First and foremost, I would like to apologize to all commenters for my late posting. The blog completely escaped my mind. With my first English class on Tuesday, I don’t really tend to think of it when contemplating homework due for Monday. I apologize for any inconvenience.
Most of the discussion in class has resolved around which of the characters in Antigone is the more likable. However, looking over the top choices -- Creon, Antigone, Ismene -- it is difficult to see a clear winner. We’ve got Creon, some crazed tyrant who has led himself to believe that he *is* the state. Antigone, a woman who is solely led by her own stubborn will and, while admirable in her own way, is so narrow-minded she shuns all who might disagree with her. And Ismene, a sister who cannot stand up for her own beliefs and is tossed aside by everyone when they see she is not willing to do what it takes. Were the house to be broken into at this very moment by a well-read robber and were he to put a gun to my head and thrust a copy of Sophocles’s Antigone into my hands and were he then to force me to choose the character I liked most or surrender my life to him…..………I’d choose Ismene. He’d then set the gun down and we’d have a lovely chat comparing and contrasting the differing themes of Oedipus Rex and Antigone over tea and scones. But I digress.
The odd thing is, it has become apparent that we don’t *need* to like the characters in a story. One can enjoy a piece of literature or drama without feeling any sympathy at all for any of the characters. Sure, it definitely *helps* if the reader can identify with the protagonist or even a secondary character but it seems not to be essential for a well-written work of literary genius. Another example of use of less than favourable characters is Emily Brontë ’s, Wuthering Heights. I mean, who *actually* likes Heathcliff or Catherine? But despite this, the novel is still a masterpiece of English literature.
Granted, it’s a rather odd thought. How can one commit to a piece of literature, spend so much time reading and analyzing it, and *not* dislike spending the time required to do so with such annoying characters? Yet, I can easily say in the same breath that I dislike every character found within Antigone and yet I thoroughly enjoy the play. It seems that themes trump characters. Not in every circumstance, of course. But when in the hands of an extremely skilled author or playwright, a handful of disagreeable characters can be molded into a fantastic, timeless story.
(Alright, 8 am on Monday morning isn’t bad! Plus, if there are any commenters who have forgotten, here’s an untouched blog entry!)
Monday, January 26, 2009
Monday, January 12, 2009
On Tolstoy and Condemnation
It is human nature to fear to death. As I stated both in class and in my Senior Speech, necrophobia is number one on most lists of Americans’ most popular fears. With the exception of Gerasim, basically every single character within Tolstoy’s The Death of Ivan Ilyich refuses to face his or her own mortality. Why is this? Of course, death is frightening. I fear It as well. What reason do we have not to fear it? It’s inevitable. We are unable to escape its grasp. I can easily relate to both Ivan’s and Peter’s fears.
And yet, the story seems to promote the acceptance of death and those who have the ability to look upon their own mortality without fear. Why should this fear of death be seen as a negative personality trait? I would condemn the rest of the characters far more for their narcissism, materialism, and their mesh of falsity they construct then for their simple fear of the unknown. Though, perhaps this is what Tolstoy is condemning: The fact that the characters ignore death (just as they ignore the severity of Ivan’s illness) despite the fact that it is inevitable. Instead of at least *trying* to come to terms with death (if they succeed is inconsequential), they ignore it all together. Perhaps this refusal to admit the inevitable is their flaw. Even I can admit -- most of the time, anyway -- that we will all, at some time or another, reach the end of our lives. I try not to ignore that fact.
Yet, though titled The Death of Ivan Ilyich, the novella revolves around the life he and his contemporaries led. It was not how he died, nor how he feared death, but the fact that he wasted his life purely with trivial matters that is the focus of the story. Perhaps this fear of death only comes from the realization one has not lived his or her life properly. Perhaps this is why no character can face it. Because no character can face the fact that his or her life has been lived poorly. Despite their riches and their positions, they are unable to look upon death because they cannot look upon their wasted lives.
In the end, it seems, Tolstoy’s novella about necrophobia seems not to be about the fear of death at all, but about the fear of having lived a life that was not worth the pain.
P.S. I would merely like to add that I rather enjoyed the thinning of the chapters that occurred throughout the novella as both the reader and Ivan traveled closer and closer to his death. It gave me the feeling that not only was time quickening, but also that time was running out.
And yet, the story seems to promote the acceptance of death and those who have the ability to look upon their own mortality without fear. Why should this fear of death be seen as a negative personality trait? I would condemn the rest of the characters far more for their narcissism, materialism, and their mesh of falsity they construct then for their simple fear of the unknown. Though, perhaps this is what Tolstoy is condemning: The fact that the characters ignore death (just as they ignore the severity of Ivan’s illness) despite the fact that it is inevitable. Instead of at least *trying* to come to terms with death (if they succeed is inconsequential), they ignore it all together. Perhaps this refusal to admit the inevitable is their flaw. Even I can admit -- most of the time, anyway -- that we will all, at some time or another, reach the end of our lives. I try not to ignore that fact.
Yet, though titled The Death of Ivan Ilyich, the novella revolves around the life he and his contemporaries led. It was not how he died, nor how he feared death, but the fact that he wasted his life purely with trivial matters that is the focus of the story. Perhaps this fear of death only comes from the realization one has not lived his or her life properly. Perhaps this is why no character can face it. Because no character can face the fact that his or her life has been lived poorly. Despite their riches and their positions, they are unable to look upon death because they cannot look upon their wasted lives.
In the end, it seems, Tolstoy’s novella about necrophobia seems not to be about the fear of death at all, but about the fear of having lived a life that was not worth the pain.
P.S. I would merely like to add that I rather enjoyed the thinning of the chapters that occurred throughout the novella as both the reader and Ivan traveled closer and closer to his death. It gave me the feeling that not only was time quickening, but also that time was running out.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)