Romance and the Novel There are 126 Posts and 2 Comments so far.
Rideout, Walter. The Radical Novel in the United States, 1900-1954. Cambride: Harvard University Press, 1956.
The entire novel is written in a form that may seem almost ‘mangled’ to the reader, for there are events where he goes back and forth, traveling between events and times and places. However, this is a literary representation of the war, a symbolic way of showing thatIt is so short and jumbled and jangled, Sam, because there is nothing intelligent to say about a massacre. Everybody is supposed to be dead, to never say anything or want anything ever again. Everything is supposed to be very quiet after a massacre, and it always is, except for the birds. And what do the birds say? All there is to say about a massacre, things like “Poo-tee-weet”? (Vonnegut)
It attempts to recuperate the non-relativist sense of the genre that has become difficult if not impossible when approaching postwar American texts: "In order to keep the study from extending to all outdoors, `political' is here defined in a very literal and functional sense. The subject of these works, apart from a few on the fringe noted as such but illustrating particular themes, is also primarily political" (8). By this standard the political novel has a disadvantage as art. Blotner's "functional" definition actually excludes a number of interesting novels -- such as Sinclair's The Jungle (1906) and proletarian novels such as Steinbeck's The Grapes of Wrath (1939 --that are about politics and that function politically. . . . Like many students of the political novel who attempt an exact and exclusive definition, Blotner asks, "Why are there so few modern American political novels of any excellence? Why are there so many bad ones?" This sense of almost unavoidable disappointment is the natural consequence of any attempt to describe the American political novel from an apolitical vantage point.
Thesis Statement For The Novel The Help
For example, say you are arguing that Jane Eyre advocates equal rights for men and women; that's your basic thesis. You give evidence from the novel that allows this reading, and then, at the right place, you might say the following, a paraphrase:This final thesis statement presents an interpretation of a literary work based on an analysis of its content. Of course, for the essay itself to be successful, you must now present evidence from the novel that will convince the reader of your interpretation.Why is this thesis weak? Think about what the reader would expect from the essay that follows: you will most likely provide a general, appreciative summary of Twain’s novel. The question did not ask you to summarize; it asked you to analyze. Your professor is probably not interested in your opinion of the novel; instead, she wants you to think about why it’s such a great novel—what do Huck’s adventures tell us about life, about America, about coming of age, about race relations, etc.? First, the question asks you to pick an aspect of the novel that you think is important to its structure or meaning—for example, the role of storytelling, the contrasting scenes between the shore and the river, or the relationships between adults and children. Now you write:[Howe] envisioned the political novel in a more purely literary way (as it were) than did Rideout. Howe waved away the problem of precise definition as something for rigid scholastics to quibble over, opting, instead, to define the political novel in this way: "By a political novel I mean a novel in which political ideas play a dominant role or in which a political milieu is the dominant setting. . . . Perhaps it would be better to say: a novel in which we take to be dominant political ideas or the political milieu" (17). . . . Still, he provided no particular insight about why the political novel should be harder to define than other genres. . . . Perhaps as a strategy for avoiding the bias that political literature is by nature inferior, Howe consistently aestheticized politics, thus transforming the object of his criticism slightly.