Critic Lionel Trilling famously observed, "All prose fiction is a variation of the theme of Don Quixote." Indeed, throughout the Western literary tradition, novelists (like visual artists) have been forced to align themselves somewhere along a continuum that can be thought of in any number of permutations: Realism vs. Romanticism, Real vs. Imagined, Actual vs. Symbolic, What Is vs. What Could (or Should) Be, Fact vs. Fiction, External Truth vs. Internal Truth, etc. Another way of saying this is that every novelist must face the paradoxical task of how to convey truth through the medium of fiction.
What are your thoughts on this? You might address where a specific novel might fall in one of the continuums listed above or you might reflect on the very nature/role of novels themselves. (That is, why do we read novels? Is it to learn about our world or to escape from it?) You may even think about the relevance of this notion to the current television trend towards "reality shows"!
20 comments:
I think that what Trilling said is true, although I must say I didn't like Don Quixote, but I can see where his point is coming from. I know that when I read at home I read to escape from the world. None of the books that I read are very educational, they are just something for pleasure. When I am at school, however, it is pointed out how we can analyze a story and see truth in it. I believe that the difference comes from the type of person you are, or why you are reading. I think that reality shows are the opposite of this theory. They say that it is real life, but really nobody acts like that. Shows like The Hills are staged and each line is fed to the actors. It says it is reality when it really is fakality, and yeah I made that word up.
I feel that people do read books to have some sort of escape. Reading frees up your mind and takes you some where else, somewhere you've actually chosen to be. This is what makes the line so thin between being real vs. imaginary and fact vs. fiction & all that. Its like the line between good & evil. Example: Cops. They are so close to sin & evil & bad stuff, but their job is to keep people safe,to protect the community. Unforunately, when working in an enviornment like that-constantly exposed to the darker side of humanity- sometimes your views get skewed & that's how we end up with all those corrupt cops & whatnot. They're on the verge. Fighting crime...but almost also living it. So with books, they're trying to convey reality, trying to reflect life with words. There are so many possible combinations of words out there though that every mixture of them might be reality to one person and fiction to another. The way things are described and arranged are what make the events realistic. It depends on who the reader is really. That's what determines whether the book is realistic or fiction. When I read...I consider everything reality. If reading is an escape and you're truly immersed in what you're reading then that universe that you're reading about and that character you're living vicariously though is real. Whether or not the plot/theme/characters make sense outside of the book doesn't matter. Inside, it's real.
I hate television...so I'm not going to discuss that whole reality-tv thing.
wow i sound so bitter...dissing the blogs...dissing t.v.
sorry guys. i'll stop being bitter.
The realism vs. romanticism contrast immediately concentrated my thoughts on Fitzgerald's The Great Gatsby. Bitterly connotated concepts-the eyes of Doctor T. J. Eckleburg, the Valley of Ashes, and physical abuse among couples-illustrate the true nature of East and West Egg. The islands are inhabited by a hollow upper class whose social and moral corruption stems from crass materialism and the disintegration of the American dream.
Standing opposite Fitzgerald's tragic representation of reality is his romanticized perception of the lifestyle of the 1920s. Lavish gatherings, Jay's overly colorful wardrobe, and the green light of hope hint at an artistic, free spirited community. In this "airbrushed" environment, it is possible for deep-seeded passions to revive and for the laws to be forgotten. The characters take on identities sometimes as charming as the exterior scenery of fountains and flower gardens. Even the brightest gems, however, do not retain their sparkle...
I don't believe it is possible to find a single reason as to why we read novels. Novels address a broad range of topics and are read by an enormous population. For instance, I may interpret the purpose of Huck Finn as communicating the essentialness of freedom, whereas someone else may view it as shedding light on Southern corruption...
Although it is difficult to pinpoint the significance of novels, one of the primary reasons for reading them is to learn how to live life. Crime and Punishment, for example, teaches its reader the importance of honesty as well as sheds light on the inevitable forgiveness bestowed upon every sinner. In The Catcher in the Rye, the audience discerns the consequences of attachment and the ups and downs of the transition period from childhood to adulthood. Young readers can compare their lives to that of Holden and recognize if they are falling into similar traps or taking advantage of sound opportunities. Some novels ultimately act as "life coaches," revealing what is moral and immoral, healthy and unhealthy, etc. Since the author's perspective is not concrete, the audience can play off of his ideas and develop its own opinions. Novels, then, foster personal growth and awareness.
Wow, I never really Trilling's idea, but it makes perfect sense to me; all books are essentially a subtle tug-of-war between the real and the fictional. Any novel can fit into this: "In as I lay Dying" the feelings that the characters feel, along with their thoughts are very personal and realistic; their actions and the situations, however, are not. This goes the same for "Harry Potter" and Shakespeare: the characters are real, the circumstances, not so much.
I think that people read for a mixture of learning and escaping. "Harry Potter" is probably better for escaping, but "Crime and Punishment" is better for learning. I like reading for the new, innovative, and interesting ideas that the author puts within the novel; that's why I liked "1984", "Lord of the Flies", and "Lolita."
Reality Tv....what's that? Is it the news, or a documentary perhaps? Personally I liked the Discovery Channel mini-series "Planet Earth." But it cannot possibly be "The Real World" or "The Surreal Life," whose name painfully demonstrates the "reality" of the show. Honestly, do people really race each other up helicopter ladders, date twenty strangers at once, or eat raw buffalo testicles for a cash prize? I think not. Face it, reality is boring, no one wants to watch the dull everyday lives of normal people. Even shows about celebrities, or families with dwarfism or OCD aren't realistic because those individuals don't have perfectly "normal lives". TV and literature only become interesting once a ripple forms in the continuity of "normal everyday life".
I think that the reasons why we read novels evolve over time. And sometimes there is no clear answer. for example, when Huck Finn was written its purpose was to shed light on racism and use satire to bring this to light. And all of these years later I feel like we don't read it for that same purpose. Yea, we're learning our history. But we're mostly looking for the uses of satire and the diction and the narration. it has become more of a job than an enjoyment or revealment. But yet we still do it and we still learn. I don't think we generally read a book to find a truth. I didn't read Great Gatsby to learn what love will be like, nor Romeo and Juliet. But it does sometimes reveal things when it is written. Some of the things we read now are about horrible things in the middle east and they are shocking, but other than that we dont really learn human nature from books. I knew that people were animalistic -- I didn't need Lord of the Flies to show me.
However, sometimes when you read a book like the stranger, you find a little piece of truth about society and their rules. In that sense we are learning. But mostly people try to escape from their world when they read. They want to not think about the mistakes we made. I think that may be the difference between good and bad literature...good literature uncovers hidden meanings, and not so good literature is just there...it just gives us something to "escape" to (like The Hills).
I think that novels can only help you learn about your world if they allow you to escape it. Novels don't resonate in your mind and make you think about a new thought or belief when you aren't absorbed in the text. One could argue that text books allow us to learn with really escaping our world, but then in the long run what do text books ever really teach us? They give us information so we can robotically memorize and recite it. Novels on the other hand inspire us to do more than that. Novels teach us to think and to go beyond the facts related to tangible elements. Yet, in order for you to understand what a novel is trying to convey, I think that you have to have an appreciation for the story. I don't know if I can speak for others, but I can only enjoy books if they make me lose focus of the world I am in and enter the world of the characters. Once you have entered the novel, you can understand what you are supposed to learn from it.
I believe that everyone has their own reason for reading a novel. Sometimes if you're in a bad place or do not like your situation you may just read to escape reality. Other times, you may just be reading to broaden your mind. For example, different themes call for different reasons. Some people just enjoy reading a thriller because they can get lost into it. Others may enjoy Harry Potter because its "out there" plots are able to capture the minds of all ages. Novels can teach you though and deliver a message. Lord of the Flies displays the harsh realities of a world. It begs the question, are we born evil or does society influence us and our actions? Novels allows us to interpret and discuss the lessons of life. As Kristen touched upon, the answer to why we read novels is continuously changing. You read a novel to fufill what you want out of it.
Alright well everyone pretty much covered what i wanted to say about the novel side of this blog but this quote can also relate to the idea of "reality tv". First of all, its not even reality. Everything you see on reality tv is staged, no matter what show it is. Real world? The name alone is a lie. You can't honestly expect people to act normally and be "real" when there's 5 cameras shoved in their face at all times. People don't watch reality tv in order to learn anything from it. Reality tv is entertainment. It's a way to escape our boring everyday lives and laugh at the dumb things people are doing in front of millions of others.
alright, so i think the point of reading a fiction novel is neither to escape reality nor to learn a truth. i think its just something fun to pass the time. occasionally you will feel like you're escaping reality, but you're really just sitting in your living room reading a book pretending as if it has something to do with your own life. also, you can learn some "truths" from books but frankly i dont think that theyre actual truths, they are something that the author has found out to be true, and i think it would just be better for people to stop "escaping reality" and to actually go outside and DO SOMETHING learn an actual truth for yourself, and then you can know it is true. im not bashing books here because i do love to read (duh i am in cianflones class) but there is such a thing as overdoing it, like don quixote, thats when you become loony and think you escape reality but just make a fool of yourself.there is no reality in a fiction work, a book is meant for fun, while reality tv shows are meant for dull people who have nothing better to do than sit in front of a tv with a bag of chips and a cell phone and have a blast calling each other all night talking about the hills or any other crap mtv puts out to rot young minds. now im gonna go find some sort of truth on my own instead of reading about it because there is no such thing, after 2 more blogs.
In a way, we do read novels to learn about our world. A novel from the 1500s is one way to see how people in that society acted, spoke, lived. Even though it is fiction (Hamlet, Othello, 1984, Frankenstein, etc...) it teaches us something about that time period. The themes teach us today about the dilemmas they had back then. I've come to realize that society has not changed much throughout time. Yes obviously we have more today than Shakespeare. But the issues were the same. A man marrying his brother's widow, I'm pretty sure you could find that today somewhere. Novels from any time period could relate to one another in one form or another, and a novel from 200 years ago could relate to society today just like a novel from today could relate to a society of the 18th century. Obviously a lot will be different, but people think alike no matter what time period they are in. The same issues do come up periodically throughout time.
On the other hand, I agree with Natalie that people do read books to escape from their lives. Obviously some books have different purposes than others. But still, a romantic novel today could still have themes/issues that were in romantic novels of the 19th century. Which means that the thoughts of the two different novels are relative which shows us our relativity to former generations.
But I do belive that reading any novel would teach us something about our world. You can show the truth of a society through fiction. Because no matter how facetious a novel is, there is definitely some truth to it.
Cianflone, the song "What is and What Should Never Be" by Led Zeppelin holds uncanny relevance to this question. Check it out if you aren't already familiar with it. Anyway, I think that we read novels to both learn about our world and escape from it. Case in point I think would be Huck Finn. In Huck Finn, we are allowed to witness the escape from the horrible world that Huck and Jim are stuck in. In a quasi-romantic journey through the Mississippi, we as readers find ourselves cheering for their success. At the same time, we are immediately repulsed by the horrid conditions that reality subjects Huck and Jim to. In this sense, Huck Finn is a Romantic-Realist novel. We want to escape yet we realize the ultimate biting power of reality. As for modern television, it's simply horrible. 24 is the worst program ever--it's a modern day McGayver. It's the greatest example of Hollywood earning an easy buck for cheap thrills. It's such a simple-minded, repetitive, unrealistic cheat that holds no higher meaning or significance. Lastly, Reality Shows are another joke. In trying to portray "reality" these shows just end up overdoing the reality sense and exploiting some poor people for cheap thrills and an easy buck.
I believe like everyone else in this blog that we all read books for different reasons. but it is true that a lot of people read to escape their normal lives. reading for school is often to understand specific points like racism, the american dream, or romanticism. however when we read at home for our own pleasure it is completely different and we read books that are important to us. I love books that take me back to another time period, but not in the school way like crime and punishment, but more in the love story type. for example i love the book "the other boleyn girl" and i also loved the book "the duchess" these books take me to another world, unlike the books i read in school which i have to work hard to read and understand everything i must understand to get the good grade.
I think most times we read books to get away from reality, or at least I do. If I’m upset about something, I’ll go and read just to be doing something quiet and alone. I think some books are a form of reality that we wish we could have, but we know will never happen. Like fairytale and fantasy stories where everything works out perfectly. Sometimes, however, the opposite is true; we read horrifying murder or sad stories to help us realize that our life really isn’t that bad. We read different things depending on what we are feeling, so reading isn’t about reality, it is about emotion. Sometimes the author will make a novel realistic, but that doesn’t mean it is exactly what would be considered reality. Authors do that to keep the reader interested, if it wasn’t at all realistic, we might get confused or bored. A completely realistic story would also be boring though; a story that is too much like everyday life would not let us get away from our problems and relax. You are still sorting through your problems of everyday life, just not through reading about reality.
I think we read different novels for different purposes, like a romantic fiction to take us away from our own life, or a murder mystery to boost our moral when we solve the crime before the detective. But I think we read things like Shakespeare and “Crime and Punishment” and “Madame Bovary” to learn about someone else's perspective of our world. We don’t just read these to learn about our world because many times we don’t agree with the author....Shakespeare isn’t God after all. But we do read them to consider the arguments they raise on how to live our lives...such as in “Crime and Punishment” we consider whether it is right to kill when your motives are justified and do you still deserve punishment. Most people would say to kill is wrong no matter what (as would I) but what about when you scale down the offense. For example if you lie to protect someone. Well your motive was great but nevertheless, the act was still wrong. Do you still deserve punishment? We read novels like this to explore these questions and their many answers in hope of determining where our own moral standards draw the line.
I think people read for both enjoyment and purpose, depending on what they are looking for. I don't think people go into reading a work of fiction thinking they can learn much from it, because people read fiction for pure enjoyment, or to be taken into another world through words and imagination. Reality tv is a little different. In some shows, everything about the reality show is ridiculous, and there's always staging to make it more entertaining. Since producers have to script REALITY shows, real life must be seemingly boring. So, reality TV is not real life, its television's attempts at showing people an exaggerated version of life. It doesn't show truth.
I have no idea why people watch some of these reality shows on tv. Some of them are absolutely crazy. But that's not really relevant. Anyways, I think the answer to the question you posed is both! We read to learn, and to escape. Or, maybe, we read to escape and happen to learn while doing so. Either way, I think they both come into play.
When I thought about how authors have to face the paradoxical task of how to convey truth through the medium of fiction, I realized that the greatest novelists are the ones who accomplish this the best. Through their fiction, they accomplish truths among their themes. Hamlet, Gatsby, Catcher in the Rye, The Adventures of Huck Finn, Madame Bovary, Ulysses(I know I haven't read that but I just know it belongs in there from many class references), and many other classics all accomplish that in complicated and symbolic ways.
People usually read novels because they are bored. they are interested in the book they are reading and they enjoy reading it. It is not to escape reality. If it was then we would be able to just read any book and get lost in it. But we read what interests us. Its merely for our own enjoyment.
I feel that there are actually three ways of reading, as opposed to the two mentioned in the prompt. The first is to escape; people do read in order to distract themselves from the real world. I tend to read for escape, particularly if there is something going on in my life that I cannot handle at the given moment. Reading provides a good distraction. The second is to learn, which I also do. I like reading because it exposes truth about the real world, even in works of fiction. I want to see people exposed through writing, and I want to learn about them and about soicety through them. The third, my added bonus, is entertainment. Sometimes reading a novel can be like going to the movies or watching television (or at least how those mediums are currently used). It is the same reason we watch reality television, or any sort of television for that matter: its entertainment.
Post a Comment