It's interesting that Professor Porter pointed out the fact that this novel is well, novel in its use of free indirect discourse. I never knew the term, however, I did recognize that the novel reads like the more modern novels I've experienced. It's interesting to note that the Romantic period was not a time of stagnated literary forms like high school Hannah thought: the notion that the forms and tropes of the romantic period were only subject to exploring childhood and innocence, nature and sublime, the pastoral vs the growing mechanistic world is a fallacy.
Experimentation is for me what sets this novel apart from the ones we've read- this isn't to say that Wasingham or Desmond weren't experimental, but I align this novel with Shelley's Frankenstein and The Last Man in that the modern reader can see veins of that particular tradition carried through in modern novels.
The concept of free indirect discourse, for me, came so naturally reading this novel (because like I said, I've been accustomed to it- as I'm sure most of the students in this class are). However, when it comes to truly dissecting the source of this discourse, it becomes confusing and convoluted. What is the point of this confusion?
It's my theory that the "point" lies in growing realism-- novels are slowing coming out of the overly sentimental era of writing marked by sensibility and hitting at the core of where this sensitibikity comes from- from the real human psyche endowed with characteristics that are shared universally with variations subject to the individual.
When the reader chooses a passage to close read and dissect, especially when it comes to attempting to discern whose "head" we're in, Austen gives hints but leaves the subtlties to the interpretation of the reader. Even on page 262, the narrator remarks that "the evening seemed to have been made up of exquisite events" in the middle of a paragraph describing Mr. Elliot and Anne. It begs the question- does the author superimpose her own reading of the unfolding events to call them exquisite? Does Anne think they are, or does Mr. Elliot? Does it matter whether or not the reader truly knows- is the simple fact that the narrator says so supposed to quell and curiosity? Does it change the reading of this passage?
I agree about the "point" lying in growing realism. One effect of the use of free indirect discourse is that it gives the reader a more interactive experience with the work. As readers we have a tendency to put ourselves into the place of either the main character or the narrator. By weaving in and out of the two view points Austen forces the reader out of the comfort zone of remaining in one viewpoint. We experience what is in Anne's head but we also get an outside view on her as well. We can sympathize with her and really observe her all at the same time.
ReplyDeleteI made the comment in class that I think this form of discourse is more "realistic" in the sense that it's a natural rendition of the way people think. As a writer, it seems like Austen likely tried to put herself inside each characters head as she was writing from their perspective in order to achieve this free discourse. The changes to each of the perspectives are very subtle, but they provide the reader with a natural method of learning all perspectives and gaining the same omniscience as the narrator.
ReplyDeleteThe development and popularization of the more modern third person omniscient narrator is definitely noteworthy in Austen's case. Compared to other literature we've read, there seems to be a shift in how Austen presents her narrative to her reader, and I wonder how jarring it might have been to her contemporaries. Although it didn't appear out of nowhere, and was building off of previous writers' styles, Austen's narrative mode is certainly novel. The effect is less direct, less straightforward and accessible for the reader's sake, as opposed to a Desmond or Walsingham. And yet, it seems to be more versatile, more dynamic, allowing for the writer to switch easily back and forth between characters. Putting preference aside, I think the way Austen utilizes the omniscient narrator allows for more intricate and thorough storytelling.
ReplyDelete