Friday, October 2, 2009
Purpose of Fiction
After our discussion of the narrator in Barchester Towers--both in this blog and in class--what do you think the narrator--and perhaps by extension, Trollope--believes is the purpose of fiction? Because the novel is so self-consciously fiction, does it undermine or emphasize that purpose?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
My answer to this blog is similar to what I thought the last article was about. I think Trollope’s purpose in his fiction, at least with Barchester Towers is to communicate a moral message in a way that is pleasant to read and entertaining. I think the article talked about how boring and dry it would be to read a sermon, but Trollope really is sermonizing in a way that won’t turn people off. My opinion of the article was that Trollope subtly but deliberately points out the contradictory personality traits of his characters as a means to hold up a mirror to his readers that they may see the contradictions in their own personalities. But by writing in such a pleasant and entertaining way, Trollope can be instructive without being boring or insulting.
ReplyDeleteIn the case of this week’s article, the writer contends that Trollope is writing about what he (and I guess his society) feels is the proper role for women. In the case of Eleanor, she’s breaking out from the traditional role for women, by being a little too independent and being assertive about who she wants to be friends with, and it gets her into trouble. In the end, by reverting to a “proper womans” role, she finally gets together with Arabin, they get married and live happily ever after, etc. But Trollope writes about Eleanor, her suitors, problems with her sister and Dr. Grantly in a satirical, comic way, which makes it an entertaining read. If he had instead written a stern tract about how women’s place is in the home, etc., it would have had a completely different effect on his readers.
I think the narrator and Trollope believe fiction to be another source as an outlet for social commentary. In writing fiction, the narrator and Trollope find it much easier to convey their moral messages without putting the reader on the offensive. In doing this, they are able to reach his audience’s inner thoughts and emotions without outright accusations, conflicts or plain insinuations and therefore engage the reader in a “non-combatant” thought process through irony.
ReplyDeleteI do not believe it undermines or emphasizes the purpose of the narrator/Trollope. I believe it to be a different style of writing needed to reach the different style of readers. Some readers find Dickens’ writing to be effective; others will see Trollope’s more effective. Either way, I believe Trollope understood that his writing style, using so much irony in his fiction, aims toward those who do not like the “bleeding heart” social commentary. Not that I think this type of social commentary is not good. It is actually the type I prefer. I apologize, I just couldn’t think of another word to describe it! :)
Reply to Allison:
ReplyDeleteIn the end, by reverting to a “proper womans” "role, she finally gets together with Arabin, they get married and live happily ever after, etc."
I guess that is what makes his books so funny. But I don't really think he is insinuating a woman's proper role at all. I think he is satiring how such an obvious notion of oppression is dangerous to the well-being of a woman, her family and society. In portraying Eleanor, Mrs. Proudie, Mrs. Grantley, Mrs. Quiverfall, and the other women so valiantly, the narrator/Trollope seek to communicate to the society they live in how strong and independent women are and how much they can contribute to families and society as a whole.
Like Dr. Battles said, what makes literature so wonderful is that it can speak to so many different people in so many different ways. I think its great!
Reply to Zampak:
ReplyDeleteI really do think that Trollope is saying something about what a proper woman's role is in Victorian Society. In our day, strong, independent women really DO contribute to society, and they are admirable, but during Victorian times, a woman's role was different: women were expected to tend to the home and children and defer to their husbands. I don't think that Trollope could see it any other way as he was a product of his times. I think that he sees Susan Grantley as the "perfect" lady and wife...she's in the background, and doesn't visibly get involved or interfere with the Archdeacon's business, although she does exert a subtle influence. Compare her to Mrs. Proudie...especially how Trollope describes her - yes, she's hilarious, and today maybe, we would all be saying "what kind of a wus is her husband!!!" But instead, I think that Trollope makes her look like the one with the problem - like "what's with this woman, to behave like that!" Take for example Archdeacon's reaction to her. Mr. Harding is disapproving of her as well, although he is not so vocal about it.
Trollope is suggesting that she is not behaving the way a proper lady would in his day.
Then Trollope shows the kinds of trouble a woman can get into if she is independent, as with Eleanor. Today, we think that an independent woman is to be admired, and women today can do things that Victorian women could not. So, I think it's natural that Trollope would communicate that a woman without a man to look after her is not "safe".
Trollope and the narrator of "Barchester Towers" both seem to present to the reader a belief that fiction functions to tell a story that is seemingly true with a believable character as its narrator--one whom Trollope leaves up to us to determine whether or not we take heed to every word penned in the novel. The whole concept of "true fiction" is a bit hard to describe. I believe that the narrator's reiteration of the novel being a fictional account while at the same time stating that the events could in fact be real somewhat distracts from the novel in the sense that we need evidence of one or the other, not both. I personally believe that the novel is a work of fiction and it's a bit fun to imagine that it could be real, but I don't want to have this debate with the fictional character.
ReplyDeleteIt is also interesting that the narrator is just biased enough to make us view the characters as they are presented to us. We take for granted what the narrator tells us, but perhaps those characters are actually a bit nicer or a bit smarter than the narrator would have us believe? Who will tell us who the narrator is or what good or bad there is in the narrator's life? Again, as readers we are expected to just accept what we are told because for the time being, there is no other side to the story. The only side presented to us is the one that the "narrator" wants to give us.
I think we must remember that this is a work of fiction crafted in the form of a possible true story. The references to this being truer than fiction only adds to the great mystique of Trollope's fiction. Now that I've successfully talked in circles, I will look at what my fellow classmates have written and hopefully theirs make more sense!
zampak,
ReplyDeleteCopy and paste works wonders and I would like to use ole c&p to point out some of my favorite quotes in your response.
"I think the narrator and Trollope believe fiction to be another source as an outlet for social commentary." Very true! Through the narrator, an author can present his or her views of social customs, etc., in a way that allows the reader to see and understand--whether the author is pointing out something genius or preposterous in society. And they can accomplish this all "without putting the reader on the offensive" as you also stated. I'll just say here that I agree with that whole first paragraph :D
As for the "bleeding heart" reference, I'm not familiar with that term...I would hazard a guess but I don't want to appear too ignorant if I'm wrong.
The narrator is the author of the novel and a character in the novel. I think Trollope believes the purpose of fiction is to educate and influence society. The novel to me seems very satiric about the views of society of women, the relationship of the upper class with the lower class, and the relationships within the upper class. The novel emphasizes the purpose by exaggerating the vices of the time and making them seem overly ridiculous.
ReplyDeleteAfter the discussion of Barchester Towers I feel that Trollope believes that the purpose of his novel is fiction, but with a few hints of nonfiction. He wants the readers to believe that he was actually present in Barchester when the war between the Proudies and Grantly’s began. He also develops concepts for the reader that can possibly be applied to their lives and situations, but at the same time addressing the hypocrisy of religion from the Proudie point of view to the Grantly point of view. He throws in hints of what is considered morally correct when it comes to religion and adding what is the “proper” way for a woman to carry herself in the religious sector. For example, when Eleanor is ridiculed for receiving a letter that is potentially meant to cause disruption with in the Grantly household, and the archdeacon accuses Eleanor of carrying on an unacceptable relationship with Slope. They go back and forth as to how she should conduct herself as a single Christian woman around a sly, manipulative and single clergyman named O. Slope whose views are totally different from his. Being able to write with such dramatic concepts would most definitely emphasis and adds credibility to the fact that Trollope was possibly a member to both of the families.
ReplyDeleteZampak,
ReplyDeleteOk,that was not fair telling the ending I am almost there, but I had an idea that would happen between Eleanor and Arabin.
Anyway, I agree with you and Dr. Battles, readers do have various opinions when it comes to interpreting literature.
I believe the narrator's purpose of fiction is to address the social situations of the time and to entertain the reader. By entertain I mean specifically to engage the reader in the story more so than some other styles of writing. In Paul Lyons quotes Trollope saying, "the author and the reader should move along together". The narrator's specific fiction and satirical style relates to the reader in such a way that he forms a bond, making the novel even more entertaining.
ReplyDeleteThe heavy satirical mood draws the reader in and almost forces them to see the social ills of the time for what they are without being offended. Though many of the situations the characters endure are exaggerated, I believe this only adds to the satire. The reader knows in reading that these things are not real, but at the same time he or she imagines that it could be. Generally, fiction is written with the intent to imagine that it is real to make a statement. In this narrator's case, the statement revolves around the conflict between the classes and the flaws found within the classes themselves.