The Judgings the Novel-Writing Tradition of the 20th Century - Essay Example

?Literature Analysis The diversity of approach, inclusion of symbolic elements from different social, academic, political and philosophical disciplines, evolution of new ideologies and their consequent incorporation in literature make it highly difficult to set right criteria in the context of judging the novel writing tradition of the 20th Century. Compared to the previous literary genres the novel writing tradition in the 20th Century incorporated traits of certain unprecedented changes that actually resulted in its diversity and unfathomable depth. The scope of 20th Century literature encompasses within its scope both modernist and postmodernist sensibilities. While generally the end of the First World War can be regarded as the commencement of the modernist tradition in literature, end of the Second World War marked initiation of the postmodernism. The writers of modernist tradition, after experiencing the radical shift from romantic traditions which also was further worsened by great devastation of the First World War, attempted to develop a holistic approach that they considered to be a matter of great importance to solve the prevailing problems. The postmodernists on the other hand adopted quite a different approach than that of the modernists and emphasized on the evaluation as well as analysis of the different aspects that construct life from in a fragmented manner. Irrespective of the fact that postmodernists derived a great deal of their inspiration from modernist traits of writing, however, their attempt to deal with subjects of novels in a fragmented and highly individualized manner developed the core of postmodernism. Such efforts not only helped in the genesis of different sub-genres in the 20th Century novel writing tradition but also helped readers to receive more accurate understanding of the social, cultural, political and philosophical scenario of the contemporary time. Thus, within scope of the paper attempts will be made to find out the best novel of 20th Century through analysis of 1984 by George Orwell and Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? by Phillip K. Dick. Within scope of the discussion adequate focus will also be provided in developing the criteria for evaluating these two novels by maintaining a close accord to art and aesthetics of modernist literature, development of popular literature and to which extent these two novels, respectively, have helped in understanding the forms of postmodern existence in a better way. In order to establish the criteria for determining the best novel of 20th Century, it is important to understand both modernism and postmodernism as these two literary and philosophical disciplines have played the most important parts in determining the aesthetics of the century, elaborated the socio-cultural aspects and finally help a reader to understand the relevance of texts with both aesthetics as well as socio-cultural dimensions. The term ‘modernism’ has raised a great deal of debate, dilemma and controversies among critics of literature and such vast is its expanse that quite often it becomes difficult to determine the actual literary-philosophical dimension of the discipline. Thus, critics like Malcolm Bradbury and James McFarlane, in their efforts to determine modernism, have emphasized on two different “sets of association” (Gupta, 2005, p. 221). In the first set of association they have opined is linked with “high aesthetic self-consciousness and nonrepresentationalism, in which art turns from realism and humanistic representation towards style, technique, and spatial form in pursuit of a deeper penetration of life ….” (Cited in Gupta, 2005, p. 221). This type of association helps in the genesis of experimental and innovative arts and consecutively deconstructs the traditional forms of artistic perception as well as representation in terms of structure, myth and organization. In the second type of association the critics have attempted to elaborate the reasons that resulted in such changes. While on one hand the intellectual dimension explored new horizons due to reinterpretation of Freud, Marx and Darwin, on the other hand random spread of industrialization and capitalism resulted in the development of intellectuals’ “existential exposure to meaninglessness or absurdity” (Bradbury and McFarlane; Cited in Gupta, 2005, p. 221). Consequently they have developed the opinion that modernist literature is the “… literature of technology. It is the art consequent on the dis-establishing of communal reality and conventional notions of causality, on the destruction of traditional notions of the wholeness of individual character, on the linguistic chaos that ensues when public notions of language have been discredited and when all realities have become subjective fictions. Modernism is then the art of modernization” (Bradbury and McFarlane; Cited in Gupta, 2005, p. 221). The journey of art and literary creations toward modernism commenced since late 18th century with the appearance of Karl Marx in the socio-political scenario. The Marxian political approach introduced such changes in the common notion about existence in a particular political context that radical political transformation took place: “Those changes, in turn, fed into the social and political changes occurring in the course of the nineteenth century as the result of the consolidation and expansion of imperial domination outside Europe (across most of the globe), the administration of vastly different cultures and the growing evidence of anti-colonial stirrings” (Gupta, 2005, p. 223). The changed perception of common people regarding their existence in the socio-political context was also reflected through different forms of artistic creation including literature and it addition to the situation modernist perception received new impetus through changes introduced by scientific advancement. Thus, the modernist world was fiercely fragmented and it was one of the major efforts of the modernist writers to aspire for “…an all-embracing characterization in the tradition of modernists from preceding centuries, and thought/wrote/painted and so on, with ambitions to apprehend the world in a singular fashion or transform it through the persuasiveness of a universal ideology” (Gupta, 2005, p. 228). However, irrespective of all such efforts it became almost impossible for modernists to find the holistic approach that would help them to interpret the world in a universal or singular fashion. The progress of time clearly showed evolve of several other ideological disciplines and in the second half of the 20th Century it became almost impossible for literary artists to fulfill their ambition in the context of finding the holistic approach or a universal ideology: “But there were numerous such aspiring ideologies and numerous such equally ambitious attempts at apprehension. In the latter part of the twentieth century, the feeling (and expressions thereof) that such holistic aspirations are destined to fail, and that multiple and even contradictory perspectives should be allowed to coexist, is often dubbed ‘postmodernism’. However, postmodernism is far from sounding the death-knell of the holistic ambitions of modernism, and even self-styled postmodernists may have ideological proclivities and convictions that are as holistic in application” (Gupta, 2005, p. 228). The era of postmodernism in literature reflects several literary terms and social ideologies that are sharply polarized and representing different dimensions of human existence from a fragmented and individualized perspective. The conflict between such polarized aspects quite naturally made the postmodernism in literature highly complex but at the same time traits of postmodernist individuality gave birth to popular literature. The popular literature incorporates within its scope various traits of postmodern culture and consequently the culture is regarded as the discipline that is created by common people so that overlapping of earlier senses can be differentiated. In this context popular literature can be identified as reflection of a cultural discipline that is “(1) belonging to the people; (2) low or base; (3) well-liked by many people; (4) deliberately seeking favour or wide approval; (5) inferior (as opposed to quality); (6) past and contemporary literature/culture/art made by the people” (Johnson, 2005, p. 4). The emergence of science-fiction novels received a great deal of impetus from the popular culture of postmodern literature and consequently paved the path for deeper evaluation of gender in the postmodernist socio-cultural context (Johnson, 2005, p. 6). Gender issues have always played a very important part since the commencement of modernist literary tradition and it took even a more pervasive form in the postmodern context. The early modernists like T.S. Eliot and Virginia Woolf have dealt with the gender issue from different perspectives. While in Prufrock and Other Observations Eliot has clearly reflected patriarchal prejudice and consequently evoked considerable critical interpretation (Gupta, 2005, p. 235), on the other hand, feminist pioneers like Virginia Woolf and Katherine Mansfield have protested against such patriarchal bias and consequently used their literary modernity as an effective device to reject such prejudice. Through her experimental works Woolf developed a different form of modernist aesthetic that is equivalent to that of her contemporaries, such as, Eliot and Joyce but at the same time used the same successfully as an instrument to project the traits of “feminist preoccupations, including its interest in the problematic relation between the woman writer and her literary and national heritage” (Watson, 2005, p. 278). The modernist aesthetic as practiced by Woolf later on became one of the major inspirations for literary endeavors to construct the postmodernist and postfeminist disciplines. The novels 1984 by George Orwell and Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? by Phillip K. Dick are brilliant examples of 20th century science fiction and also provide considerable opportunity in the context of evaluating the gender issues along with contemporary socio-cultural situation. Keeping in accord with Andrew M. Butler’s argument it can be suggested that both these novels aim at exploring “various dark or ambiguous visions of future societies …” (Butler, 2005, p. 112). It has been further observed by Butler that science fictions contain certain common features namely “…the importance of technology, the utopian or dystopian future, the resourceful male hero who overcomes difficulties in an exotic or alien environment, the side-lining of female characters…” (Butler, 2005, p. 112). In 1984 and Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? these traits are explicit. The world of 1984 as depicted by George Orwell is brute, utilitarian, nihilistic and completely under tyrannical surveillance of the “Big Brother”. Such powerful is his capacity of ruling that even the smallest defiance against his prescribed methods are considered as rebellion and the violator is punished accordingly by his force. The side-lining and marginalization of women in the society of 1984 has been masterfully expressed by the author in the following passage: “The little sandy-haired woman had flung herself forward over the back of the chair in front of her. With a tremulous murmur that sounded like ‘My Savior!’ She extended her arms towards the screen. Then she buried her face in her hands. It was apparent that she was uttering a prayer” (Orwell, 2004, p. 24). Compared to their male counterparts women have been depicted as vulnerable and helpless before the Big Brother’s crude dictatorship; thus, they have accepted his dominance without any effort. Intellectual like Winston Smith and his followers, who are also males, are only hope for the decaying society under tyrannical reign of the Big Brother and consequently they are projected as men of such power that alone can destroy prevailing tyranny. Julia clearly is an exception in the scenario of patriarchal dominance: “She obviously had a practical cunning which Winston lacked, and she seemed also to have an exhaustive knowledge of the countryside round London, stored away from innumerable community hikes. The route she gave him was quite different from the one by which he had come, and brought him out at a different railway station. ‘Never go home the same way as you went out,’ she said, as though enunciating an important general principle. She would leave first, and Winston was to wait half an hour before following her” (Orwell, 2004, p. 160). Compared to the conventional approach of writing science fiction novel, providing such importance to Julia’s character and depicting her as a rebel against patriarchal bias not only reflects the radical change in popular culture regarding perception of women but also it incorporates the modernist aesthetics of feminism initiated by authors like Virginia Woolf and Katherine Mansfield. Compared to Julia’s character Winston is selfish, self-obsessed and less intelligent; yet he is never ready to accept his drawbacks and consequently wishes that Julia must provide him with highest priority. Julia, on the other hand, does not suffer from any such complexes but when it comes to establishing her own point she reflects the true spirit of modernist womanhood. However, the most important aspect that sets Julia’s character apart from all others is her empathy for others. Standing over the debris of human intellectualism, freedom of expression, imagination and humane empathy, Julia is the only character that reflects quintessence of humanitarian existence and with her death the last hope of humanity’s survival is perished completely. While the 1984 by George Orwell transcends the boundary of being just a science fiction and a reflector of changing popular culture towards patriarchal gender bias, the Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? by Phillip K. Dick is largely a science fiction as we know it in the recent times. In the Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? a reader is introduced to such a social scenario where everything is technology based and the basic foundation of social relations have also been altered. The very introductory part of the novel clearly suggests that a reader is about to enter such a world where everything is governed by technology and the spread of such governance has been extended to such an extent that the course of normal human habitat is also controlled by them: “A merry little surge of electricity piped by automatic alarm from the mood organ beside his bed awakened Rick Deckard. Surprised — it always surprised him to find himself awake without prior notice — he rose from the bed, stood up in his multicolored pajamas, and stretched. Now, in her bed, his wife Iran opened her gray, unmerry eyes, blinked, then groaned and shut her eyes again” (Dick, 1996, p. 3). The title of the novel is highly connotative too as it provides considerable focus on the thematic development of the novel. The androids are artificial human beings and completely dependent on technological devices to enjoy the natural human feelings. It is due to the same reason that when they are thinking about adopting a pet, their artificial intelligence is telling them to opt for artificial sheep than the domestic and natural ones: “The Deckards have an electric sheep and dream of – in the sense of yearn for – a real live one. The reasons for this ambition should become clearer as the novel progresses. The question posed by the title seems to be whether androids (artificial humans) desire to have electric sheep (artificial sheep). The choice of animal might also refer to the practice of counting sheep to facilitate sleep, although we do not normally think of machines sleeping – they are either on or off” (Butler, 2005, p. 110). Critics like Butler have found the relation between Rick and Iran has an inescapable economic dimension. Rick and Iran have never seemed to have shared or exchanged the spontaneity of human emotion; rather they have remained like mechanical organs and attempted to complement and supplement each other just for the sake of accomplishing certain tasks: “Dick’s portrayal of Rick and Iran’s relationship also has an economic dimension: it is made clear that Rick is the breadwinner and that Iran stays at home, and is dependent on Rick’s money. It may be the future – or at least 3 January 1992 was in the future when the novel was first published – but the relationship between the sexes is not dissimilar to how it was before the 1970s. On an emotional level, the detail that they sleep in separate beds suggests distance between them, but it also recalls the chastity implied by separate beds in films and sitcoms of the 1950s and 1960s. This is a relationship under some kind of stress” (Butler, 2005, p. 110). Impression the stress in their relationship has been made evident in the initial chapter of the novel. Iran’s reaction to her husband is not only antagonistic but also contradicts the conventional gender role. Though Iran is financially dependent on Rick, however, compared to the conventional approach she is dominating and almost uncompromising when it comes to expressing her own opinion or liking: “"If you dial," Iran said, eyes open and watching, "for greater venom, then I'll dial the same. I'll dial the maximum and you'll see a fight that makes every argument we've had up to now seem like nothing. Dial and see; just try me." She rose swiftly, loped to the console of her own mood organ, stood glaring at him, waiting. He sighed, defeated by her threat” (Dick, 1996, p. 4). It is interesting to see that the society of Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? is entirely capitalist and development of relations, sensibilities, refection of popular culture are oriented according to the social construction. Unlike George Orwell’s novel, Dick has talked about such a social construction that is quite similar to that of the modern Western existence. The technology dependence, realization of human sentiments and respective expose of human beings to the external world each of the aspect occurs through technological medium. It is such a world, where in order to recognize their respective entities human beings are forced to accept the help of technology and consequently submit themselves in hands of the system: “Never in his life had he personally seen a raccoon. He knew the animal only from 3-D films shown on television. For some reason the dust had struck that species almost as hard as it had the birds — of which almost none survived, now. In an automatic response he brought out his much — thumbed Sidney's and looked up raccoon with all the sublistings. The list prices, naturally, appeared in italics; like Percheron horses, none existed on the market for sale at any figure. Sidney's catalogue simply listed the price at which the last transaction involving a raccoon had taken place. It was astronomical” (Dick, 1996, p. 40). The progressive course of the novel gradually unfolds that Rick’s quest gradually helped him to encounter with his real self and consequently he started realizing that how futile, nihilistic and meaningless was his existence. In the end of the novel he emerged as an embodiment of the modernist spirit, of the modernist existentialist crisis. Recognition and approval could only have recovered him from such situation and thus, in search of humane warmth he wanted to see Dave. His final journey made him encounter the actual human feelings that he never experienced before and consequently the journey also becomes highly symbolic as if signifying quest of an individual in search of his true identity irrespective of knowing the inevitable: “Too tired, he thought, to climb. Stopping, he wiped stinging sweat from his eyes, salt tears produced by his skin, his whole aching body. Then, angry at himself, he spat — spat with wrath and contempt, for himself, with utter hate, onto the barren ground. Thereupon he resumed his trudge up the slope, the lonely and unfamiliar terrain, remote from everything; nothing lived here except himself. The heat. It had become hot, now; evidently time had passed. And he felt hunger. He had not eaten for god knew how long. The hunger and heat combined, a poisonous taste resembling defeat ...” (Dick, 1996, p. 230). The two novels, 1984 by George Orwell and Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? by Phillip K. Dick have dealt with the theme of popular culture from different perspectives. Irrespective of the fact that within respective scopes the novels have provided impression of gender issues, relational aspects, humanity and recognition of human entity in different ways, however it is interesting to find that each of the novels has dealt with certain issues that are very much relevant in the postmodern context. While in 1984 the storyline is replete with strong political connotation, on the other hand, in Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? more emphasis has been provided over revival of humanism from an entirely mechanized existence. The world of 1984 contains certain individuals who have the capacity to rebel against the system. Thus, they have acted as supporters of Winston. Moreover, Julia’s active support for Winston in the process of achieving his goal acted as an additional inspiration for him. Compared to Winston’s situation Rick is in a far worse condition. He not only fights alone to emerge as the sole representative of the humanity against a system that is dominated by technology but also had no one with him to share his existentialist crisis during the course of his development as a human entity. Keeping these aspects into consideration, the Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? by Phillip K. Dick would surely earn my support in the context of being evaluated as the best novel of 20th Century. Works Cited Butler, A.M. 2005. “Philip K. Dick, Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?” The Popular & The Canonical: Debating Twentieth-Century Literature (1940-2000). (Ed. David Johnson). Oxfordshire: Routledge. Dick, P.K. 1996. Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?. London: Del Rey Books. Gupta, S. 2005. “Approaching modernism/modernisms”. Aestheticism & Modernism: Debating Twentieth-Century Literature (1900-1960). (Ed. Danson Brown and Suman Gupta). Oxfordshire: Routledge. Gupta, S. 2005. “T.S. Eliot, Pruforck and Other Observations.” Aestheticism & Modernism: Debating Twentieth-Century Literature (1900-1960). (Ed. Danson Brown and Suman Gupta). Oxfordshire: Routledge. Johnson, D. 2005. “Introduction to Part 1”. The Popular & The Canonical: Debating Twentieth-Century Literature (1940-2000). (Ed. David Johnson). Oxfordshire: Routledge. Orwell, G. 2004. Nineteen Eighty Four. Iowa: 1st World Publishing. Watson, N. J. 2005. “Virginia Woolf, Orlando.” Aestheticism & Modernism: Debating Twentieth-Century Literature (1900-1960). (Ed. Danson Brown and Suman Gupta). Oxfordshire: Routledge. Read More