I think we can declare that Miller now knows more than Ayn Rand did about Aristotle, Literature, and Art. wc
________________________________ From: Chris Miller <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 10:53:34 AM Subject: Rand Chapter 4: Basic principles of Literature Chapter 4: Basic principles of Literature Rand gives Aristotle pride of place in this essay -- starting out with a quotation from Chapter IX of the Poetics: "The true difference (betweeen History and Dramatic Poetry) is that one relates what has happened, the other what may happen. Poetry, therefore, is a more philosophical and a higher thing than history: for poetry tends to express the universal, history the particular." But then she takes a sharp turn, as she presents the Novel as *the* major literary form, and tells us that it's four attributes, in order of importance, are "Theme, Plot, Characterization, and Style" As we might remember, Aristotle lists the four principles of Tragedy as Plot, Character, Thought, and Diction -- where Plot stands first and foremost as "the soul of tragedy" Note that difference? Rand has found something called 'theme'("the summation of a novel's abstract meaning") and shoved it in at the very top. Which isn't all that unusual, is it? Didn't your high school literature teacher always want to talk about the 'theme' of "David Copperfield" or "Silas Marner"? That annoyed me then -- and it annoys me now. My problem with this innovation is that I'm never quite sure just how the theme of the various novels that I read can be properly stated. There usually seems to be a variety of alternatives with equal validity. And now, finally, I'm realizing the wisdom in Aristotles placement of "Thought" (which is something like theme, but also quite different) way down at number 3 - beneath plot and character. But at least Rand is asserting the necessity of Plot (as did our former lister, Kirby) and carrying that assertion as those pesky "Naturalists" who "object that plot is an artificial contrivance, because in "real life" events do not fall into a logical pattern" But I also have trouble identifying the plot of some of my favorite novels. What is the plot of "Dream of Red Chamber"? A bunch of bright, beautiful people are living in a luxuriant garden until suddenly, without warning, they're all thrown out. Could that really be called a plot ? She presents this as "the cardinal principle of good fiction": "the theme and the plot of a novel must be integrated" And yes, perhaps that's the cardinal principle of the fiction she likes to read and write. (with examples of its perfection taken from her own novel) But I feel differently. One final, and fascinating, feature of this chapter is the comparison Rand makes between the style of Mickey Spillane in "One Lonely Night" versus the style of Thomas Wolfe in "The Web and the Rock" -- in passages where each of them describe "New York City at night" (I put that in scare quotes, because I'm not really sure that they do) Spillane, God bless him, addresses an "objective psycho-epistemology" by providing facts and expecting the reader to react accordingly: "The rain was misty enough to be almost fog-like, a cold gray curtain that separated me from the pale ovals of white that were faces locked behind the steamed up windows of the cars that hissed by. Even the brilliance that was Manhattan was reduced to a few sleepy yellow lights off in the distance" (note: this is only part of the except that she quoted on page 76) While "Wolfe's style is emotion-oriented and addressed to a subjective psycho-epistomology: he expects the reader to accept emotions divorced from facts, and to accept them as second hand": "That hour, that moment, and that place struck with a peerless co-incision upon the very heart of his own youth, the crest and zenith of his own desire. The city had never seemed as beautiful as it looked that night. For the first time he saw that New York was supremely, among the cities of the world, the city of the night" Rand concludes: "If one reads Wolfe out of focus, one gets a vague, grandiloquent approximation, suggesting that he has said something important or uplifting; if one reads him in full focus, one sees that he has said nothing" Myself, I haven't read either of those novels -- but based on the excerpts given, I'm more inclined to get a copy of the Wolfe. Not because his description of a New York City night is any better -- but because his character who is making the observations is more interesting to me. His life, at that moment, seems more compelling. ____________________________________________________________ Handyman Franchises. Click Here. http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2231/fc/BLSrjnxaAgtgMG1uK3xxDLY8QuTdWF FeQISRi6uyYgfLtnsei9xsAZKUnCI/
