Intuiting Truth

Emerson and the Transcendentalists emphasize that every person has personal access to the Truth if one seeks it. They argue that the Truth is not found in the words of philosophers or religious leaders, but only in each individual’s heart. He says, “To believe your own thought, to believe that what is true for you in your private heart is true for all men—that is genius.” Is there a downside to this unfailing belief in one’s own personal intuition? Are there times when one should seek the wisdom of authorities over personal intuition? Should a person consider what other people (including authorities, philosophers, scientists, religious leaders, etc) think in formulating opinions and beliefs, or should geniuses expect to be misunderstood and push forward regardless of others’ opinions?

A Fool's Paradise

Emerson argues that “Traveling is a fool’s paradise.” He says that one should not travel around to the world “with the hope of finding somewhat greater than he knows.” He believes that all the wisdom people need can be found through experiencing the world right around us more deeply and fully rather than traveling to far off lands. He points out that if he leaves his home in order to escape the sadness he feels inside he will find in far away lands “the stern fact, the sad self, unrelenting, identical that I fled from.” Do you agree with the transcendentalists that all the wisdom a person needs can be accessed right now where we are, or does an educated person need to see the world to really understand?

The Illusion of Progress

Emerson argues that “Society never advances.” He says that “For everything that is given, something is taken.” Do you agree with him that society never advances, and that there are trade-offs for every scientific or technological breakthrough that we make? Are we now better off than aboriginal peoples, or are we just trading one thing for another without truly moving forward?

Realism and Truth

In arguing for realism in literature the realists claimed that words can match reality if they are carefully chosen and well-crafted. The endless detail of a realist novel is an attempt to capture things “as they really are.” When Charles Bellingham says at dinner, “The past of one’s experience doesn’t differ a great deal from the past of one’s knowledge [. . .] it’s really a great deal less vivid than some scenes in a novel that one read when a boy” he is expressing the realist belief that well-chosen and accurate words can simulate Reality. Can words evoke genuine experiences, or are things a person has read always less vivid or Real than actual experiences? Do you live vicariously through the books you read, or do you find reading to be a poor substitute reality? What about television and film? Do you think that your experience of books has more to do with the quality of the writer (i.e. a good writer can create vivid experiences and a mediocre one cannot) or does it have more to do with the medium of language itself?

The Riddle of the Painful Earth

Bellingham says that “The novelist who could interpret the common feelings of commonplace people would have ‘the riddle of the painful earth’ on his tongue.” This is an allusion to Tennyson’s poem “The Palace of Art,” and refers to the human “riddles” that result from trying to find Truth and Right in a confusing/disheartening/painful world. Do you agree that a writer is likely to find Truth and Reality in the daily experiences, thoughts, and objective reality of commonplace people’s lives? Or, on the other hand do you side with the Romantics who believed that a writer can only approach the Truth through abstract symbolism, stylized settings and characters, and an emphasis on individual perspectives? On the third hand, do you think Truth and Reality can’t be approached at all and both kinds of writers should instead just embrace the simulacra?

Realism vs. Entertainment Value

Charles Dickens was sometimes criticized by Realists because although elements of his writing are highly realistic, he often used Romantic characterization and plot. He incorporated amazing and “unrealistic” coincidences into his narrative and had unexpected and improbable plot twists (one character in Bleak House, for example, spontaneously combusts—literally just explodes suddenly and goes up in smoke). He responded that although he wanted his writing to be realistic, it was even more important that it be entertaining to the reader. Having read one of the more “exciting” chapters of The Rise of Silas Lapham, do you think it’s more important for a writer to be honest and faithful to Truth and Reality, or to be entertaining?

What is Good Satire?

Satire is “a verbal caricature that shows a deliberately distorted image of a person, institution, or society for the purpose of pointing out problems.” Which of the writings from the satire packet were most effective in pointing out societal problems? Which were most humorous? What are the most important elements of good satire?

Realist vs. Modern Satire

The examples in the packet were of two types: Realist and Modern. The effectiveness of Twain’s satire emerges directly from the literary paradigm of realism because it enables him to play the “straight man” and mock realism while outwardly participating in it. Similarly, modern satire depends upon perspective—it is the difference between the narrative perspective, the writer’s perspective, and the reader’s perspective that creates the humor and makes the point. Some people argue that satire is a lost art because we are such an ironic and politically correct culture that its effect is reduced. They observe that most modern satire is made up of simple shock-jokes rather than “genuine” satire. Using the packet as evidence, discuss the differences and similarities in the two periods of satire and their relative effectiveness and humor. Feel free to discuss other examples like South Park, Family Guy, The Daily Show, etc.

The Kitchen Sink

We are near the end of the semester now, and surely there are things that you wish we had discussed more in-depth or there are observations that you want to make about this class, literature, rhetoric, philosophy, or just life in general. Similar to the extra credit thread in our class discussion board, this is an open forum for you to ask questions, discuss issues, complain, or argue.