User:Sherrilledwards/sandbox: Difference between revisions

Line 19:

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.

=== 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

<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>

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 ===

@@ Line 19: / Line 19: @@
 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
+<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>
-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 ===