Sunday, March 18, 2007
Where do we draw the line?
Many argue that it is presumptuous to believe that we can write about the reality of a certain period. Reality in itself is relative. What one considers as reality can be a fiction for another. If it is so difficult to represent reality, can we ever know the truth about a period? How can someone determine what is reality in a literary work? Maybe the reality is what those writers are not saying to the readers. If they are, how we will ever know the truth. I have a feeling that the real is false. Does Flaubert in Sentimental Education present the reality of his period? I don’t know. Maybe the reality is there, but it is tinted by Flaubert’s subjectivity. What do you think?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Don,
You have a point about reality, that it is always clouded by the subjectivity of the writer. I think the reason Flaubert is called a realist is because he was willing to write about things that happened in bourgeois society that many writers refused to acknowledge. This made his writing more realistic than the typical writing of 19th century France.
I think about Lazarillo de Tormes, whose author is unknown. Lazarillo is about the way the poor were treated in Spain and the abuses of the clergy during the siglo de oro (16th - 17th century). It had to be published anonymously in Holland because it offended so many people who didn't want to admit the truth.
Good for people to know.
Post a Comment