Friday, April 16, 2010

The Blatantly Less Obvious

Narayan’s short narrative of the young Swami and his group of friends might seem at surface level to be fairly trivial. In contrast to some other authors we have read, such as Joyce, he used very simple and straightforward language, and presented his ideas in one short and concrete narrative. Though not simply one narrative, My Life in the Bush of Ghosts was presented rather similarly. The author of Bush of Ghosts also had some extremely interesting ideas he wished to portray, and using the life story of one young boy, also found a simple means through which to express them. Though presented in simple concrete narratives, each is truly much more abstract and though-provoking than one might initially presuppose, and I find it extremely interesting that the author’s chose to present their ideas in this manner. When possessing a message which one would wish to portray, it is often times easier to simply spell out one’s argument in a clear-cut fashion which is easy for the reader to grasp and understand. One could then argue that each of these two authors found a more artistic way with which to get their messages across in choosing rather to incorporate and slightly obscure their thoughts in the form of a narrative.

2 comments:

  1. Great point about the choice of Narayan's language. I am of the school of thought that believes that if you want to say something, just say it. I dislike complicated, superfluous language without a purpose and stories without plot. I can appreciate them as works of literary merit, but I am far less likely to understand an author's greater message if I have no idea what's going on. Narayan also includes lots of dialogue, which I think gives unique insight into the characters that purely descriptive novels do not.

    My Life in the Bush of Ghosts drove me up the wall because I wasn't sure which incidents could be mapped onto greater historical context, but the Tutuola's language was simple, yet vivid enough to allow me to have a view of this ghost world he created.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think this is a very good point to make, Holly. Narayan took the colonization issue of India and put it into a light seen from a child's perspective, which in all honesty is a great way for a foreigner to be introduced to such a foreign land and concept. Not being from India, it is easy to be swayed in many directions on the issue when presented in forms of news articles, essays, etc. However, with literature, and particularly that with a child's perspective, the reader is drawn into a world of people (family and friends), details (descriptions of people and places) and plots (riots, strikes, cricket, etc).
    The reader can be likened to this child because he is new to this world too (therefore, "young") and innocent to the political goings-on of the nation. Therefore, it is easier to follow a child's view of taking in political events and accepting them as real within the story, which in turn gives life to a reality otherwise unknown.

    ReplyDelete