I came to some realizations in my class today. Instead of paying attention to what the professor was saying I was analyzing my other classes to find out why I like them more than others. It's taken me the whole semester to figure this out and coherently put it into words. Here it is.
Studies in the British Novel: We talk about characters in books as if they were real entities, like you and me, separate from the author, acting of their own volition. This is slightly frustrating because I don't believe you can talk about books separately from the author. Questions like "Is this the author speaking through the character or is this the authors voice?" make absolutely no sense. It is, of course, the author's voice. How could it be a character's voice when that character does not exist in any one's mind but the author? Of course, the character lives in other people's minds after they have read the book, but the character is still a figment of the author's imagination.
Major Authors (Mark Twain): We talk about the deep connection between an author and the text. This makes more sense to me since a text, no matter who writes it or what it's purpose is, is forever tied to the author's experiences and ideas. The questions in this class never deal with the characters as real people in the real world. The questions always focus on why the author chose to portray a character the way he/she did. Of course, it is easier in a class where we learn about the author as well as discuss what he has written, but it is no excuse to ever treat characters in a book as real people.
Anti-War Literature: In this class we treat characters as real people because, for the most part, they are/were real people. Most of the characters in these novels are based on people who experienced these situations. It is more like a history course than a literature course.
This post was more for my own well-being than to entertain. The other ones gave me a chance to comically convey what happened to me in that given day. This one is acting as a therapeutic exercise for my mind. I needed to explain to people how I feel about these classes and the way they approach literature. Please let me know what you think of these different approaches and if you agree or disagree with me on the way I feel about them.
I hope my next entry will be a return to humorous ramblings and awesome links. Which reminds me: I put the links into the blog hoping everyone who reads this (all two of you) will go to the links. I think they spruce up and increase the intended hilarity.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
I agree with your point about the character's actually being the author's voice and after thinking about it for a while, I've decided that I like to think of the characters as real people (depending on the book, even as friends) which is why when discussing literature, I act like they're not fictional and therefore capable of making decisions on their own. Does that make any sense?
I feel you, I feel you. So: do I think of characters as real people while I'm reading? Yes. Do I think of the characters as real people when I'm analyzing the text for influences and point of view? Gotta be a no, dawg.
As a reader myself, as well as your other posters, I can't help but feel like the characters are real people. How can you not? This is why people feel like they "know" a character, or cry when a character dies. (At least I do...)
I always got annoyed when professors tried to completely disconnect an author from their character. After all... the character is part of them.
BTW, you have at least 3 readers.
Okay. VERY nice to know that I have more than two readers. I sort of felt like this was an exercise in futility. So thank you readers. Also, I'm glad Alexa cleared up what I meant. I get annoyed when we analyze a text and treat the characters as real people. I also get attached to characters and become upset when something bad happens to them or I get really happy when something good happens. But it's in the analysis that I get frustrated.
Post a Comment