becomes one of the forms of signifying a new reality - using myth themes and structures to convey the chaos and absurdity of the world, the irrational element within individuals and humanity. The mythological mechanism of resolving oppositions between life and death, the eternal and the transient, fiction and truth, idea and illusion is often replaced by the disruption of these oppositions, blurring their boundaries, with the ambivalence of the very idea of oppositions, achieved through the means of deconstruction, transposition, play, and the carnivalization of mythological narratives.

Durrenmatt's ballad “The Minotaur” is chosen for analysis for two reasons. First and foremost, it presents a unique reimagining of the myth in which a creature with emerging humanity is trapped in a mirrored labyrinth, communicating through dance, craving connection, and self-identifying only when encountering an actual human-monster. Durrenmatt asks which of the two figures - the monster or the hero - possesses human potential, and which carries bestial cruelty within.

The second reason for delving into “The Minotaur” analysis is Durrenmatt's reinterpretation of mythological archetypes, often engaged by the postmodern literary tradition. On the one hand, the ballad contains numerous intertextual reminiscences of postmodern reinterpretations of myths and archetypes, allusively intersecting in this sense with existential concepts of absurdity, the meaning of existence, etc. associated with such a reinterpretation. On the other hand, despite the implied references to postmodernism, the ballad does not “fit” into aesthetic principles and techniques commonly associated with postmodernism [Hassan, 1998; Lewis, 2001]. Durrenmatt reinterprets the myth, not in a paratextual-parodic form, but by imbuing his interpretation with a humanistic meaning. He employs a mythbased fabulation, while adhering to realism and mimesis; he explores the chaos of the universe and temporal distortion, but avoids postmodern fragmentation and maintains a linear narrative by conveying the absence of structure and a disrupted chronotope through symbolic metaphors of the labyrinth and mirrors. The author employs a dual encoding, not in the postmodern sense of multiple interpretations aimed at differently prepared readers, but rather in terms of the polysemy of symbolic metaphors and archetypes, transparent across all levels of their meanings, influencing the narrative-semiotic codes of the text -- hermeneutic, semantic, and symbolic.

In this context, the focal point of the article is the exploration of archetypal symbolic metaphors in Durrenmatt's “The Minotaur” within the framework of postmodern and existential-philosophical reminiscences, through their interpretation within the semantic architecture of the ballad's text.

Theoretical Background

One of the theoretical premises of the article is the concept of a symbolic metaphor, first introduced by J.H. Wicksteed [1928, 23]. Such a metaphor possesses qualities of “repeatability and stability”, which, according to Rene Wellek and Austin Warren, can be considered distinctive characteristics of a symbol: “an image may be invoked once as a metaphor, but if it persistently recurs both as presentation and representation, it becomes a symbol” [Wellek, Warren, 1973, p. 189]. Symbolic metaphors are distinguished by their fixation on the central meaning (symbolic component) they signify, while retaining a connotative range, despite its potential variation in contexts.

It can be argued that there are at least three levels of postmodern metaphorical symbolization associated with ancient myths: the primary level involves the symbolism of mythological archetypes, the secondary level involves the interpretation of mythological symbols in postmodern literature, where they are used as signs to denote new concepts inherent to postmodernism, and the tertiary level involves the authorial symbolization within symbolic metaphors of a specific text. At the last two levels, connotative implications that are consistently linked to mythological archetypes are reinterpreted as the symbolic metaphors, creating a new symbol either within the literary tradition or within a specific text, contributing to its symbolic and hermeneutic codes.

The first level of symbolization corresponds with Jung's characterization of the archetype as a potential symbol - an image-like entity [Jung, 1959, pp. 3-41] and symbols as embodied archetypes, which serve as sources of all mythic representations. According to Jung, mythology is the primary way archetypes manifest, transforming into symbols that fill myths with meaning. In transdisciplinary studies, myth is understood as the universal language of human imagination, with the following characteristics highlighted: its archetypal foundation, symbolism, connection to the collective unconscious, and its function in addressing fundamental worldview problems, offering answers to the essential questions of human existence [Dardel, 1984; Keen, Valley-Fox, 1989]. Jung discerns the connection between myth and archetype in the way that archetypes shape reality and “create myths, religions, and philosophies that influence and characterize entire nations and historical epochs” to provide sacred answers to existential imperatives [Jung, 1964, p. 76]. This world-shaping function of archetypes, known as “archaic remnants” or “original patterns of primal human experience”, is explained by Jung through their possession of a “specific energy” [ibid], intellectual and emotional significance that ordinary ideas lack. The function of archetypes as a subconscious adaptive tool for addressing social and biological issues is also highlighted by other researchers [Becker, Neuberg, 2019, pp. 59-75], with archetypes defined as hidden mythic causes [Segal, 2004].

One of the most crucial characteristics of myth is its symbolism. Jung speaks of myth as a collectively shared symbolic representation of a specific idea or concept, as representations of a powerful symbolic unconsciousness [Jung, 1959]. In a similar vein, R. Miller affirms that myth is a universal human phenomenon that seeks to express the highest reality through symbols (mythologemes) and points to a reality beyond itself [Miller, 2014, p. 539-561].

It is important to note that myths are a secondary expression of archetypes in archetypal images, which in Jungian terminology can be referred to as an “elaboration” that can lead to something entirely different from the original experience [Jung, 1959], with specific purposes - to solve particular worldview problems. In this context, within myths, all things are considered simultaneously in two aspects. On the one hand, they are temporal and immediate; on the other, they are eternal and transcendent [Sigal, 2004].

The property of myth to preserve the eternal and transcendent in modern interpretations, and the ability of mythological archetypes to manifest in images, is used by postmodern metaphorical symbolism - the second of the types of symbolism mentioned above. The interpretation of mythological archetypes in postmodern literature represents a development that serves a dual purpose - through the reevaluation of a specific myth and the creation of symbolic metaphors based on it, postmodernism addresses existential and eschatological issues in the “absurd” world of finitude, mortality, imperfection, and the meaninglessness of human existence [Baker, 1996; Cox, 2018; Wendy, 1988; Weed, 2004]. The engagement of postmodernists with mythological archetypes can be explained by the fact that these archetypes, elaborated through myths, have acquired the status of universal symbols with their own symbolic grammar [Ellens, 2001]. Mythological characters, objects, and themes (such as journeys to the underworld, battles with monsters, and more) have become symbols recognizable across various linguistic and cultural contexts. As these symbols embody symbolic keys to truths about the human condition and the world [Stenudd, 2022], reinterpreting them allows for a challenge to these truths, casting doubt on them within the author's own system of signs and symbols. As such, the reinterpretation of mythological images, which become the source space for new symbolic metaphors, allows postmodernists to question established narratives and perspectives, leading to new layers of meaning and interpretation.

In the ballad “Minotaur”, Durrenmatt employs the third level of symbolization by utilizing the primary meanings of archetypal symbols within the source space of metaphors while adapting established symbolic correlates from postmodern literature to create new symbolic metaphors.

The research's objective and its associated tasks involve the analysis of the specific construction of symbolic metaphors in the ballad “Minotaur” and their impact on the narrative-semiotic codes of the text, considering both the commonalities and differences in the interpretation of symbolic images within the contexts of mythological, postmodern, and existential-philosophical traditions.

Methods

The article uses a comprehensive approach with elements of intertextual, structural- semiotic, and hermeneutical methods of literary analysis. As the components of the symbolic metaphor are scattered throughout the entire text, influencing its narrative-semiotic codes, the study employs Roland Barthes' structural-semiotic method, utilizing narrative coding [Barthes, 1974].

Barthes distinguishes

(a) hermeneutic or enigmatic code, intertwined in the analyzed text with meanings encoded by symbolic metaphors;

(b) semiotic code (semic code, according to Barthes), linked to the connotative meanings of the text;

(c) symbolic code, unveiling a system of value oppositions;

(d) actional or proairetic code, related to the narrative unfolding of the text, predicting characters' actions and consequences; and

(e) cultural code, encompassing historical, social, or literary references, specific constants of social mythology [Barthes, 1974, p. 17-20, 78, 117].

In “The Minotaur”, cultural code is grounded both in references to the ancient myth and its characters, as well as in the interplay between the text and concepts, characters, and motifs within the postmodern cultural tradition and existentialist concepts.

Therefore, the identification of cultural code relies on intertextual analysis, which allows for the interpretation of symbolic metaphors within the analyzed text through “explicit or implicit connections with other texts” [Genette, 1997, p. 1]. Such analysis involves the classification of types of intertextuality/trans-textuality according to G. Genette, among which the study utilizes:

(a) Proper intertextuality, which concerns the “presence” of one text within another,

(b) Para- textuality, which encompasses the connections between the text and its title, preface, epigraph, and so forth,

(c) Metatextuality, which includes retellings and commentary on references to the pre-text [Genette, 1997, p. 1-7].

The hermeneutical method enables the identification of the role of symbolic metaphors of the text in interpreting its deep semantic structure. The study employs a hermeneutical interpretation of symbols, the model of which is proposed by Paul Ricoeur [1967; 1974] in the following stages of analysis: establishing a connection between the analyzed symbol and the broader world of symbols, particularly within the studied text and in postmodern literature; disclosing the content of the symbol through immersion in the atmosphere of the corresponding symbolic world or in mythological conceptions; interpreting and determining the specific meaning of the symbol. In the application of the hermeneutical method to our research, it is important to distinguish between primary understanding or pre-understanding (Vorverstandnis) and secondary or philological understanding [Heidegger, 1963, p. 338]. In the context of the article, primary understanding involves the identification of meaning-generating symbolic metaphors.

In contrast, their philological interpretation as secondary understanding involves the use of linguistic methods - conceptual blending and the method based on the interactive theory of metaphor.

The method of conceptual blending [Fauconnier, Turner, 2002] utilizes a basic structure of four spaces to reconstruct metaphors. The structure includes input source and target spaces, a generic space of their shared attributes, and a blend space into which selected shared characteristics are projected, which is further elaborated with the inclusion of background knowledge from the text and extratextual presuppositions.

In the model of analyzing symbolic metaphors, an approach is employed that treats such metaphors as structures, encompassing an invariant symbolic core and a connotative metaphorical periphery.

In the process of interpreting such a metaphor, relationships are established between all the images in the text, revealing their metaphorical “interaction” [Black, 1962; pp. 25-47; 1977, pp. 431-457] within a comprehensive “associative complex”. Those elements of the holistic metaphorical image that are not explicitly stated in the text are reconstructed from the associative context of the symbolic metaphor.

Results and Discussion

The metaphorical symbolization of the Minotaur image. A component of the hermeneutic code of the text is the metaphorical reimagining of the Minotaur image as a symbolic metaphor of alienation and loneliness. The archetype of the Minotaur monster is allusively intersected not only with the ancient Greek myth but also with numerous depictions of the Minotaur in postmodern interpretation.

In Borges' “The House of Asterion”, the story is told from the perspective of the Minotaur, who is lonely in his labyrinth, desiring the companionship of his reflection and suffering from solitude: But of all the games, the one I like best is pretending that there is another Asterion. I pretend that he has come to visit me, and I show him around the house [Borges, 2000, p. 52]. In Mark Z. Danielewski's novel “House of Leaves”, the house is depicted as an infinite space with a labyrinth inside it and a Minotaur that doesn't actually exist but is felt everywhere: I'm afraid. It is hungry. It is immortal. Worse, it knows nothing of whim [Danielewski, 2000, p. 79]. In Henry James' story “The Jolly Corner”, [1945] the main character desperately searches for his doppelganger, a meeting with his Minotaur, in order to achieve either a fragmentation or consolidation of his potential self. Similarly, Umberto Eco views the Minotaur as a quest for one's own identity: A maze does not need a Minotaur: it is its own Minotaur: in other words, the Minotaur is the visitor's trial-and-error process [Eco, 1984, p. 81].

The intertextual allusion to the labyrinth, Minotaur, Theseus, and Ariadne is one of the structuring elements in John Fowles' “The Magus”, where the Minotaur is conceptualized as an internal monster that the protagonist must confront in his initiation: let it all come, even the black minotaur, so long as it comes; so long as I may reach the center [Fowles, 2004, p. 306].

Durrenmatt's interpretation of the Minotaur differs from the ancient Greek myth and only partially aligns with a postmodern interpretation of the image of the mythological creature as a metaphor for solitude and the search for one's own identity. However, he interprets these metaphors in his own unique way. The ballad becomes imbued with a pervasive symbolic metaphor for the alienation and loneliness experienced by a creature striving for connection within an antagonistic world. metaphor durrenmatt minotaur ballad symbolic

The target space of the Minotaur symbolic metaphor, which is Loneliness, is schematically illustrated in Table 1, representing the nominations of this space characteristics (The translation into English was carried out by the authors of the article - N.K., M.P.).

Table 1 Components of the target space of the metaphor “Minotaur is Loneliness”

The common characteristics of the target space, Loneliness, and the source space, Minotaur, encompass:

(1) Isolation, Misunderstanding, Alienation, and Inability to Connect with Others: Similar to the Minotaur in the labyrinth, a solitary person can feel as if he is trapped within their own labyrinth, unable to communicate and find common ground with others;

(2) Hidden Fears and Internal Struggles: Just as loneliness is associated with internal conflicts and fears, the Minotaur in Greek mythology was created from fears and sins, constantly burdened by the curse of the gods and haunted by his fate;

(3) Loss: Similar to how loneliness is often linked to a sense of loss, the Minotaur is deprived of familial connections, relationships with people, and connections with others of its kind.

At the level of the semantic periphery contributing to the semantic code of the text, the metaphor is intensified by contextual connotations such as “prison”: eingeschlossen in ein glasernes Gefangnis Enclosed in a glass prison.; curse: Beleidigung der Gotter und ein Fluch den Menschen, verdammt War An insult to the gods and cursed by humans.; inevitability, and abandonment: die Minotauren und die Madchen ihn verlassen hatten; gelassen und verraten The Minotaurs and the girls had left him; left and betrayed.. Connotations are formed through the repetition of words, including in parallel constructions, which creates a foregrounding effect based on quantitative deviation, i.e., a departure from an expected frequency [Leech, Short, 2007, p. 38] and parallelism as “some form of linguistic repetition in two or more parts of the text” [Douthwaite, 2014, p. 96].

The image of the Minotaur-Stiermenschen, as a half-human, half-beast combines human and animal qualities, with their mirrored inversion in the “noble-base” projection: human qualities such as naivety, trustfulness, childlike innocence, friendliness, and kindness characterize the Minotaur-animal, while the animal nature - the desire to kill, cruelty - awakens within the creature precisely through encounters with humans, their treachery, and betrayal.

Individuals awaken in the Minotaur the monster they themselves fear. At this stage of the Minotaur's “initiation”, the hermeneutic code of the text is encoded in the complex metaphor “Man is the Minotaur, and the Minotaur is the Mirror of Man”. The blending of the characteristics of the target space “Man” and the source space “Minotaur” in the space of metaphor becomes possible thanks to (a) the dual nature of the Minotaur, embodying both human and animal elements, and the dual nature of Man with his capacity for good and evil; (b) the symbolism of the Minotaur figure in Greek mythology, representing primal, monstrous, and dark aspects of humanity; (c) the reflective quality of the mirror, which mirrors the dark aspect of humanity in the Minotaur. By becoming a mirror of humanity, the Minotaur starts to kill.

In the symbolic code of the novel, such a metamorphosis is encoded through oppositions of self - other, human - animal (with a role reversal: the animalistic element in humans teaches animals to be animals), being - otherness, life - death, trust - betrayal: Der Minotaurus naherte sich ihm voll Wohlwollen; Er freute sich; Der Minotaurus umtanzte es, umklatschte und umstampfte es. Er tanzte seine Freude, nicht mehr allein zu sein; Er war nur noch Heiterkeit, Freundlichkeit, Leichtigkeit, Zartlichkeit. - die ganze Menschheit brache uber ihn herein, ihn zu vernichten; Der Hafi kam uber ihn, den das Tier gegen den Menschen hegt, von dem das Tier gezahmt, mifi- braucht, gejagt, geschlachtet, gefressen wird, der Urhafi, der in jedem Tier glimmt¹¹.

Prominent are also oppositions such as (a) kindness - hatred, marked by recurring words on one hand, Freude, Heiterkeit, Freundlichkeit (joy, cheerfulness, friendliness), and on the other, Hafi, Wut (hate, anger); (b) order - chaos: rhythmischer Tanz (rhythmic dance) - wilden Ringelrei- gen (wild wrestling dance); (c) lightness, tenderness (Leichtigkeit, Zartlichkeit) - suspicion: Er beob- achtete sein Spiegelbild mifitrauisch, tat, als ob er es nicht beobachtete, er fuhlte, dafi es etwas zu sein schien, was es nicht war The Minotaur approached him with kindness; He was delighted; The Minotaur danced around it, clapping and stamping. He danced his joy, no longer being alone; He was nothing but cheerfulness, friendliness, lightness, tenderness. - all of humanity would descend upon him to destroy him; Hatred came over him, the hatred the animal holds against humans, the ones who tame, misuse, hunt, slaughter, and devour the animal, the primal hatred that smolders in every creature. He observed his reflection suspiciously, acted as if he wasn't observing it, he felt that it seemed to be something it wasn't.; (d) hope, dream: Er traumte von Sprache, er traumte von Bruderlich- keit, er traumte von Freundschaft, er traumte von Geborgenheit, er traumte von Liebe, von Nahe, von Warme He dreamed of language, he dreamed of brotherhood, he dreamed of friendship, he dreamed of security, he dreamed of love, of closeness, of warmth. - disappointment and betrayal: gelassen und verraten (abandoned and betrayed).

The “Noble-base” oppositions, highlighted in the text through foregrounding mechanisms, contribute to the motif of the hermeneutic code of the text “Minotaur - negation of the beastly element” vs “Human - negation of the human element in the Minotaur”.

Humanity compels Minotaur to realize his solitude and doom, depriving him of blissful ignorance and sentencing him to suffering, thus, on a newer level of textual development, consolidating the original metaphor “Minotaur - Loneliness”, which in this case is associated with Kierkegaard's idea of “the despair of being oneself” [Kierkegaard, 1980, p. 67].

The Minotaur reaches a higher level of consciousness, not as a human, but only at the moment when he learns to accept himself as the Minotaur: er einem anderen Minotaurus oder dessen Spiegelbild gegenuberstand. Der Minotaurus schrie auf, wenn es auch mehr ein Brullen war als ein Schreien, ein langgezogenes Aufheulen, Aufmuhen und Aufjaulen vor Freude daruber, dafi er nicht mehr der Vereinzelte war, der zugleich Aus- und Eingeschlossene, dafi es einen zweiten Minotaurus gab, nicht nur sein Ich, sondern auch ein Du He stood facing another Minotaur or its reflection. The Minotaur let out a scream, more like a roar than a scream, a prolonged howl, a rebellion and a howling of joy because he was no longer the isolated one, both excluded and enclosed at the same time, that there was a second Minotaur, not just his self, but also a You..

In the hermeneutic code of the novel, the image of the Minotaur is connected with Kierkegaard's existentialist idea about the inevitability of conflict and guilt arising from the encounter of the Self with the Other [Kierkegaard, 1987, p. 144, 150]. Upon encountering the Other-Human, the innocent Minotaur becomes guilty solely because he exists, “schuldlos und schuldig zuglei- ch" blameless and guilty at the same time..

The encounter of the Minotaur with himself is the result of realizing that the reflection in the mirrors is the “Other". Therefore, this encounter can be interpreted in connection with an existential concept such as the “Self" and the “Other", “The Other and the Look” [Sartre, 1992] - when one experiences oneself in the Other's Look, one doesn't experience oneself as nothing (no thing), but as something, as objectively existing subjectivity, with a “self-recovery of being which has been previously corrupted" [Sartre, 1992, p. 116].

The reinterpretation of the Minotaur's image by Durrenmatt leads to a reevaluation of other mythological characters through the inversion of hero and monster roles, embodying good and evil.

These roles are reversed, with Theseus donning a bull mask to deceive and treacherously kill the Minotaur, who was filled with “existential” enlightenment from encountering a being similar to himself. The image of Ariadne is also rethought by Durrenmatt, since the role of Theseus' saviour, leading him out of the labyrinth, is replaced by the role of an accomplice in the murder. She, like Theseus, becomes a symbol of cunning, as she herself goes to the sleeping Minotaur and wraps his horns with a red thread, so that Theseus, entering the labyrinth, can quickly find and kill the Minotaur.

The metaphorical symbolization of the image of Mirrors

One of the central cultural archetypes in the ballade is the image of mirrors which serves as a recurring motif in postmodern literature, where, similar to Durrenmatt, the mirror motif often pairs with the archetypal image of the labyrinth, both in attributive syntagmatic relationships such as “the mirror-maze" and in the relationships of double symbolic metaphor (a metaphor within a metaphor): Mirror - Otherworld, Mirror - Labyrinth, when the mirror serves as a metaphor for an alternate world that draws one into the labyrinth: “Mirrors to weave a labyrinth around" [Borges, 1964, p. 85]. In postmodern literary tradition, only Borges addresses the image of mirrors in at least six of his works - in “Labyrinths", “Funes the Memorious", “Three Versions of Judas", “The Immortal", “The Theologians", “Deutsches Requiem".

In Durrenmatt's work, the labyrinth consists of multiple mirrors reflecting the image of a being with a projection into infinity: verschachtelte Wande aus Glas waren; in Spiegelbildern von Spiegelbildern die anderen Spiegelbilder.

The image of numerous labyrinthine mirrors that duplicate reality is reminiscently connected to the mirrors of the Benedictine abbey in Eco's “The Name of the Rose” [1983] and to the Borgesian mirrors in the house from “Death and the Compass", in which man is “infinitely reflected in opposing mirrors” [Borges, 1954, p. 259].

The archetypal image of the mirror in the ballad becomes a symbolic metaphor that evolves as the text unfolds, accumulating symbolic and semantic meanings and encoding a hermeneutic code. At the beginning of the ballad, the mirror serves as a metaphor for the Universe of the Minotaur, where he does not feel lonely but rather as a “leader" or “god", dancing with reflections.

The Universe, as the target space of the Mirror metaphor, is schematically illustrated in Table 1, presenting markers of this space and its characteristics.

The metaphor of the Mirror as the Universe is reminiscently associated with the image of the mirror-door in the library from “The Name of the Rose", which, in turn, becomes a symbolmetaphor of Eco's universe-labyrinth. It is also linked to the idea of the reconstruction of the Universe, attributed to the conjunction of the mirror and encyclopedia by Borges [1964, p. 3], as well as with the image of the mirror as a metaphor for infinity in Borges' “The Library of Babel” [Borges, 2000], where the mirror expresses and promises infinity.

Table 2 Components of the target space of the metaphor “Mirror is the Minotaur's Universe”

The walls of the labyrinth serve as mirrors in which the Minotaur sees multiple versions of himself, interacting only with his own reflections. The correlate of this mirror reflection is the echo - a reflection of sound in the mirrored labyrinth: tausendfach schollsein Echozuruck, schien endlos zu brullen A thousandfold, its echo reverberated, seeming to roar endlessly..

The fact that the Minotaur does not recognize himself in the mirrored images but considers himself one being among many similar beings showcases the animalistic aspect of the humanbull, with a still “dormant” human nature that has not yet reached the Lacanian mirror stage of human development as the self-awareness of the Minotaur is hindered by the multiplication of his own image through infinite mirrors: Wesen nicht nur seinem Spiegelbild gegenuberkauerte, sondern auch den Spiegelbildern seiner Spiegelbilder: Es sah unermefilich viele Wesen, wie es eines war, vor sich, und wie es sich herumdrehte, um sie nicht mehr zu sehen, unermefilich viele ihm gleiche Wesen wiederum vor sich; Es befand sich in einer Welt voll kauernder Wesen, ohne zu wissen, dafi es selber das Wesen war The creature crouched not only in front of its reflection but also in front of the reflections of its reflections: It saw countless beings, like itself, before it, and as it turned around not to see them anymore, countless beings just like it were once again before it; It found itself in a world full of crouching beings, without knowing that it was itself the being..

At this stage of the text's development, there are echoes of Borges' “Fauna of Mirrors” [Borges, 1970], where mirrors show images of animals and beings that exist independently of the image they duplicate. This, in turn, intersects with some Chinese legends about “animals in the mirror” [Cirlot, 2001, p. 212]. The recurring motif in literature of “Mirror Images as an Antithesis of Loneliness” is also actualized. For instance, Potter, experiencing a sense of loneliness, “had seen not only himself in the mirror, but a whole crowd of people standing right behind him” [Rowling, 1998, p. 208].

The conceptual reconstruction of the symbolic metaphor “Mirror - Universe of the Minotaur” reveals a set of attributes of generic space integrating the source space “Mirror” and the target space “Universe”:

(1) Symmetry, Balance, and Harmony: Despite its immense diversity, the Universe maintains a harmonious balance. Just as a mirror creates a symmetrical reflection of objects, the metaphor depicts symmetry between the Minotaur's state and a harmonious and balanced whole of its inner universe. The beings inhabiting it interact with each other and with him in a unified dance: dieser kindlichen Freude wurde allmahlich ein rhythmischer Tanz des Wesens mit seinen Spiegelbildern, die teils spiegelverkehrt, teils als Spiegelbilder von Spiegelbildern mit dem Wesen identisch This childlike joy gradually transformed into a rhythmic dance of the creature with its reflections, some of them mirrored, some identical as reflections of reflections with the creature..

(2) Illusion and Reality, Blurred Boundary: The semantic boundary between illusion and reality, much like a reflection in a mirror, becomes blurred, symbolizing the complex relationship between the Minotaur's perception and the actual universe: es nicht wufite, was Traum war und was Wirklichkeit It didn't know what was a dream and what was reality..

(3) Reflection and Interconnection, Iconic Isomorphism: An iconic correspondence between the Minotaur's existence and its universe is established, akin to how images in a mirror correspond to their physical counterparts. Like a mirror, the Universe reflects various aspects of existence, capturing both visible and hidden elements. In the world of his mirrors, the Minotaur's internal experiences are reflected, leading him to respond to these reflections with a friendly dance: Er tanzte seine Ungestalt, er tanzte seine Freude, er tanzte seine Erlosung, und es tanzte sein Schicksal, er tanzte seine Gie; Es wurde ubermutiger, sprang herum, uberschlug sich, und mit ihm sprang und uberschlug sich eine Unermefilichkeit von Spiegelbildern He danced his deformity, he danced his joy, he danced his redemption, and his destiny danced, he danced his greed; It became more reckless, leaping about, somersaulting, and an immensity of reflections leaped and somersaulted with it..

The metaphor blended space contributes to the hermeneutic code of the text: the mirrors in the Minotaur's labyrinth create his harmonious universe, preserving his naively animalistic perception of the world, shielding him from realizing his loneliness and the chaos beyond the mirrors. The blend develops by incorporating elements from the source and target spaces of another metaphor “Mirror is Consciousness” based on such shared features of the first metaphor's generic space as Reflection and Interconnection (the Minotaur's feelings and perceptions is reflected in the world of mirrors).

The hermeneutic code of the text is supported by its semantic code through connotations associated with the parameters of the universe: infinity - vom Labyrinth ins Unendliche wi- dergespiegelt mirrored from the labyrinth into infinity., timelessness, and vastness: eine Unermefilichkeit von Spiegelbildern; Spiegelbilder von Spiegelbildern An immensity of reflections; reflections of reflections..

Due to repeated instances in the text, such nominations, contributing to the semantic code, underlie foregrounding effects of quantitative deviation and parallelism.

On the other hand, the semantic periphery of the metaphor includes connotations of “happiness”, “friendliness”, and “interaction”, which strengthen the metaphorical comparison of mirrors-labyrinths with the universe of the Minotaur as a harmonious and interconnected whole. Ein Glucksgefuhl uberkam es; er tanzte seine Freude; Sein Gesicht wurde freundlicher, die Gesichter seiner Spiegelbilder wurden freundlicher; ein ungestumes Gluck A feeling of happiness overwhelmed it; it danced its joy; Its face became friendlier, the faces of its reflections became friendlier; an exuberant happiness.".

At the beginning of the ballad, the mirror is not a tool for the Minotaur's self-identification, and his human nature is only expressed through a creative dance-like interaction with the mirror images. The appearance of a human in the mirror reflections makes the mirrors a threshold phenomenon for the Minotaur's self-awareness: Tanzend hatte das Wesen zwischen den tanzen- den Spiegelbildern Wesen gesehen, die nicht tanzten und die keine Spiegelbilder waren, die ihm gehorchten While dancing, the creature had seen among the dancing reflections beings that did not dance and were not reflections, beings that obeyed it..

In this context, the second hermeneutical interpretation of the mirror, corresponding to literary tradition, is the metaphor of the Mirror as a Threshold, a corridor between two worlds, which Durrenmatt reinterprets in two dimensions. Firstly, as a boundary between worlds - the world of the Minotaur and humans, the labyrinth and the external world, aligning with the literary tradition exemplified by Lewis Carroll in “Alice Through the Looking Glass”. Secondly, the mirror serves as a threshold of transition towards self-awareness or a qualitatively different state of the soul, as “the mythic form of a door through which the soul may 'pass' to the other side” [Chevalier, Gheerbrant, 1997, p. 211].

The first projection of the metaphor “Mirror as Threshold” between the Minotaur's world and that of humans emerges when the Minotaur realizes that the reflection in the mirror is the Other and the space of mirrors, reflecting the natural world of the Minotaur, is invaded by the human world.

At first, it is a girl whom the Minotaur inadvertently kills in a sensual dance, then a young man who, like a matador, taunts him with a sword and a cloak, striking with a sword in the chest, the young men and women joyfully dancing in anticipation of his death, and finally the pseudo-Minotaur Theseus in a bull mask.

When human reflections appear in the mirrors, they cease to be incorruptible and mere prosthesis that, in Eco's words, cannot be used to lie [Eco, 1984, pp. 214, 216]. The mirror becomes deceptive not because it is distorted but because the centre of distortion becomes the human who disguises himself as a mirror reflection to kill.

The human-twisted mirror distorts and inverts feelings and emotions, responding to merriment, warmth, lightness, and tenderness with malicious intent, betrayal, and murder. At this stage of the text's development, the second projection of the metaphor “Mirror as Threshold” becomes actualized.

The human “twists” the feelings of the Minotaur - from love to hatred - by mirror-like transmitting to him human feelings of hating, fearing, and understanding that everything that is not a Minotaur is his enemy. In other words, enantiomorphism, the inverted symmetry of the mirror (right - left), metaphorically changes “right” feelings to “left” ones.

The semantic periphery of such a metaphor at the level of the text's semantic code is actualized by connotations reflecting the “transition” of the Minotaur to a new level of self-awareness - with human qualities: cruelty, hatred, fear: seine Wut, seine Gier, seinen Wunsch sich zu rachen, seine Lust zu toten, seine Furcht; er die Leiber der anderen Menschen mit seinen Hornern durchstofien und zerfetzt hatte his anger, his greed, his desire for revenge, his urge to kill, his fear; he had pierced and torn apart the bodies of other people with his horns..

As the mirror becomes a model of deception, contradiction, and the conflict between appearance and essence, the Minotaur becomes aware of the illusory and deceptive nature of his mirrored universe.

The idea of mirror illusion is supported by reminiscences of postmodern literature - the Minotaur no longer knows what is real and what is just a reflection, similar to the character in Ambrose Bierce's story in John Barth's “Lost in the Funhouse”, who does not know if the image he sees in the mirror-maze is real or not [Barth, 1988].

He cannot find answers as to why the mirror reflections of humans carry hatred and death toward him; the answers are hidden behind the mirrors, remaining an enigma, much like the most forbidden place in the labyrinth from “The Name of the Rose”, [Eco, 1983], finis Africae.

This leads to an explosion of hatred and the destruction of the mirror walls of the labyrinth that multiply and disseminate this illusion. This is somewhat reminiscent of the reference to Borges' “Tlon, Uqbar, Orbis Tertius”: “The visible universe [is] an illusion.

Mirrors ... are abominable because they multiply and disseminate that universe” [Borges, 1964, p. 4]. Akin to the apocalypse of the universe of mirrors in Eco's “The Name of the Rose”, where the labyrinth-library is consumed by fire, the Minotaur destroys the mirrors that invert his world: Er durchbrach die Wand; darauf schlug er mit beiden Fausten zu, das Spiegelbild ebenfalls, schliefilich trommelte er an die Wand; Er trommelte seine Wut, er trommelte seine Gier zu zerstoren, er trommelte sei- nen Wunsch sich zu rachen, er trommelte seine Lust zu toten, er trommelte seine Furcht, er trommelte seine Rebellion He broke through the wall; He then struck with both fists, at his reflection as well. Finally, he drummed on the wall; he drummed his anger, he drummed his greed to destroy, he drummed his desire for revenge, he drummed his urge to kill, he drummed his fear, he drummed his rebellion..

Mirrors serve as signs of disorientation not only in the metaphorical sense but also in a direct, narrative sense - as they disorient the creature with the mirrored reflection of the pseudoMinotaur, Theseus in a bull mask. Thus, the end of the story invertedly mirrors its beginning: the Minotaur confronts a Minotaur who, as hinted by his experience of self-identification, is his own reflection. However, he suddenly realizes that this is not his reflection but a representative of his own kind. Recognizing oneself in the other becomes a decisive moment for completing his own self, his self-identification, revealing himself.

This fills the Minotaur with joy, hope for friendship, love, companionship, and community: aber das ihm bewies, dafi er einem anderen Mino- taurus oder dessen Spiegelbild gegenuberstand. (...) Er tanzte den Tanz der Bruderlichkeit, den Tanz der Freundschaft, den Tanz der Geborgenheit, den Tanz der Liebe, den Tanz der Nahe, den Tanz der Warme But that proved to him that he was facing another Minotaur or its reflection. (...) He danced the dance of brotherhood, the dance of friendship, the dance of security, the dance of love, the dance of closeness, the dance of warmth.. With joy, he extends his arms to “His Own”, and in that moment, Theseus delivers a deadly blow: als der Minotaurus in die geoffneten Arme des andern sturzte, im Vertrau- en darauf, einen Freund gefunden zu haben, ein Wesen wie er, (...) stiefi der andere den Dolch in den Rucken when the Minotaur rushed into the open arms of the other, trusting that he had found a friend, a being like himself, (...) the other thrust the dagger into his back..

The ballad itself serves as a metaphor for a mirror that, on the one hand, reflects a world in which innocence and simplicity are threatened with destruction and, on the other hand, distorts the world of myth in order to convey such a reality.