http://clevermsbennet.livejournal.com/ (![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png)
clevermsbennet.livejournal.com) wrote in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
fandomhigh2008-10-02 05:04 am
clevermsbennet.livejournal.com) wrote in fandomhigh2008-10-02 05:04 am
Entry tags:
Literature, Class 5: Period 3, Thursday, October 2
"There is a famous quotation," Miss Elizabeth Bennet said, "which says, slightly paraphrased, 'I am sorry that this letter is so long. I did not have time to write a short one.' This may sound laughable, unless one has ever tried to write a letter and discovered that one only has a single sheet of paper. Being concise, being clear in the least number of words possible, that will in many cases require more thought, more effort, than simply filling a page with one's news.
"The same is true, to some extent, with works of fiction. I do not mean to imply that a short story would take an author longer to write than a thousand-page epic. However, a short story is truly a different work than a novel. An event happens, an anecdote is shared. In a novel, the overarching plot is frequently one of personal development: the characters' lives, in short, and the growth that they achieve, or that which they fail to achieve. A novel has a narrative, connecting a series of events; a short story may have one event, and the sequence that creates that event, or what occurs after, as a result.
"Poems can be short, only meant to convey an impression, a feel, perhaps a moment in time. By contrast, there is epic poetry, which seeks to tell a long narrative in poetic form. Historically, epics have their own rules: there is one hero, fighting either with the assistance of or despite the interventions of various deities. There are long lists: geneaologies, in some cases, as well as the names of the dead, and of those who fought bravely on each side. Epics also must start with an invocation to the muse.
"Plays we discussed briefly, of course, during our study of William Shakespeare. As we noted there, the loss of narrative means that we must show our audience what we wish for them to know. Plays allow for actors to bring their own personalities to each role, for directors to stamp their own imprints onto the works -- which some may say gets us further from the play's original intent. This is true, unless one believes that perhaps plays are intended to be open in this manner: adaptable to each new performance and what it may bring out of the work.
"Another complication is serialization. Many novels were, at one time, printed in news-papers in segments. Writing to that audience means that each passage's beginning must be accessible to new readers, but more importantly, each passage's ending must leave your audience desiring more. Charles Dickens' work was serialized; as a result, many of his chapters end with dramatic cliffhangers. The intent was to inspire the audience to return to your next episode, eager to know of their beloved characters' fates.
"These are, of course, generalities, and will not be applicable in every case. However, it is important for us to think about how form affects content. If one was to write a story of a war, the tone, the characterization, the overall impact, all of these would be very different in an epic poem than a novel. In serial form, one would plot carefully which major battles fell on which chapter breaks. In a play, one might compress two minor characters into one, so as not to confuse the audience with interchangeable side roles.
"At times, outside factors can affect the story in very specific ways. It has been rumoured, falsely, that Dickens was paid by the word; though he was not, many of his contemporaries were. One can imagine how fondly they reached for adjectives, for a little more description to round out that third paragraph, whether or not the it was perfectly crisp as it then stood. By contrast, a modern author named Stephen King once finished a 1200-page saga, only to have his publisher insist that the book needed to be far shorter or it would not sell. The issue was not the content, or that the book's pacing was unsteady, but that, because of commercial and practical concerns, the book needed to lose four hundred pages. The book was reduced, and published; years later, when the author was famous, he re-released the book in its original state.
"The form of a story changes that story. How we tell a tale alters it; what we keep, what we omit, what words we use. We experience this every day, when recounting to one's sister the dreadful argument one had with one's mother. It is no less true in literature than it is in life."
She smiled. "One final note. I wished to discuss the contrast between an author's intentions and those results, but I am not certain how easy this will be, since we have not all read the same works. For this one week, I ask, if you can: please find a copy of Jane Austen's Randolph Park or Amelia. Read either, or both, for next week's class, if you are able to do so. There will be no penalty if you are not."
"The same is true, to some extent, with works of fiction. I do not mean to imply that a short story would take an author longer to write than a thousand-page epic. However, a short story is truly a different work than a novel. An event happens, an anecdote is shared. In a novel, the overarching plot is frequently one of personal development: the characters' lives, in short, and the growth that they achieve, or that which they fail to achieve. A novel has a narrative, connecting a series of events; a short story may have one event, and the sequence that creates that event, or what occurs after, as a result.
"Poems can be short, only meant to convey an impression, a feel, perhaps a moment in time. By contrast, there is epic poetry, which seeks to tell a long narrative in poetic form. Historically, epics have their own rules: there is one hero, fighting either with the assistance of or despite the interventions of various deities. There are long lists: geneaologies, in some cases, as well as the names of the dead, and of those who fought bravely on each side. Epics also must start with an invocation to the muse.
"Plays we discussed briefly, of course, during our study of William Shakespeare. As we noted there, the loss of narrative means that we must show our audience what we wish for them to know. Plays allow for actors to bring their own personalities to each role, for directors to stamp their own imprints onto the works -- which some may say gets us further from the play's original intent. This is true, unless one believes that perhaps plays are intended to be open in this manner: adaptable to each new performance and what it may bring out of the work.
"Another complication is serialization. Many novels were, at one time, printed in news-papers in segments. Writing to that audience means that each passage's beginning must be accessible to new readers, but more importantly, each passage's ending must leave your audience desiring more. Charles Dickens' work was serialized; as a result, many of his chapters end with dramatic cliffhangers. The intent was to inspire the audience to return to your next episode, eager to know of their beloved characters' fates.
"These are, of course, generalities, and will not be applicable in every case. However, it is important for us to think about how form affects content. If one was to write a story of a war, the tone, the characterization, the overall impact, all of these would be very different in an epic poem than a novel. In serial form, one would plot carefully which major battles fell on which chapter breaks. In a play, one might compress two minor characters into one, so as not to confuse the audience with interchangeable side roles.
"At times, outside factors can affect the story in very specific ways. It has been rumoured, falsely, that Dickens was paid by the word; though he was not, many of his contemporaries were. One can imagine how fondly they reached for adjectives, for a little more description to round out that third paragraph, whether or not the it was perfectly crisp as it then stood. By contrast, a modern author named Stephen King once finished a 1200-page saga, only to have his publisher insist that the book needed to be far shorter or it would not sell. The issue was not the content, or that the book's pacing was unsteady, but that, because of commercial and practical concerns, the book needed to lose four hundred pages. The book was reduced, and published; years later, when the author was famous, he re-released the book in its original state.
"The form of a story changes that story. How we tell a tale alters it; what we keep, what we omit, what words we use. We experience this every day, when recounting to one's sister the dreadful argument one had with one's mother. It is no less true in literature than it is in life."
She smiled. "One final note. I wished to discuss the contrast between an author's intentions and those results, but I am not certain how easy this will be, since we have not all read the same works. For this one week, I ask, if you can: please find a copy of Jane Austen's Randolph Park or Amelia. Read either, or both, for next week's class, if you are able to do so. There will be no penalty if you are not."
Speak with the TAs [LIT-5]
Re: Speak with the TAs [LIT-5]
Re: Speak with the TAs [LIT-5]