In response to Stacy Fisher's post "Moby-Dick: Madness" (March 11, 2012):
It is certainly true that in modern-day America, any sort of mental abnormality is generally viewed in a negative light. Moby-Dick does offer a different perspective on what most people would indeed consider genuine madness; it also raises questions about the possibility that mental abnormality is not necessarily a bad thing. If such extremely different viewpoints on life as Ahab's and Pip's have some validity, then what of viewpoints which are closer to, although not entirely in sync with, what is 'normal?'
Certain types of mindset which are currently classified as disorders are indisputably useful in some settings - examples of this can be found in many autism-spectrum disorders, particularly those which cause people to develop extremely impressive capacities in other areas - in other words, those which result in savants. Perhaps, rather than classifying these conditions as disorders, it would be better to simply consider them different, but equally valid, ways of viewing the world.
Thursday, March 15, 2012
Response: Visual Cues
In response to Andrew Bagley's post "What if Moby Dick was Not White?" (March 14, 2012):
I agree with the idea that white has certain connotations (death, purity, and so on), but I also think that Moby-Dick's whiteness is the result of a broader issue - that of visual uniqueness indicating other sorts of uniqueness in literature. Particularly in older literature,, but also continuing in modern literary works, major characters often possess distinctive physical features to act as cues, so to speak, for the importance of the character. For example, if one compares the ratio of green-eyed protagonists to brown-eyed people in literature (as protagonists or other major characters) versus in reality, one will find that in literature there is a far larger portion of green-eyed people. Moby-Dick's whiteness is a unique physical feature which sets him apart from all of the other sperm whales, making him 'special' in an obvious, observable way which can then serve to emphasise his other unique qualities.
I agree with the idea that white has certain connotations (death, purity, and so on), but I also think that Moby-Dick's whiteness is the result of a broader issue - that of visual uniqueness indicating other sorts of uniqueness in literature. Particularly in older literature,, but also continuing in modern literary works, major characters often possess distinctive physical features to act as cues, so to speak, for the importance of the character. For example, if one compares the ratio of green-eyed protagonists to brown-eyed people in literature (as protagonists or other major characters) versus in reality, one will find that in literature there is a far larger portion of green-eyed people. Moby-Dick's whiteness is a unique physical feature which sets him apart from all of the other sperm whales, making him 'special' in an obvious, observable way which can then serve to emphasise his other unique qualities.
Sunday, March 11, 2012
Heroes and Antiheroes
In contemporary literature, the figure of the antihero has become increasingly common, and in fact has begun to completely replace that of the flawless hero typical of past literary traditions. Some critics have claimed that this trend is bad, in that if people view flawed characters as heroes they will be more likely to emulate flawed or immoral behaviour. I do not agree with this, because I do not think that fascination with a certain kind of character necessarily extends to admiration/emulation of such characters' behaviour. I think that the current popularity of antiheroes illustrates an increased fascination, perhaps, with the negative side of human nature, but fascination alone is not a bad thing.
What is a bad thing, I think, is the literary community's recent tendency to condemn 'classical' flawless (or only slightly flawed) heroes as flat, two-dimensional, or unrealistic. This is not necessarily the case; some real people exist who actually possess very few negative features and who act in almost invariably admirable ways. Furthermore, even unrealistic characters can be interesting, complex, and (to go along with the first type of critic) inspirational.
There does not have to be only one ideal type of character or protagonist in literature. Different characters have different types of value.
What is a bad thing, I think, is the literary community's recent tendency to condemn 'classical' flawless (or only slightly flawed) heroes as flat, two-dimensional, or unrealistic. This is not necessarily the case; some real people exist who actually possess very few negative features and who act in almost invariably admirable ways. Furthermore, even unrealistic characters can be interesting, complex, and (to go along with the first type of critic) inspirational.
There does not have to be only one ideal type of character or protagonist in literature. Different characters have different types of value.
Response: Types of Guilt
In response to Andrew Bagley's post "Tension in Life" (March 8, 2012):
The examples of tension in this post were interesting to me, because they were all subjective in nature. Knowing that exercise is 'good' and playing video games is 'bad' is not in fact knowledge, but opinion. There are people in existence who believe that the only point of life is to have fun, and as such would say that playing video games is in fact the 'better' option. In short, if one fails to exercise or do some other 'good' thing, then they have not really failed in an objective sense.
There are, however, examples of tension between objectively good and objectively bad things as well. For example, the tension between choosing to punch someone with whom one is angry and choosing not to punch them is composed of choices with objective moral value. A more severe one, which is the cause of a great deal of debate, is the choice between vegetarianism and meat consumption. While few if any people can formulate a watertight argument for meat consumption, many people place their personal preferences above their moral obligations.
Such morally loaded tension is often found in literature, often in the choice between resisting an evil, oppressive force and taking the risk to stand up against it. While tension without moral value can of course still add interest to a narrative, tension with moral value tends to create more intense conflict.
The examples of tension in this post were interesting to me, because they were all subjective in nature. Knowing that exercise is 'good' and playing video games is 'bad' is not in fact knowledge, but opinion. There are people in existence who believe that the only point of life is to have fun, and as such would say that playing video games is in fact the 'better' option. In short, if one fails to exercise or do some other 'good' thing, then they have not really failed in an objective sense.
There are, however, examples of tension between objectively good and objectively bad things as well. For example, the tension between choosing to punch someone with whom one is angry and choosing not to punch them is composed of choices with objective moral value. A more severe one, which is the cause of a great deal of debate, is the choice between vegetarianism and meat consumption. While few if any people can formulate a watertight argument for meat consumption, many people place their personal preferences above their moral obligations.
Such morally loaded tension is often found in literature, often in the choice between resisting an evil, oppressive force and taking the risk to stand up against it. While tension without moral value can of course still add interest to a narrative, tension with moral value tends to create more intense conflict.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)