Symbolism and Realism
Symbolism and Realism were distinct but parallel literary movements that swept Europe and much of the world in the late 19th century. Social order was one of the main concerns of Symbolists and Realists, which reflects the unprecedented growth of the middle class and its values across Europe during that time period. Morality and ambition were homogenized – and, in some cases, institutionalized – to a degree never before seen in civilized society, and many intellectuals and artists saw this homogenization as a conformist social force that threatened individual perspective. Thus, Symbolists’ and Realists’ works lashed out against social institutions and values and were particularly concerned about the domestic sphere, because of its dependence on social norms and shaping effect on individual perceptions; were disturbed by the decaying effects of conformism; and were troubled by the disconnection between modern individuals. Moreover, Symbolists and Realists argue that these three themes of domesticity, decay, and disconnection are linked, a connection explored especially in the Symbolist Charles Baudelaire’s poem, “Spleen LXVIII” (1862), in the Realist Leo Tolstoy’s novella, The Death of Ivan Ilyich (1886), and in the Realist Anton Chekhov’s play, The Cherry Orchard (1903). Specifically, these authors argue that the various forms of modern domestic life lead to the ruination of substantial interpersonal connection.
As long as one drowns in life’s tedium, asserts Baudelaire, the human experience and one’s connections with others decay. “Spleen LXVIII” describes a winter rain that pours “On corpses fading in the near graveyard, On foggy suburbs pours life’s tedium” (1550.II 3, 4), and, speaking of a ...
... middle of paper ...
...orms in one way or another destroy one’s connections with other human beings. Not only does such focus on forms defy the social nature of humanity, creating generations of socially approved outcasts, but also it severely restricts the individual’s perspective by forcing it to conform to preordained, rigid structures, thereby suffocating the blessing of human creativity. Such restriction does not belong to modern civilization alone, however; creativity never exists without limit, for every society upholds rules of conduct that its members are taught to obey. Therefore, contemporary conformity is not new but rather reborn and strengthened. Correspondingly, the task of the modern citizen is ancient, but difficult in its originality: to strike a balance between creativity and conformity, between pursuing our own diverse forms and following the accepted forms of society.
The world is divided up into numerous things: Countries, states, cities, communities, etc. However, when looking at the big scope of things, one can group the vast amount of people into a society. This society is where the majority lie in the scheme of things - in other words, the common people. Individuals do exist in this society, but they are scarce in a world of conformism. Society’s standards demands an individual to conform, and if the individual refuses they are pushed down by society.
Poetry is a part of literature that writers used to inform, educate, warn, or entertain the society. Although the field has developed over the years, the authenticity of poetry remains in its ability to produce a meaning using metaphors and allusions. In most cases, poems are a puzzle that the reader has to solve by applying rhetoric analysis to extract the meaning. Accordingly, poems are interesting pieces that activate the mind and explore the reader’s critical and analytical skills. In the poem “There are Delicacies,” Earle Birney utilizes a figurative language to express the theme and perfect the poem. Specifically, the poem addresses the frangibility of the human life by equating it to the flimsy of a watch. Precisely, the poet argues that a human life is short, and, therefore, everyone should complete his duties in perfection because once he or she dies, the chance is unavailable forever.
During Russia’s transition to communism in the early 20th century, conflict and unease permeated every part of life. Nothing was stable and very little of what the Bolsheviks had fought for had come to fruition by the time the USSR disbanded in 1991. The “classless society”, which was to work together for the prosperity of everyone, never became a reality. In the end, the majority of Russia’s 20th century was an utter failure on a grand scale. However, there were many amazing products of the system do to the great importance of education in Russian culture. Priceless novels were written, timeless movies were made, and great scientific endeavors were realized despite the rigid control placed upon Russian persons by the government. In fact, some of the most memorable written works of the time were written protests to the creativity-stifling situation many writers found themselves in. Because of the danger to their lives should the wrong people be upset by their writings, Yevgeny Zamyatin and Mikhail Bulgakov wrote their most popular, Soviet-life condemning novels under the guise of satire. Even though they’re satirizing the same subject, in both We and The Master and Margarita respectively, they take very different paths to do so.
Conformity is an entity that occurs in the lives of the ordinary; an infinite precedent and inner machination of the enigma people call human nature. Consensus from hordes of people and authority influence independent thoughts, actions, and consciousness, a fundamental social mistake that consequently leads to stripped individuality and ultimately orthodoxy. In William Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar, all plebeians’ voices are spoken as one and are universal. The plebeians display no debate or disagreement and are easily moved by the speeches of Brutus and Antony. In George Orwell’s 1984, the proletarians are all content; they have no need to rebel. Winston, the protagonist, is desperate to guard the ‘spirit of humanity’ while withholding his will to seek truth, yet he falters and joins the majority that will continue to maintain class hierarchy. Both, works delve into the instinct of human beings and the power of social pressures, showing that many will adopt views and beliefs even without realization, ultimately giving up one’s own individuality and free thinking. The fickle love of the plebeians in William Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar and the ignorance of the proletarians in George Orwell’s 1984 portray conformity through the majority’s natural instinct to follow authority.
Society has always functioned on the premise that a person must adjust their behaviour in accordance with what is deemed socially acceptable at that time. If administrated to the fullest extent, the theme of conformity can be detrimental to the stability and growth of a community. Through analyzing the dystopian narrative elements of Sherri Jacksons’ works, readers are able to distinguish how the theme of conformity is still prevalent to humans today as it expresses the need for order and organization, eliminates fear of the unknown, and promotes society functioning as a whole with limited individuation. The author depicts this reoccurring normative event, to stress the notion that there is something fundamentally wrong with society.
What is symbolism? According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary symbolism: is the use of symbols to express or represent ideas or qualities in literature, art. What is the writer or artistes trying to intemperate in their work? William Faulkner and Edgar Allan Poe were literary geniuses in their use of dark and subdued writing styles, but in my opinion no one takes the time to look in depth into the real meanings of there works . This paper will elaborate on the use of symbolism in “A Rose for Emily” by William Faulkner and The Tell-Tale Heart by Edgar Allan Poe.
Breaking away from society’s “so-called” customs/norms incorporates a large array of valor, inspiration, and most importantly, individuality. Society places normalities upon its people in order to maintain stability and often times, tradition. More specifically, gender roles, such as women raising children; men being the only source of profit, must also be broken in order to establish uniqueness and distinction in a conventional- themed culture, such as Victorian society. Kate Chopin’s The Awakening is perhaps the only novel that fully illustrates the struggle that is leaving Victorian ideals and tradition from a woman’s perspective. Although often considered a feminist text, The Awakening can be viewed as a novel that depicts and promotes individuality using symbolism. Instead of plastering readers with dull literalism, Chopin uses symbols, such birds and music, to relay subtle ideas. Within each fictive part, Chopin provides symbolism that readers must comprehend in order to appreciate the novel as a whole.
A symbol is any “‘object, act, event, quality, or relation which serves as a vehicle for conception’” (230). Peyote Hunt: The Sacred Journey of the Huichol Indians by Barbara Myerhoff is a very intricate text which involves numerous aspects of symbolism. Myerhoff not only applies a much deeper meaning to deer, maize, and peyote, but she also uses these objects as a representation of divine beings and spirits. The deer, maize, and peyote are very powerful entities but together they form the deer-maize-peyote complex, which is central to the Huichol life. The unification of these disparate objects can be easily understood once they are analyzed on three different levels: exegetical, operational, and positional.
When George Eliot’s gothic story The Lifted Veil appeared in Blackwood’s in 1859, her partner George Henry Lewes was busy publishing his study of human anatomy, The Physiology of Common Life (1859). Intriguingly, this work of Lewes’s contains a brief tale which is as strikingly morbid as Eliot’s own. Unlike her story, his is not fictional — it is a scientific anecdote prefacing a detailed discussion of the respiratory system — but like The Lifted Veil its dark melodrama recommends it as “not a jeu d’esprit, but a jeu de melancolie.”[1] It concerns the case of a suicidal Frenchman, M. Déal, who, disillusioned by an unremarkable life and lack of reputation, resolves to exit the world in such a way as to remedy his perceived failings. To do so, he determines to asphyxiate himself on the poisonous fumes of burning charcoal while recording in a narrative the experience of his rapid demise. This testimony, he thinks, will be of much use to science, and so confer on him posthumously the intellectual dignity hitherto lacking in his life. Accordingly, he plans his suicide with the orderliness of an experimental scientist, as Lewes explains:
Gustave Flaubert incorporates and composes a realistic piece of literature using realistic literature techniques in his short story, “A Simple Heart.” Flaubert accomplishes this through telling a story that mimics the real life of Félicité, and writing fiction that deliberately cuts across different class hierarchies; through this method, Flaubert
On the surface, one might not find much overtly attractive about Camus’s cold philosophy expressed by Meursault in the cell he spiritually shares with all people awaiting inevitable deaths as the universe watches on with indifference, but there is a freedom that comes with letting go of hope that tries to cover up fear. If society tries to prosecute each person with the moral guilt of those that have been buried, it is liberating to reject those presumptions of guilt. There is a happiness that can be found in that freedom and an appealing strength in being able to face the howls of execration from the spectators of every individual’s march toward death in a benign, indifferent universe.
The Stranger, by Albert Camus, depicts a man who is going through life with an existential viewpoint on things that he does. The protagonist, Meursault, insists on going through life as if nothing in his life matters at all, and the point of his existence continues to escape him on many different levels. Through the death of his mother; the relationship with Maria, and the killing of an Arab; Meursault still finds that the meaning of his life escapes him. While many people believe that Camus uses symbolism with the weather and various other devices, I believe he uses a different approach. In The Stranger, Camus shows through symbolism that the true meaning of life is found when facing one’s own death.
In this story by Kate Chopin, the heart trouble is both a symbolic and physical malady that stands for her ambivalence towards her unhappiness and marriage conjoined inability to be free. The first thing we qauire in the book is that Louise is suffering from a heart problem;additionally we learn that her heart problem is also the reason why the announcement of the death of Brently seems so threatening now. It is also clear that an individual with a heart problem would certainly not deal with such terrible news. In any instance where Louise tries to go through the idea of her renewed independence, her heart races as the blood in her veins pumps to the extremes. As the story ends, Louise dies. The diagnosis of her heart disease looks appropriate to her disease but it seems even more appropriate since she experienced shock once she saw Brently. Surely, such shock is enough to drive her to her deathbed. It is however ironic that the doctor concludes that the main reason as to the death of Louiseis overwhelming joy. It is ironic because it is not joy that had led to her death but rather loss of joy, which had killed her. Louise had certainly died because of a broken heart that was caused by the idea of suddenly losing her much loved independence (Chopin, The Story of an Hour)
There comes a point in everyone’s life when they are pressurized by society’s demands. One is given the option to either conform or challenge these social norms in order to suit one’s life.
In both Anton Chekhov’s The Cherry Orchard and Henrik Ibsen’s A Doll’s House the subversion of perception and the insubordination of supposedly inferior characters has massive implications on the overall message of the play. These mechanisms bring to light a multitude of questions about the correctness of social norms and the future of both Russian and Norwegian society. They are powerful reminders of ever-changing society and the nature of human relationships, and they leave the reader at once confused and motivated for change.