| Steve 的个人资料The Act of Becoming: The...照片日志留言簿 |  工具  帮助 |
|
|
9月15日 Literary Art or Run O' the Mill Fiction What makes a piece artistic?
There has been some debate recently (at Absoulute Write) whether The Body--Stand by Me to
you filmaholics--written by Stephen King, is a literary story or just your average fiction?
I believe it definitely has literary qualities. But the question is do those qualifiers
alone make it literary? This (to me) seems really a to each his/her own judgement. Art, like
beauty: IS in the eye of the beholder. And the perspective changes from viewer to viewer.
That's just the way it is. Perhaps so existence can be seen through a multitude of
colorful lenses. Like that of an insect eye forming a kaledeoscopic array by which
to observe it all.
Why does everything have to be so rigidly classified anyhow?
I get that it's necessary to say that this story has more of this or that aspect to make it
easier for the reader to identify in the library/stores, but the best stories can't be so
easily categorized.
Take Stephen King's The Gunslinger: The Dark Tower for instance. It's more like genre
potpourri than any one thing. It could be called a Western. You could label it Sci-Fi (not
to be confused with the idiotic SyFy.) There's plenty of romance within the tome. At
times... Oh the HORROR!!! More often than not it is very mysterious, though there isn't much
by way of dead bodies being found in a locked room scenario. And it's Thrilling beyond
belief. Not to mention there's a kind of historical saga ingrained: Always Roland. I could
probably name many more but I think you get the idea.
The Gunslinger is my favorite story of all time, not despite the fact that it's some
schizoid that can't make it's mind up, but rather because of it. It's the one all inclusive
work where an author chose not to settle. It's almost as if Steve lit upon Bruce Lee's
philosophy in life: And took that which was truly useful, used it to the best of his
ability, and discarded what was not.
I've heard a bunch of people criticize his inclusion of references to other fictional
characters, from other's work as well as his own, and frankly I think their whole way of
thinking is flawed. Whether it was a purposeful or that's just how it came out, this
method provided a kind of belief blanket which amounted to the purest comfort in knowing all
the worlds real and fictional alike were connected. And no one litters their stories with
more colorful realism than Steve King does.
There are probably a thousand people out there, at this very moment, arguing whether this
seven novel story itself is or isn't literary. I'd venture that certainly some of it is. I
believe that's how it is for most stories out there. They may in fact contain portions of
that are wholly literary.
Why does it have to be all or nothing?
So few things in life are so permanent (aside from death, and say taxes, and some would
argure not even those.) So why is it that a story must be?
I'll tell ya why I think it's necessary: Because the Elitests would have you
believe there is no other way. That time honored traditions aren't to be molested. Heaven
forbid they have something in common with the masses. It seems that the general
concensus of attitudes tend to think were a simple commoner to read something they deem
literary, that the reader should have no right to judge whether or not it actually was, for
themselves. That their gilded opinions are more valuable than that of the person who reads
solely for entertainment.
In closing I pose this question to you my fellow reader. It's just about a given that at
some point in your life you've questioned everything--even the Lord God's word--then why
not question theirs? 引用通告此日志的引用通告 URL 是： http://stevedenton79.spaces.live.com/blog/cns!1D899783DCCEB3A5!204.trak 引用此项的网络日志
|
|
|
