|
|
| (96 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| | | draft has been moved to real page |
| | |
| This book is fiction. But there is always a chance that such a work
| |
| of fiction may throw some light on what has been written as fact.
| |
| —Ernest Hemingway (''A Moveable Feast'' 230)
| |
| | |
| [I]t is the author’s contention that good fiction—if the writer
| |
| can achieve it—is more real, that is, more nourishing to our
| |
| sense of reality, than non-fiction. . . . novelists have a unique
| |
| opportunity—they can create superior histories out of an enhancement
| |
| of the real, the unverified, and the wholly fictional.
| |
| —Norman Mailer (''[[Harlot’s Ghost]]'' 1287–8)
| |
| | |
| {{dc|dc=W|hat is the rhetoric of modernism?}} Is the Modern novel “the epic of a world that has been abandoned by God?”{{sfn|Lukács|1971|p=88}} If so,why do religious themes still appear? Are they the Cheshire Cat’s grin, nostalgic echoes of a vanished age, cosmic footprints left in the wasteland of Modernity? Or are
| |
| they rumors of grace? How does God-language function in the work of
| |
| Ernest Hemingway (1899–1961) and Norman Mailer (1923–2007)?
| |
| | |
| This issue could be a problem in narrative theory, constructing modernity, contemporary religion, or all three. In any case, why does religion persist? Why is some God-language compatible with Modernity—and some
| |
| not? I shall first discuss the rhetoric of Modernism, then Modernity and disenchantment,
| |
| before moving on to my selection of God-language of Hemingway and Mailer. I briefly emphasize the sacred, indeterminacy, and grace.
| |
| | |
| {{pg|331|332}}
| |
| | |
| === The Rhetoric of Modernism ===
| |
| | |
| The epigraphs speak of the role of fiction in our lives. For Mailer, paradoxically, good fiction nourishes “our sense of reality.” For Hemingway, fiction “may throw some light” on the facts. The strange relationship between fiction and fact seems linked with Modernism—and the problematic nature of “reality.” I call this the rhetoric of Modernism. But is that rhetoric—seen in the Modern novel—necessarily linked with secularization? Pericles Lewis suggests that it may be the following:
| |
| | |
| <blockquote>If the novel is indeed the art form of secularization, “the representative
| |
| art-form of our age” in Lukács’s words, and if modernity is indeed a secular age, then we could expect the modern novel to be doubly secular. {{sfn|Lukács|1971|p=93}} Many major novels of the early twentieth century do in fact seemto represent a “world that has been abandoned by God,” inasmuch as virtually none
| |
| of their characters expresses any concrete religious faith and no gods intervene in the course of the action.{{sfn|Lewis|2010|p=673}}</blockquote>
| |
| | |
| === Notes ===
| |
| | |
| {{notelist}}
| |
| | |
| ===Citations===
| |
| | |
| {{Reflist}}
| |
| | |
| ===Works Cited===
| |
| | |
| {{Refbegin}}
| |
| | |
| * {{cite journal |last=Lewis |first=Pericles |title=Churchgoing in the Modern Novel |journal=Modernism/modernity |volume=11.4 |issue=2004 |date=2004 |pages=669-694 | access-date= ''Project Muse.'' Web. 5 June 2010.|ref=harv }}
| |
| | |
| * {{cite book |last=Lucáks |first=George |date=1971 |title=The Theory of the Novel: A Historico-Philosophical Essay on the Forms of Great Literature|location=Trans. Anna Bostock. Cambridge |publisher=MIT Press |pages= |ref=harv }}
| |
| | |
| * {{cite journal |last= |first= |title= |url= |journal= |volume= |issue= |date= |pages= |access-date= |ref=harv }}
| |
| | |
| * {{cite magazine |last= |first= |date= |title= |url= |magazine= |pages= |access-date= |ref=harv }}
| |
| | |
| * {{cite news |last= |first= |date= |title= |url= |work= |location= |access-date= |ref=harv }}
| |
| | |
| * {{cite web |url= |title= |last= |first= |date= |website= |publisher= |access-date= |quote= |ref=harv }}
| |
| | |
| {{Refend}}
| |
draft has been moved to real page
