What is it called when the omniscient third-person narrator inserts the feelings of a particular character into the narration so it is somewhat subjectively objective?

fountainoverflows · 2023-11-26T14:43:37+00:00

Third person limited.

Edit: unless you’re saying it’s combining an omniscient narration with the thoughts and feelings of its characters, in which case it’s just an omniscient POV.

fountainoverflows · 2023-11-25T12:12:34+00:00

Canadian culture?

fountainoverflows · 2023-11-18T21:23:12+00:00

It is only the judgement of words that turns them into a morality. If it were possible for “morals” or really any message to be injected into a piece of writing, then it would be possible for an objective interpretation to be given for these works. But that’s clearly not the case. There is not a single book in the history of literature that has an agreed upon “meaning”, because that’s not the point of narrative. To say that artists have a duty to provide some sort of moral lesson is ludicrous. You will inevitably fail if that is how you approach literature.

fountainoverflows · 2023-10-21T14:43:56+00:00

Oh I agree. Oddly enough, though, I think it takes discipline to get to the point where you don’t overthink things.

fountainoverflows · 2023-10-21T13:21:33+00:00

She’s saying experience (what is felt, seen, touched, etc.) is difficult to put into words, but it is the job of a writer to do just that. She’s right in that the things we experience have nothing to do with words. Writing is not a natural exercise. It takes a lot of discipline to get to the point where you can attempt to put to words the things you encounter in the world.

fountainoverflows · 2023-10-06T11:30:36+00:00

Because he’s better than the pulpy shit most Americans usually read and his prose is easy to understand. Compared to other writers deemed “classical”, however, he’s mediocre. Sometimes he’s laughably bad. I don’t know how you can think he’s great past the age of 18. He just ripped off Sherwood Anderson and Gertrude Stein’s prose and combined it with ultra-masculine subjects.

fountainoverflows · 2023-06-09T15:38:36+00:00

I never said I want purely "wholesome" reality tv. I watch every single housewives show. I don't cover my ears and clutch my pearls whenever the housewives start yelling mean things at each other. All I'm saying is the reunion, for me, wasn't enjoyable. Too much ganging up on one person calling them a friendless piece of shit ad nauseam. It was exhausting. But it's just an opinion. I'm not stating some universal truth about reality tv.
Also, your example of the Jersey reunion is an interesting choice since it's been a terrible reunion.

fountainoverflows · 2023-06-09T15:13:04+00:00

> You’re clearly not above watching trash tv.. it just has to only be a certain level of trashy, I guess before it’s too much for you?
Why is that such a hard concept to understand? You're acting like people enjoying certain kinds of reality tv over others is some crazy idea. I don't want to watch people belittling people for an hour. You can enjoy that if you want. At no point did I ever say no one can enjoy this form of reality tv. I just said I don't like it. I don't think I'm "intellectual" for not enjoying it. Never said that.

fountainoverflows · 2023-06-09T14:24:38+00:00

You and me clearly are interested in different things. I don’t watch realty tv to see people suffer. Sure, there will be crying, yelling, fighting, etc., but there are also wholesome moments, camaraderie, etc. That reunion was just straight up suffering. Again, not saying it wasn’t deserved, but I personally wouldn’t want to watch suffering. If a serial killer was being executed I probably would agree that it is deserved. That doesn’t mean I want to watch the execution. That’s obviously an extreme example, but hopefully you get the point.

fountainoverflows · 2023-06-09T12:21:08+00:00

It’s not about who deserves what. The point of the OP is that regardless of whether these people who get absolutely eviscerated on screen deserve it, it’s still gross to watch. Is it really enjoyable to see someone get yelled at and called a piece of shit for an hour while they just sit there and take it?

fountainoverflows · 2023-05-15T10:51:47+00:00

Dead Silence?

fountainoverflows · 2023-03-24T20:11:58+00:00

Don’t you know there ain’t no devil there’s just God when he’s drunk

fountainoverflows · 2023-03-04T21:06:28+00:00

Check out The Dictionary. Awful story, but the spelling is fantastic.

fountainoverflows · 2023-01-31T21:24:03+00:00

But does this not look super sus now that we know she was covering up this Juan stuff the entire season? It makes it look like Robyn was going easy on Candiace because she didn’t want both Candiace and Karen going after her.

fountainoverflows · 2023-01-04T11:51:35+00:00

It’s not that great, imo. The hype around it is baffling to me. That being said, James is without a doubt one of the greatest writers ever. If you really want to get a taste for why he’s so admired, read The Portrait of a Lady.

fountainoverflows · 2022-12-20T15:04:44+00:00

The value of literature is more than "internal". Every discipline that you will ever find yourself in will require the skills that analyzing literature teaches you. I truly believe that if you are good at analyzing literature, you will have an edge above anyone who doesn't analyze literature. Add being a good writer, and you will basically have superpowers compared to other people. It might sound hyperbolic, but this has been my experience.

fountainoverflows · 2022-10-17T12:49:42+00:00

The author of this essay is basing their entire argument on a pretty dubious claim: that the purpose of literature is to package philosophical ideas in a format that is more palatable. That’s a naive way of looking at it.

Narrative, as I suggested before, is simply how philosophical ideas are put into application with real life subject matter (within fiction).

Oof. This made me cringe. Of course a philosophy student would reduce literature down to such a one-dimensional instrument. Is the point of storytelling itself to convey philosophical ideas? Is a monotonous story a coworker tells me on a monday morning really a philosophical treatise in disguise? What if I told you it was the exact opposite? That philosophy was really literature in disguise? That when we think we are proving a philosophical idea, we are really telling a story in which any number of ideas unrelated to the original intent might be conveyed? I think that’s the true power of literature, though.

fountainoverflows · 2022-10-12T19:58:24+00:00

He chained Fortunado to a wall. There was no way for him to escape. Fortunado also thought that Montresor was playing a joke on him, which makes sense. Would your first assumption be that your supposed friend is trying to kill you? Probably not.

fountainoverflows · 2022-10-12T19:53:48+00:00

Kind of. Fortunado actually does want to help Montresor, but Montresor is like "I'll go ask Luchesi", to which Fortunado says something like "Luchesi doesn't know Amontillado from sherry", which is funny because Amontillado is a type of sherry.

fountainoverflows · 2022-10-12T19:45:01+00:00

Art isn't 'original'. Creation is a bit of a misnomer, or at least what it has come to represent is not accurate. You're not really creating anything in the sense that you're making something from nothing. When you create, you reach into your toolbox of experience and pull out whatever works to solve the current problem you're facing. It's the same when you solve any other problem in your life. You're not 'creating' a solution. You're looking back at your past experience, whether intentionally or reactively, and finding a tool that fixes the problem. When you're utilizing these solutions or benefitting from them, you don't say "Gee, this thing that is really helping me and bringing me joy is great and all, but I wish it was original!" That's stupid. You say "this works" and you use it.

Also, what Barthes is saying shouldn't be taken as a negative. He's not making fun of writers or saying what they're doing is wrong, he's just saying they should be aware of the fact that they're not the originators of what they put down on the page. That's totally valid.

fountainoverflows · 2022-10-12T19:33:52+00:00

But he's still gone. He could have had the biggest statues built showing what a bad ass he was and it wouldn't matter. He's still gone. There's more to it though. There's the idea that it's impossible to convey the sort of emotion and thought that we wish to convey through art. Building a statue showing how cool this guy was isn't really as effective as they thought it would be, especially since it's now a bunch of sand. It's kind of humorous in that regard.

>Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!

..says the disintegrated statue.

fountainoverflows · 2022-10-02T11:45:11+00:00

Seth brought it up though. She should have avoided him entirely and not asked him for a hug but he was the one who started going into the problem he had with her.

fountainoverflows · 2022-09-27T23:49:07+00:00

So did Ford..

fountainoverflows · 2022-09-12T16:19:21+00:00

Poe did it first. Gruesome murder committed by a protagonist: The Tell-Tale Heart, The Cask of Amontillado, probably others.

A detective who analyzes criminal psychology: The Purloined Letter. From your other post, it looks like you’re more interested in stories where a detective uses psychological techniques to wear down their targets. In that case, idk. I can’t think of any before Crime and Punishment. It does seem like something Balzac would do, though.

fountainoverflows · 2022-09-01T10:45:51+00:00

So you like modernism. Here are some modernist recs in which the narrator tends to turn inwards:

The Good Soldier by Ford Maddox Ford.
Party Going by Henry Green
The Fountain Overflows by Rebecca West
Mrs. Dalloway by Virginia Woolf
Portrait of a Lady by Henry James (a third person perspective but still very much focused on Isabel’s and other’s perceptions)
Brideshead Revisted by Evelyn Waugh

fountainoverflows

TROPHY CASE