The intention is to attempt to understand the difference between reading a more or less structured piece of literature, and forms that at this point in time seem more free-flowing and less deterministic. The following issues will be addressed primarily: The course will be discussion oriented with audio visual material as an aid along with specific readings. There will be a supportive workshop context within the class hours.
Chaucer's Pardoner Beginnings and endings, we have been hearing, are arbitrary, and chronology falsely presumes meaningful traditions and influences. This study borrows from the shape of chronology, primarily because I am more concerned with the way writers in the realist tradition imagined their relation to each other, to the form of the novel, and to their culture's imagination of knowledge, than I am with the antichronological implications of the fulfilled realist intention.
Realism leads away from its originating structures, not to closure, but to indeterminacy, not to clarified relation between idea and thing, but to their exclusiveness.
To provide a framework for the studies that follow, I offer here something of a narrative, a tale starting with Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, which provides both a pattern and a metaphor for the very different realist literature that followed, and taking as its chronological extremes Jane Austen and Joseph Conrad, figures representative of the polarities of the realist impulse.
With the figure of some monster emergent from the most stable as from the most volatile realist texts, we find every writer before Conrad touching on the skeptical possibilities he dramatized, every one after Austen seeking the controlling form she imagined in the communal recognition of the ordinary.
The critical narrative I imagine here is therefore presented as a fiction whose closure emphasizes the distance between it and the truth it seeks, metonymically, to shadow forth. Mary Shelley Frankenstein and his monster will turn up frequently in the chapters that follow because in their curious relationship they enact much that is central to the traditions of realistic narrative, but much that is not quite reducible to discursive prose.
Sandra Gilbert and Susan Gubar identify as a characteristic of women's literature the projection of "what seems to be the energy of their own despair into passionate, even melodrama tic characters who act out the subversive impulses every woman feels when she contemplates the "deep-rooted evils of patriarchy.
It is true that "even the most apparently conservative and decorous women writers" create such figures. But it is no accident that conservative male writers within the tradition of nineteenth-century realism do so as well.
For realism embodies in its very texture the controlling force of the established order of society and history; it is thus a mode particularly available to women writers, sensitive to such force, as Gilbert and Gubar show them to be. It is also, however, a mode appropriate to any writers who share women's ambivalence about established authority -- needing the very structures that are felt to be oppressive and narrow.
Such ambivalence is characteristic of almost every important Victorian writer. Nineteenth-century realistic fiction tends to be concerned with the possibility of accommodation to established power, and yet, given its inevitable interest in character, it explores with at least equal intensity the possibility of resistance as well.
The "madwoman in the attic," to use Gilbert and Gubar's phrase, has her male counterpart; the domesticated man -- Pip, Pendennis, or Edward Waverley -- has his dangerously rebellious double. Female resistance to the patriarch is echoed in a general Victorian resistance to the tyranny of society, of convention, of the majority.
Mary Shelley's characters, the monster and his creator, reflect the culture's ambivalence about itself, the realist's difficulty with the narrative conventions of realism. As creator, Frankenstein attempts to reach beyond the limits of human possibility, as the realists reached beyond the limits of human possibility, as the realists reached beyond words, into reality.
Yet when he finds what his imagination has brought forth, he recoils from it as monstrous, and denies kinship. The consummation of community, the confirmation of a justly ordered world, the affirmation of consonance between word and action, the marriage turns out to be a murder.
All the potential horrors of domestic realism, so carefully averted in the comic tradition, are anticipated here. The attempt to repress and then destroy the monster leads Frankenstein and his book into a landscape beyond the limits of the domestic realism toward which they had turned for succor.
Such landscapes provide the spaces, distant from the centers of realistic drama, in which illicit and uncivilized extremes are acted out. The assumption of most nineteenth-century literature, from Scott forward, is that civilization was indeed advancing. The Macaulayan reading of history implied that savagery had been banished from the centers of Western experience.
But in Frankenstein, Alps and Arctic wastes are the norm. They are the landscape of isolation from community, Victor's first obsessive choice, and they are the icons of his refusal to bring the monster in from the cold to the communal warmth of the hearth. In the cold, monster and creator enact the futility of their desires in what is almost a ritual and self-destructive parody of the Keatsian quest for the elusive fair maiden.
Only Captain Walton returns, and only because he surrenders his Frankensteinian ambition.
In its place, he finds an ear for the narrative in his sister, the civilized Mrs. His position is rather like Mary Shelley's, for she surrenders fully to her imagination, but in the writing she keeps the distance that might save her from it and deny it.
The parabolic neatness of this way of telling the story certainly a distortion of the novel's instability and ambiguities suggests why, for the past one hundred sixty years, it has provided metaphors for writers.
The monster becomes those sexual, revolutionary, deterministic, or psychic energies that novelists and intellectuals confront even as they try to avert them. It is both rational and irrational, victim and victimizer, innocent and evil. As in the culture at large, Frankenstein and his monster keep turning up in literature -- in the face of the uneducated mob in Mary Bartonin Magwitch's relation to Piphis created gentle man, in the laboratories where Ursula Brangwen studies.
The power of the myth of Frankenstein transcends the limit of the particular narrative because it is, in a way, an antimyth that has embodied in all its ambiguities the modern imagination of the potentialities and the limits of modern consciousness. The apparent ideal in Frankenstein is the recognizable domesticity that Victor Frankenstein betrays, but the novel lives far beyond the limits of this ideal.
It becomes a psychomachia of the extremes of human consciousness aspiring to transcend the limits of thought and language by touching a new reality and to assert the compatibility of that reality with poetic, moral, and religious ideals.
Moreover, Frankenstein's preoccupation with "creation" -- though connected with literary myths and Mary Shelley's own concern with birth 6 -- is more than accidentally related to the problems and responsibilities of writing itself.- Virginia Woolf offers interesting analysis of social pressure and social class in Mrs.
Dalloway and The Years. Understanding Woolf’s message about society demands a certain amount of sensitivity and decoding on behalf of her reader. - Dickens' Criticism of the Poor Law in Oliver Twist Dickens criticised the poor law in many. Take a look at a list of the top books of all time, nominated by writers from around the world, from Things Fall Apart to Mrs Dalloway, and from Pride and Prejudice to Don Quixote Shady Ahmed Knowledge & Reading.
All three of the characters find themselves in a deep hole of depression vulnerability. "Woolf was undeniably a brilliant writer." Woolf's work of Mrs.
Dalloway was read by fifteen-year-old Michael Cunningham in order to impress an older girl in school. from the woman in white itself to Charles Dickens' Oliver Twist. Villains usually. Characters/Second Apocalypse Characters Introduced In The Prince Of Nothing Trilogy Characters/Second Apocalypse Main Characters Of The First Trilogy Characters.
Gode emner til essays plme research papers deviance in sports essays athletes dissertation tu darmstadt maschinenbau scholz finish your dissertation once and for all pdf about barack obama essays brown university transfer essay essay on cultural homogenization dichlorodimethylsilane synthesis essay.
Australian prime minister gay marriage essay. Understand more than works of literature, including To Kill a Mockingbird, The Catcher in the Rye, , and Lord of the Flies at iridis-photo-restoration.com Mrs.
Dalloway. By: Virginia Woolf. Much Ado About Nothing. By: William Shakespeare.
Oliver Twist. By: Charles Dickens. On the Beach.
By: Nevil Shute. The Once and Future King.