LITERATURE AND MODERNISM
Alan Friedman suggests that the ‘roots’ of modernist innovation ‘lie tangled deep in the modern experience. Causes in fields other than literature there doubtless were – a confluence of psychological, philosophical, scientific, social, economic and political causes, analogues and explanations.’
Choose any two of Friedman’s ‘fields other than literature’ (e.g. philosophy and psychology) and identify their possible effects on modernist writing.
The confluent areas or fields mentioned by Alan Freidman clearly have been observed to have an impact on modernist writing, especially modernist fiction. Discussing fields other than literature, Friedman suggests that the art of modernist writing is shaped by a general phenomenon of modernism, which pertains more to psychological, philosophical, social, scientific, economic, and political explanations Bourne-Taylor and Mildenberg, 2010). The confluence of these areas can be traced back to the history of modern literature, where the roots of the modernism phenomenon and its features have come to be characterized as modernist writing today. Friedman identifies scientific and technological innovations that have transformed the content, form, and shape of modernist writing since its inception. Thus, the roots of modern writing and modernism phenomena are closely linked to scientific and technical development that changed the way people think along with transforming their outlook and perception. Technology and art are linked and interconnected in more ways than one (Dennis Brown, The Modernist Self in Twentieth-Century English Literature, 109). Therefore, scientific and technological innovations have impacted the general phenomenon of modernism and evolved modernist writing over the years. Scientific and technological advancements brought about greater literacy. Mass printing and production of books in the early 20th century led to a fall in the rate of novel/book prices, changing the print industry for good. This helped an increasing number of literate people to take an interest in modernist literature and writing. Also, the importance of science shaping the lives and perceptions of the society for a better future compelled further research into literature and language, the investigation of which further helped shape modernist writing and change the way people look at modernism (Lawrence Rainey, The cultural economy of Modernism, 35).
Highlighting the possible effects of psychology in shaping modernist writing, insight, ideas, conceptual thinking, feelings, reflection, personality, etc. are all considered from a mentalist approach, or to dive into the psychological intuitions and barriers of readers. For example, Sigmund Freud’s psychoanalysis that suggested the strongest psyches of a human being- the fear of losing an individual or the loss of any individual value, was incorporated into a number of modernist literature and writing. Usage of the psychological phenomena in modernist writing can be seen by James Joyce in Ulysses (1922) and in The Sound and the Fury by William Faulkner. Examples like these introduced elements of psychological confluence like mentally handicapped characters and the perception of time and space. In the late 1890s, German novelists like Stefan Zweig and Arthur Schnitzler were amongst the first ones to incorporate psychological elements into their writings, taking inspiration from Freud’s psychoanalysis theories. This gave modernistic writing a new dimension where literature provided new and fresh insights, compelling readers to relate better to the story and its characters. Additionally, psychoanalysis using memory to establish a relation between time and space was what modernist writers started seeking by the beginning of the 20th century (Stephen Kern 1983). It led to modern literature comprising an organized series of psychological elements to evoke mindful, conscious, and subconscious reflection and thinking. Thus, Freud’s psychoanalysis changed the way writers understood and perceived human behaviors in a different manner, leading to deliberate attempts of the incorporation of psychological elements in modernist literature. Psychological problems related to conflict and perception started unraveling psychoanalytical methods by modernist writers, causing feelings of fear, agony, self-awareness, conscious, and more amongst readers.
‘The real metaphysical problem today is the word. The epoch when the writer photographed the life about him with the mechanics of words . . . is happily drawing to its close. The new artist of the word has recognised the autonomy of language’ (Eugene Jolas). Suggest how Jolas’s ‘metaphysical problem’ and ‘autonomy’ figure in modernist literature, and how each contributed to a new ‘epoch’.
Eugene Jolas’ comment above appeared in Our Exagmination Round His Factification for Incamination of Work in Progress (1922) by Samuel Beckett, where metaphysical problems by Jolas were identified in the ‘word’ of the language used, and the autonomy or the autonomous ability of a word to be free-flowing in its own way. In the early 20th century of modernist writing, it can be found that the science, psychology, and philosophy behind the fragmentation and disintegration of words were some crucial aspects of language and literature during that time. However, Jolas’ views on a word and its autonomy gave way to a new ‘epoch’ being constructed by modern writers since then (Michael Bell, The metaphysics of Modernism, 24). The belief behind this comment by Jolas is to transform the language and writing used for modernism, as compared to traditional writing and language used. Modernist writing requires a level of autonomy in words, language, and ideas that can be free-flowing and further push the society into being more insightful of such literature. The magical and autonomous weaving of words provided a breakthrough to modern literature in terms of archaic conditions that cannot be used during the modernist period. One new ‘epoch’ was seen as a transitional change in speech and language used in modern fiction. Speech is not static, especially in the English language. Words need to flow with autonomy and the non-static nature of figures of speeches and elements of language is what gave modernist writing its value and worth. Thus, James Joyce in Ulysses (1920) made the autonomy of form and content more visible after Jolas’ comment, where there was a transformation seen in the kind of words and language used by modernist writers. The autonomy of language and the free flow of word as a form of a new art or epoch was respected in Finnegans Wake. Jolas comment of focusing on not writing about something but rather, write that thing led to a separation of words and their relations with language and meaning. An example of this can be seen in A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man by James Joyce and other modernist writers like Gertrude Stein. Therefore, an epoch can be seen in ways of undermining the conventional use of language and speech on modern literature, avoiding repetitive forms of prose and speech, not following a punctual structure and let the autonomy of words help in attracting attention on the texture and style of the writing itself.
‘This extraordinary discrepancy between time on the clock and time in the mind is less known than it should be and deserves fuller investigation’ (Virginia Woolf, Orlando). Investigate modernist writing and its period further in ways Woolf’s comment suggests.
With the influence of various non-traditional elements that helped modernist writers explore new dimensions of social behavior based on psychological facets, another such possibility was seen in the time and space component. Virginia Woolf rightly states that the remarkable correlation and distance between the clock time and time running in the mind had never really been explored until the phenomenon of modernism brought elements other than just language and literature to life. Modernist writing and fiction literature were seen as a way of asking oneself the right questions, carry emotions, build insights, skeptical and rational thinking, and the awakening of the unconscious and subconscious. These forms began to be used comprehensively as time and space, defying the chronological structure of fiction literature that was followed by writers until the late 19th century. At the time, very few writers had explored the essence of time and space to be used in fiction novels. Thus, the clock time and time in the mind were used as essential components to create a sense of confusion, or rather, put the story in a way that is aesthetically real. To ignite feelings further on expectations, change, and temporal confusion, modernist writers explored time in ways that had not been experienced before – one way was to break the sequence or chronology, in an attempt to integrate linear timing with human desires and memories, the ability to shift memories from present to the past, and eventually make time the central theme of novels during the 20th century. Therefore, time can be seen as an essential intention of modern literature where writers tried to establish more linearity, freedom, and structure the story in a free flow and non-rigid sequence. Apart from Woolf’s comment about relating time concepts in modern literature further, one interesting way was found in The Sound and The Fury by Faulkner- ‘
When the shadow of the sash appeared on the curtains……..wheels clicking and clicking behind it, not knowing any better’.
The excerpt above from The Sound and The Fury displays a rather unconventional form of time-lapse, where there is a clear distinction in the time of the clock and time of the mind through a free narration that is based on thoughts, feelings, and language. In the story based on the excerpt above, the narrator Quentin breaks the clock time, after which the author completely defies the non-traditional sequence of exploring time and frames the story ahead solely according to the time of the mind. This idea of using time was seen as a very contrasted and dynamic way of evoking modernism in both language and literature by fiction writers. The sense of punctuality considered with time saw a breakthrough in modern fiction literature, where writers became keener on exploring the vagaries of memories and the human mind. Another way of exploring time concepts was observed in In Search of Lost Time’ (1913-1927) by Marcel Proust. This novel transformed the way writers were able to correlate time that is real and time that is based on memories. Shifting human memories from present to the past did require effort, but the same didn’t stop modernist writers from exploring the concepts of memories so as to bring more contrast and modern elements to life through their novels (Dennis Brown, The Modernist Self in Twentieth-Century English Literature, 109).
‘It is useless to go to the great men writers for help . . . a man’s sentence . . . was unsuited for a woman’s use’ (Virginia Woolf, A Room of One’s Own). Discus ways in which modernist language and literary form may have been shaped by the motives for innovation Woolf’s remark implies.
The above comment by Virginia Woolf in A Room of One’s Own was the beginning of an impressionist and feminine modernism movement. By the late 19th century, women were seen to come up front on issues with great ferocity and assertion, which was also followed by the suffragette movement in England where women participated in violent and aggressive movements for more equality. Thus, writers like James Joyce and Virginia Woolf through their subjective fiction stories led to creating a social difference by women and for women. With the new role, energy, and wave of feminism in the European parts of the country, modernist writers at this time found a new way of promoting the feminism culture through subjective and impressionist writing features in their novels (T.S. Eliot 1941). A novel like A Room of One’s Own is where Woolf questions the difference between what a male writer from what a woman would. In other words, Woolf’s comment above suggests how male writers celebrated the nuance and virtues of being a man in their novels, while female writers were trying to encourage feminism. Additionally, Woolf suggested that a novel does not necessarily have to contain itself within the boundaries of one specific sex, taking the example of Rudyard Kipling’s novels that lack feminine impressionism and characteristics in their stories. Thus, the comment above only shows that Virginia Woolf was against this inequality between how men and women writers indulged in modernist writing and that literature produced by men are completely different than those produced by women. This though on breaking out of conventional vows by women and take a more modernist approach towards feminism through language and literature during that time shaped the social structure where schools become more sensitive to the thoughts, emotions, and sense of women in reality (Griselda Pollock 2007). This movement of modern feminism through literature was seen as a major step towards creating social equality between the two genders, especially at a time where women were expected to follow and run on stereotypes, like in the novels of Jane Austen. This female impressionism fostered by modernist writers like Virginia Woolf helped open up a new possibility for women to read and write while liberating the women of the society from the conventional and stereotypical loops and rely less on an education and social system that favored men and other higher social classes (Marianne Dekoven, Modernism and Gender, 182 & 183). Impressionist art used to evoke feminism were slowly brought to paintings, as such impressionist elements looked more real that showed the real condition and status of women in the society.
Thus, Virginia Woolf can also be called as an advocator of modern feminism. In the Lighthouse by Virginia Woolf is a clear example of how she turned to women as the main protagonists and started developing stories with a sense and level of modern feminism in her characters and storyline. In the Lighthouse is not only a distinction between the opposite genders of the society, but also focuses on the female protagonist, Mrs. Ramsay’s search for a true identity, liberalism, and freedom through her womanhood and independence at its best. This difference led to a huge social impact, where women interests and the reality of their lives were highlighted, leading to the innovation of a new expression of female consciousness (Quentin Bell 1990). Novels started unraveling thoughts, emotions, and ideas by and for women, which was quite unlike the literature scenario until the late 19th century. This way, modern fiction was a form of contemplated reality where women were breaking out from conventional rules and taking small and crucial steps forward in being identified as conscious beings in both modern literature and real life.
Georg Lukács charged modernism with ‘surrender to subjectivity’, ‘denial of history’, ‘negation of art’, and evasion of the political world generally. How far can it be defended against these charges?
There are huge concerns with George Lukács disbelief, dissatisfaction, and criticism about modern literature. As compared to other writers and philosophers, Lukács has a very different notion about the way modernism is depicted by writers during the time. Both Marx and Lukács considered modernism as a crucial conflict between capitalism and Marxism, especially when modernist elements like Romanticism, Realism, and Naturalism in modern literature are considered. In The Theory of the Novel, Lukács charges modernist writing with being fragmented that only focuses on immediate reflection instead of focussing on the total modernist theory of the society (Georg Lukács 1971). The point of his view related modern literature more with philosophy and politics, instead of focusing on the aesthetic value of such literature. His antagonistic views and debates isolated the autonomy of literature completely, and this change of subjective arguments on modern literature by Lukács time and again only shows his level of subjectivism against modernist writers. In other words, he accused the subjectivism of modern literature of being opposed to the knowledge of nature and its lack of awakening t consciousness levels of the society. However, Lukács arguments, in this case, cannot really be relied upon as he urged modernist writers to look away from the aesthetical value of art and convert it into pure knowledge and scientific philosophies. He believed that modern literature and language must be based on non-subjective reality like the fear of loss and suffering, and deny all other realistic features and head only towards a one-dimensional direction of realism. Thus, Georg Lukács has been charged with trying to relate modern literature with defeat and despair, with transitional shifts of his narrow and open-minded thoughts on modernist literature (Max Weber, Reading and Commentary on Modernity, 58). Lukács completely disregards the interior art and realist forms of modernism, further confirming Lukács’ inability comprehended artistic realism and subjective matter just like Hegel. Lukács could not really find beauty in the art that modern literature made attempts to depict back then, leading to a pessimistic and utopian series of ideologies and theories. Lukács has even seen to deeply follow the principles and ideologies of Hegel and Kierkegaard, where he disregarded the art of modern literature as being destructive to art in totality and being non-subjective to other modern elements of the society (Hugh Silverman, Heidegger and Merleau-Ponty: Interpreting Hegel, 226). All these perceptions about art projected by Lukács were mainly based on the philosophical elements seemed to change slowly over time. In The Historical Novel and The Meaning of Contemporary Realism, Lukács demands more meaningful and realistic views from modern literature, but the same was declared impossible and Lukács ends up criticizing modernist artists on a negative front. ‘Pure reflection is profoundly inartistic’, showing that Lucas changing views on the fine line between artistic and inartistic elements in modern writing cannot really be considered as a viable justification to his criticism of modernism depicted in literature then. The fact that Lukács views only centralized on the subjectivism, revolutionist, and reasoning of art and artistic elements, arguments by Kant where art is considered something more than revolutionary defying scientific and mathematical reasons is why Lukács views on modernism cannot be justified and considered true for modern literature during the early 20th century (Lewis Pericles, Modernism, Nationalism, and the Novel, 38).
- ‘There died a myriad,/ . . . / For an old bitch gone in the teeth,/ (Ezra Pound, ‘Hugh Selwyn Mauberley’). Assess how far the First World War revealed ‘a botched civilisation’, and with what consequences for the literature of the time.
With the evolution of modernism and modern literature in the early 20th century, the First World War managed to change the face of modern literature in drastic ways. The above line depicts Ezra Pound’s outrage in the aftermath of the First World War and the kind of consequences it had in the overall society. With this outrage, an increasing number of writers were motivated to evoke self-conscious through their writing. T.S. Eliot, James Joyce, and Virginia Woolf were some of the writers who took up to self-conscious writing to and achieve a more substantial and realistic goal through modern literature. As such, an adequate transition can be seen in modern literature post-WWI. A few ways in which modernist writers tried to achieve this was by prioritizing the individual mind and its insights and emotions, break the boundaries of language and traditional structure of literature, and form content with experimentation and new ideas. Such experimented literature after World War I includes The Waste Land (1922) by TS Eliot, To the Lighthouse (1928) by Virginia Woolf and Ulysses (1920) by James Joyce. Thus, the disturbance and destruction created by the First World War encouraged writers to explore different forms of representations and experimentations in their writing after that, which can be observed in The Great War and the Language of Modernism by Vincent Sherry (Sanford Schwartz 1985). Such works were a continuation of incorporating modern elements and develop new ways of experiencing and expressing concerns, ideas, and emotions through modern literature. Therefore, it can be safely assumed that the First World War surged literary forms and output, where an increasing number of women writers were able to pen their thoughts on the kind of repercussions such wars and conflicts had on the society and individuals as a whole. People were touched by the way wars and their consequences were depicted, and the heroic sentiments projected in poems like that of Ezra Pound and Hugh Selwyn Mauberley. World War I created the images that lead to fear of fragmentation . Words such as “torn into pieces”, “fall apart”, “break down”, “disintegrate”, “shock” and “fragmentation” all found their direct combat meaning (James Longenbach, Modern poetry, 134). Violence became the metaphor of the soul, as violence used as a theme in modernist fiction had the ability to shock readers and urge them to contemplate and reflect on their inner thoughts and react to conflicts on the outside. Modern language and literature thus, started to influence and instigate the society, where writers no longer followed a chronological sequence to the construction and literary elements used in modern writing.
References
Whitworth, Michael H. Modernism. The Cambridge Companion to Modernism. Blackwell Pub., 2007.
Bell, Michael. The metaphysics of Modernism. The Cambridge Companion to Modernism. Cambridge University Press. 2011. Print. pp 9-32.
Rainey, Lawrence. The cultural economy of Modernism. The Cambridge Companion to Modernism. Cambridge University Press. 1999. Print. pp 33-69.
Dekoven, Marianne. Modernism and Gender. The Cambridge Companion to Modernism. Cambridge University Press. 1999. Print. pp 174- 193.
Mildenberg, Ariane. Understanding Merleau-Ponty, Understanding Modernism. 2018.
Bourne-Taylor, Carole, and Ariane Mildenberg. Phenomenology, Modernism And Beyond. Peter Lang, 2010.
Lukács, Georg. The Theory of the Novel. Trans. Anna Bostock. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 1971. pp 36–37.
Virginia Woolf. The Waves. 1931. p. 219.
Trotter, David. The Modernist Novel. The Cambridge Companion to Modernism. Cambridge University Press. 2011. Print. pp. 69-98 (David Trotter, The Modernist Novel,
Brown, Dennis. The Modernist Self in Twentieth-Century English Literature. Hampshire. 1989. p. 109
Weber, Max. Reading and Commentary on Modernity. Maiden: Blackwell. 2005. p 58.
Silverman, Hugh J. Heidegger and Merleau-Ponty: Interpreting Hegel. Research in Phenomenology 7. 1977. pp. 222 and 223.
Friedman, Alan. The turn of the novel. New York: Oxford University Press. 1966. Pp 143 – 185
Longenbach, James. Modern poetry. The Cambridge Companion to Modernism. Cambridge University Press. 2011. pp. 99-127
Pericles, Lewis. Modernism, Nationalism, and the Novel. Cambridge University Press. 2000. pp 38-39.
Pollock, Griselda. Encounters in the Virtual Feminist Museum: Time, Space and the Archive. Routledge. 2007.
Kern, Stephen. The Culture of Time and Space. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 1983.
Eliot, T.S. “Virginia Woolf’s Obituary.” Horizon. May 1941.
Bell, Quentin. Virginia Woolf: A Biography. London: Hogarth Press, 1990.
Schwartz, Sanford. The Matrix of Modernism: Pound, Eliot, and Early Twentieth Century Thought. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. 1985.