http://www.chimpfeedr.com/ <![CDATA[amlit 2520]]> 2012-05-14T14:53:08+00:00 http://www.chimpfeedr.com/ tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8730172007482082106.post-6920809061619235275 <![CDATA[Literary Realism and Naturalism in America]]> 2012-05-13T21:31:04+00:00     
     William Dean Howells is noted for being a realist and believed in realism's simplest definition saying, "Realism is nothing more and nothing less than the truthful treatment of material" (Cain 11). Today this definition is thought to be to simple and limiting, not giving realism the space it requires. Several elements make up realism such as: truth, details, ordinary, often unpleasant, opposing idealism, observant, credible, and convincing. The most important of these traits are truth, details and convincing. Truth is important because without it the very essence of realism is corrupt. Details cannot be overlooked because without them the last trait would be unable to fill its roll as convincing.
   
     The most impressive realism author out of the ones we have studied so far I believe is Bret Harte because of his clever use of irony. He made the story believable as it could have happened in the very way it is told. At the end of The Outcasts of Poker Flat Harte writes, "And pulseless and cold, with a Derringer by his side and a bullet in his heart, though still calm as in life, beneath the snow, lay he who was at once the strongest and yet the weakest of the outcasts of Poker Flat" (Cain 51). This represents realism because it is unpleasant, opposes idealism, and credible (holding true) to the story.
  
     The worst author at using realism is in my opinion Ambrose Bierce because he did not make the story convincing. While reading the story an observant reader would realize that several things did not make sense which I will now summarize. On page 74 this passage is read, "hours before, these desperate, stricken men, with their more fortunate and now distant comrades, had penetrated the forest in thousands. Their successive battalions, breaking into swarms and forming in lines, had passed the child on every side--had almost trodden on him as he slept. The rustle and murmur of their march had not awakened him" (Cain). This is not believable because if a battle was being fought, "within in a stone's throw away" from a child he should have woken up. The reasoning behind him not waking up is not given thus Bierce omits an important detail.
     
     The majority of  authors we have studied so far are not naturalists because they do not use scientific proof to justify their truths but are rather simply realists. Realism is a wonderful form of literature that can still be appreciated today. It is constantly changing but always justifies the truth of something without the slightest ounce of exaggeration. Many authors I believe use some form of realism in their writings but ignore other forms. Such as Mark Twain uses realism when it comes to dialect and dialogue always, but sometimes wrote fiction the plot of which was exaggerated. Realism is important in American Literature because it helps readers see things as they are; promoting them to take part in the reality in their own lives.
     

]]> tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6729455803994736676.post-2585060213141521336 <![CDATA[Realism/Naturalism]]> 2012-05-13T06:41:40+00:00

Realism/Naturalism


After we discussed the two different styles of literature I wanted to get a firmer grasp on each concept so I could really know what they were.  
Though naturalism and realism are two different styles they have a lot in common and have on some occasions been grouped together.  Essentially naturalism is an extension of realism. "Each, though slightly different in concept or subject, is defining what is going on in front of his or her eyes, without imagining a past or a future." (American Realism)
Both techniques were an abrupt change, a revolt against the emotional Romantic era.  However despite their similarities, the two do have a lot of differences as well: 


                  Where romanticists transcend the immediate to find the ideal, and naturalists plumb the 
                  actual or superficial to find the scientific laws that control its actions, realists center their 
                  attention to a remarkable degree on the immediate, the here and now, the specific action, 
                  and the verifiable consequence (Campbell)


One of the characteristics of realism is it generally focuses on the middle-class lifestyle, it was a "faithful representation of reality." (Campbell)  For example, the dialect used in Mark Twain's "Jumping Frog", does not suggest an upper class society and if the people had been living in poverty it is more likely that the children would be working rather than out playing.  I think, though it is a very light-hearted version of realism, Mark Twain does a good job of representing the technique in this story.  However, in "Editha" by William Howells I think the idea, the fact that they are focusing on such a controversial topic at that period of time is definitely realism, but I felt like the emotions were at times a little too over the top for the genre. 
While realism only describes people as they are, 


               naturalism attempts to determine "scientifically" the underlying forces. 
               Naturalistic writers believed that the laws behind the forces that govern human
               lives might be studied and understood used detailed realism to suggest that 
               social conditions, heredity, and environment had inescapable force in shaping
               human character. (Naturalism)


Naturalism explores the deeper part of the human character and finds out why we do what we do and tries to understand that.  Also, where a realist would focus on the middle-class, naturalists generally would focus on the low-income areas.  Occasionally naturalistic writers were criticized for being too negative and pessimistic on their view of life.  
The story of "Chickamauga," written by Ambrose Bierce, I feel is a good example of naturalism.  It shows a family of lower-class and how the environment affects this family.  It definitely explores the darker side of people, shows reality and expresses the thoughts and feelings of people, not just the events that occur.  
As I read about the two definitions and went through the stories I could definitely see a difference between the two techniques.  I also feel that, though each style has it's place, naturalism is definitely more relatable and current, even if it does give a more honest and sometimes bleak outlook on life.  


Campbell, Donna M. "Realism in American Literature, 1860-1890." Literary Movements. Dept. of English, Washington State University.  09/08/2011. http://public.wsu.edu/~campbelld/amlit/natural.htm


American Realism. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_realism. 8 May 2012.


Naturalism. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalism_(literature).  22 April 2012












  

]]> tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8436020532816771243.post-7855193693234405122 <![CDATA[Realism]]> 2012-05-13T00:10:40+00:00       In my opinion, Realism more or less is just a way of taking a different view on a subject than the typical or popular way of viewing it. William Dean Howells was a perfect example of this, according to the description of him in American Literature Volume Two, he was "...obliged to teach all persons and therby dispute the boundaries of class."(52) An author of Realism is expected to state facts that may be very forward or blunt and many times unpleasing to the public. This is done in order to enlighten and broaden views. This is done instead of making flowery and pleasing literature for the reader and leaving them to their typical ways of thinking.
     While discussing Mark Twain and reading about the other authors such as Howells. It is also a good assumption to say that realism authors' writing in fact was simpler to read and more direct. In other words their works were  more "real" in their descriptions. Using real-life dialects and situations to create a stronger feeling in the reader and a greater ability to imagine the scene the author was creating. Again making the writing more "real" for the reader and the new view.
     Almost all of the assigned readings we had were on war. Perhaps because of the time that Realism began to break forth was about the time of the civil war. I found this topic to be quite an inviting and powerful topic that made it much easier to distguinish the purpose of Realism. Many of the pieces pointed out that  Americans or just people in general, glorify war and don't realize the actual negative baggage it carries. The majority of the pieces gave a very un-glorified view of war and paint a picture of sadness, and gore. These writings could be considered slightly disturbing, but they do in fact, teach us a different side of war that most of us are oblivious to because we have not experienced it ourselves. War often times is viewed as an only way to accomplish peace and is often seen as a showing of bravery, however, it is a very destructive, sad, and painful thing. I believe the authors did well in demonstrating the opposing side of war and showing their view of reality.  As defined in the book, I felt there was a "Moral lesson in them that will benefit readers in the conduct of their lives" (8).
      Realism is meant to have an inspirational effect on readers and create a new form of thinking and viewing the world. This goal is achieved through a style of writing that is honest and simple. A style that allows the reader to experience the scene and have it affect them personally.
I found the study of this particular genre very interesting and felt that it really did have an affect on me and fulfilled its intended purpose.
]]> tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-818254740678701435.post-1550149997749552666 <![CDATA[Literary Realism]]> 2012-05-12T21:09:09+00:00
Mark Twain:  Mark Twain was hard to pin a position on the spectrum which makes me think he falls somewhere in the middle.  He focuses a lot on the realistic details, especially in his criticisms of Fenimore Cooper.  In one instance, Twain points out in a shooting match that Cooper omitted the color of the paint and could not even be set in reality because the mark was 100 yards away. Twain also requires a purpose to the details of his writing.  Characters must be saying things for specific reasons and details to prove to arrive somewhere as Twain recounts in his description of the violations of the rules of romantic fiction.  Twain falls somewhere in the middle of the realism spectrum and set a high standard for those who would follow.  He truly had the "common touch, reaching wide range of readers" (22).

Bret Harte:  He deals very well the details of the story.  The Outcasts of Poker Flat was quite a realistic tale, with a sufficient number of details, however, I felt it very lacking in a point.  I borrow a phrase from Mark Twain, "the tale shall accomplish something and arrive somewhere" (30) and Outcasts did neither for me.  It was simply a tale of a bunch of outcasts and how they died.  He almost arrives somewhere with his last line of "he who was t once the strongest and yet the weakest of the outcasts of Poker Flats" (51) but it was too little, too late. Harte would be on the very realistic depiction of material spectrum of realism. 

William Dean Howells:  Howells is a realistic author exactly as he depicts realistic authors should be, and "Realism... refers to the effort to give an accurate, morally informed, and enlightening depiction of life" (9).  In Editha, he gives a moral tale concerning war.  It is a quite the anti Spanish-American war piece, suggesting that those who supported the war are not a) in the war and giving their life for it and b) do not understand the full consequences of war. At the end of the story, Editha, the self-absorbed female, never full understood the consequences, suggesting that America, really understood those consequences either.

Ambrose Bierce:  What a powerful story.  Bierce falls on the opposite end of the spectrum as Harte and as I understand it, is a naturalistic author as well.  Naturalism, as defined by Wikipedia, is "detailed realism to suggest that social conditions, heredity, and environment had an inescapable force in shaping human character." The small child, whose name we never learn, is shaped - both in the beginning and the end, though differently- by the Civil War.  In the beginning, the war shapes his actions and his play.  It is all about conquest and sword play.  In the end, it will shape his behavior because of the destruction it caused his home and family.  Bierce tells a very realistic tale of a young boy but meditates on the text and really brings home a powerful ending.  Bierce is on the "meditations" end of the spectrum.  I believe that this end of the spectrum is the truest realism in the sense that realism "amounts both to a true and to a new way of seeing.  It means seeing what others have not" (7).  I think that Bierce of all the authors we read is the most realistic author.
]]> tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930755777037342547.post-1626720449919308953 <![CDATA[Naturalism and Realism]]> 2012-05-12T04:41:30+00:00
To begin with the question: Which author have we read exemplifies literary naturalism the best? My answer is none of them. These are the reasons why: 1)Each author has a unique opnion, 2)Each author has a different background from eachother. Naturalism and realism do not have a concrete and universal definition that we can all agree on as far as I know. I also believe it's better to look at it from this view to see the different views of naturalism and realism and bring them all together like pieces of a puzzle.

Let's start with Mark Twain, by far the most famous of the authors we have read so far. If you want to see his view of naturalism and realism you just have to look at how he wrote his stories. He incorporated numerous dialects into his stories with a diverse cast of characters who used them. You could see that "He had a keen sense of pleasure and possibility...but also a deep, disturbing perception of human folly." (American Literature Volume 2, William E Cain, pg. 23) The pleasure and possibility came with his fun characters that seemed so real that you could relate to them if they were real. He also showed the grim reality of real life, depicting racism in novels like "The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn," and other common vices such as thievery in "The Notorious Jumping Frog of Calaveras County." To me Mark Twain is like a modern version of Robin Williams; with the ability to bring numerous characters and dialects and real life issues to the masses in a way that we can all digest it intellectually. When Twain was happy, his realistic view of the world was positive. When he was miserable, his realistic view of the world was negative.

I am not going to spend as much time on the remaining authors as I did on Mark Twain. I want to get to my point as soon as possible and not bore you or myself with boring facts and examples that slow down the trip to the climax.

The next in this line of authors is Bret Harte. Often viewed in the shadow of Mark Twain, Harte was know for his colorful stories such as "The Outcasts of Poker Flat." He wasn't an extreme writer in terms of his philisophical views or his views on life. He just took "fairly routine story formulas and g(a)ve them new vigor and settings." (American Literature Volume 2, William E Cain, pg. 41) In other words he took every day things and made them more interesting for people to read. Kind of like Bill Cosby, but Harte was accessible through his books, and he did not do it in a very comedic style. Bret Harte to me is not an author who calls attention to himself. As far as I can tell, his approach to realism was just looking at it through a magnifying glass, except he changed the type of glass to see which one you could enjoy the most.

William Dean Howells is next on the list. His view on realism is "nothing more and nothing less than the truthful treatment of material." (Crow, Charles L. A companion to the regional literatures of America) When you are going off this definition, then his story "Editha" is the truthful treatment of the Spanish-American War. To put my own opinion on the story I say this: This is a good depiction of American imperialistic views of the time. It also shows a person as represented by Editha, who is so dense and ignorant, that you have to dislike her. Her husband seems to be the more rational thinker of the pair. But I do not know the rest of the story or the depth of the characters, so I can not say more.

Okay now it's getting late and I am tired. I hope this will help you think and contribute to you developing your own opinion.
]]> tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8134006259695622721.post-7081607977761768450 <![CDATA[Class assignment Paper #1 Maxx S]]> 2012-05-12T02:25:44+00:00
Realism as used and pioneered by authors such as, Twain, Howells, Harte, and other in the mid to late eighteen hundreds is an easy to read but difficult to define genre of literature. The definition used in the book “American Literature” edited by William E. Cain states the Realism is a literary style that uses “The practice of regarding things in their true nature and dealing with them as they are.” and that realism also shows “Fidelity to nature in representation; the showing of life, etc., as it is in fact.”(Cain 3) Using this definition what can be shown is the true use of realism by the author William Dean Howells in his short story entitled “Editha”which will give us a solid understanding of how Realism interacts with the world and how the reader is shown a world that is in name supposed to be real.
The first thing we need to do, in order to use the works of Howells, is to understand what realism is is to look at the definition of realism as given by William Cain and fully understand what it means. The second part of the definition Cain uses is that it “shows fidelity to nature”. This is the more simple to analyze portion of the definition so we should start there. What this means in a sense is that the writing must reflect nature and how it actually occurs. This includes people and they way that they behave, interact, and live. This also means that anything that does not exist in the real world can not be considered in the realm of realism. Essentially, it means that no matter how real the characters in “Lord of the Rings” may act the works are not, in any way, connected to be realism and the same goes to any imaginative fantasy in which characters, settings, or rules of nature do not follow the rules we have in reality. As a side note this definition means that along with fidelity to nature the work should also conform to the world of Science, things that are possible in the work should also be possible in the real world under all current scientific standings.
The first part of the description offered by Cain is a little more difficult to get a solid understanding of. What does it mean to deal with things in their true nature? It could mean two things that are relevant to understanding realism. First relates to our previous explanation of the definition, namely that the work needs to reflect material and observable things that span the work and reality, but the definition also says to deal with things as they are. This seems to mean that characters need to behave in rational and realistic ways. Characters need to behave in relatable ways to actual humans, in a sense the character needs to exist in a space that if that person were real they would not be abnormal. Dealing with things as they are also means that things can not be left out or alluded to. Situations can not be enhanced, or cleaned up by the author, they must appear real. This makes realism a very gritty and often sad or uncomfortable writing style.
With a basic understanding of what realism should mean on a basic level we can look at Howells short story “Editha” and see how it conforms to our definition and the interpretation of it. First the story must adhere to a set of rules that would be applicable to our real world. “Editha” is a short story about a young woman who encourages her lover to go to fight in a war that he is not particularly enthused about. It follows the rules for a normal world and nothing supernatural happens, this is an easy rule to follow and many works of fiction follow this rule. The rule for realism comes when you use the other definition. Does this story deal with things in their true nature, to which the answer is an astounding yes.
There are many tropes at play here that both make for a good story as well as follow the common occurrences that happen in real life. First Editha is a woman who decides that if her lover will not go to war she will no longer be involved with him. This is at its core a story about a woman manipulating a man in order to get what she wants. It takes this common story arc and takes it to an absurd maximum without leaving the realm of the real. What Howalls has done here and taken this classic story arc and crated an interesting story out of it while not allowing it to leave the realm of possible actions and outcomes.
There is one more very similar story element that gets played out near the end of the story. Editha goes to the mother of her lover after her lover is killed in the war that Editha convinced him to fight in. In this scene the mother screams at Editha for supporting the war and convincing her son to go and try to kill people resulting in his own death. This scene follows the same pattern as the previous arc in that it both comments on real life while telling a story that stays within the realm of the real. What we have is the mother of man who has been taken away by an outside woman, changed so that his beliefs are different than the ones he was raised with and eventually taken away from the mother, in story through death, while in real life it is through marriage; again, everything comes down to sex.


Cain, William, comp. American Literature. Volume 2. New York: Penguin Academics, 2004. 3. Print.
]]>