First, let me say that ALL of the prompts on this yellow sheet I have before me could be discussed for hours and hours. Since I cannot, in fact, blog about all of them, I am choosing one that can be written about for quite a while; one full of intrigue and mystery. Let's see if you can guess which one I'm answering. I'm not going to blatantly put, write, or even summarize this question: the face value truth is not going to be recorded. Let's first start with this whole big deal about the truth. Again, as I'll probably mention in every single post regarding this book, the indeterminate truth is omnipresent and constantly reappears throughout Barnes' writing. In practically everything he writes, whether it be specifically about Flaubert, himself or even critics, this idea of a truth that can't be labeled or have words slapped on it is the underlying theme. As a post-modern work of "literature/fiction", this is what is to be expected... along with narrator participation, irony, and open writing (thanks to Hassan's Schematic). This isn't making sense. I should just give up.
Getting to the point - if any brand of truth in this book is going to be considered indeterminable and therefore unspeakable, it would be hard to describe Ellen's story. The sad this is, we don't even know that her name is Ellen yet. I don't think, at least. Braithwaite is avoiding talking about his deceased wife, not because it's a "hard subject" like most readers would assume, but because it is the truth, and truth isn't easily discussed in the post-modern frame of mind. Braithwaite, like Barnes, is a post-modernist (I'm assuming? The line between those two is a little blurry in my mind) so it makes much more sense to talk about fact, not truth.
The trouble is... what is the difference between those two? They mean such different things yet they're so closely related. For example, the well-known phrase "fact or fiction?" presents a problem: the opposite of fiction is nonfiction (meaning truth) while the antanym of fact would seem to be a lie or something made up. This simple little phrase seems to be implying that the two terms are opposites so what is the actual difference? The truth, in all honesty, is what I believe to be much deeper than a fact. Just like all squares are rectangles, but not all rectangles are squares, all facts are true but hardly no truths are fact. In the end, it all comes back to the fact that words are meaningless. True emotion or feeling can't even begin to be expressed by forcing three, different odd looking figures together to make s-a-d or even multiple groups of those "letters" to create "poignant heart-clenching pain." But then, why would I be writing this post if language had no meaning?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Wow. Excellent post. Too much here for me to respond to, though you do seem to keep returning to this central notion of the blurring between fact and fiction (which, of course, raises the question of what can be 'fact' in a work of fiction).
Clearly, you've got plenty to work with in terms of your essay; the problem, as I'm sure you're aware, will be settling on a topic. Just keep in mind (in an effort to stave off frustration) that it's okay not to answer any of these (or other) questions definitively. It may be enough simply to make your own reader more fully aware of the complexity of the issues at stake in the questions themselves.
Post a Comment