A Dear Diary Moment
I can't believe I am almost half way through the semester. Time is flying by quickly and things as they are now will be missed once the summer comes. I've got a lot of material to read and papers to write this weekend, but I'm excited, because earlier today we were given an extra credit opportunity with one of my favorite professors. Class never feels like class - instead, we're a group of friends that come together to talk about what we've read and argue back and forth. I laugh more in that one hour span than I do most weeks and that is saying something. But this is sort of tangential to the extra credit opportunity. I get to write a poem emulating Paul Muldoon's "Sleeve Notes," which is basically a poem about songs that bring you back to particular memories. It should be fun, but considering I had and still have an odd taste in music, the final product should be interesting to say the least.
Earlier today we got into a debate in my Hemingway/Mamet class and when you pit me and another hot headed kid against one another, things get interesting. We were discussing the difference between fact and truth and how this pertains to memoirs, autobiography, and fiction. The book that instigated this conversation was none other than "A Moveable Feast" by Hemingway, which recounts his various encounters with prolific writers in France when he was younger. We talked about whether or not it mattered that the story was accurate, whether or not Hemingway's depiction of people was true.
Putting libel aside, I would say that it does not matter. Oscar Wilde once said that "it is the spectator, and not life, that art really mirrors." I think you can learn from literature, regardless of whether it is "true" or not. I hate using the term because in my opinion there is no such thing as an absolute truth, but what is the difference between A Farewell to Arms and a living soldier's account of World War I? We can take things from it and grow as people. And besides, Twain was famous for saying that "the truth is often stranger than fiction; fiction, after all, must stick to the possibilities."
But let's go back to the idea of Fact and Truth. After I had said that there is no such thing as truth, another student replied that I was incorrect because certain things are undeniably true, for instance, student A walking through the doorway. I rebutted by defining his argument as fact and went further to describe it as the physical motion through space. Fact correlates directly with this idea of physical motion, but this completely removes the human and often more interesting element: the how, what and why, which are ultimately realms of "truth" and consequently subjective modifiers. Without subjective truth, facts remain lifeless and literature is not possible.
However, even facts may be subjective in nature. One could use two facts, for example, that "The War on Terror started in 2001" and "The War on Terror ended in 2xxx." However, this in and of itself is troubling. By noting these two facts, you elevate them above other facts and give them an artificially raised importance. Moreover, choosing them over others is a subjective choice on the part of the historian. What about other events? Which do we choose to include or omit? Fact, therefore, becomes subjective in particular and exciting ways.
When someone comes to me claiming to know the "truth" about something, I am always hesitant to believe them. "Truth" is a dirty word that people are attracted to, perhaps because it makes it easier to move on with our choices. If we develop an artificial layer of logic we can then continue to build upon it as a means of stability. Otherwise I suppose we would never be able to get anything done. But it was a really interesting and engaging discussion.
You can surmise from this that:
Two of my classes are fukawesome.
Two of my classes are 'kay.
One of my classes is ugh. UGH.
With that said I now leave you my audience of unknowns.
Earlier today we got into a debate in my Hemingway/Mamet class and when you pit me and another hot headed kid against one another, things get interesting. We were discussing the difference between fact and truth and how this pertains to memoirs, autobiography, and fiction. The book that instigated this conversation was none other than "A Moveable Feast" by Hemingway, which recounts his various encounters with prolific writers in France when he was younger. We talked about whether or not it mattered that the story was accurate, whether or not Hemingway's depiction of people was true.
Putting libel aside, I would say that it does not matter. Oscar Wilde once said that "it is the spectator, and not life, that art really mirrors." I think you can learn from literature, regardless of whether it is "true" or not. I hate using the term because in my opinion there is no such thing as an absolute truth, but what is the difference between A Farewell to Arms and a living soldier's account of World War I? We can take things from it and grow as people. And besides, Twain was famous for saying that "the truth is often stranger than fiction; fiction, after all, must stick to the possibilities."
But let's go back to the idea of Fact and Truth. After I had said that there is no such thing as truth, another student replied that I was incorrect because certain things are undeniably true, for instance, student A walking through the doorway. I rebutted by defining his argument as fact and went further to describe it as the physical motion through space. Fact correlates directly with this idea of physical motion, but this completely removes the human and often more interesting element: the how, what and why, which are ultimately realms of "truth" and consequently subjective modifiers. Without subjective truth, facts remain lifeless and literature is not possible.
However, even facts may be subjective in nature. One could use two facts, for example, that "The War on Terror started in 2001" and "The War on Terror ended in 2xxx." However, this in and of itself is troubling. By noting these two facts, you elevate them above other facts and give them an artificially raised importance. Moreover, choosing them over others is a subjective choice on the part of the historian. What about other events? Which do we choose to include or omit? Fact, therefore, becomes subjective in particular and exciting ways.
When someone comes to me claiming to know the "truth" about something, I am always hesitant to believe them. "Truth" is a dirty word that people are attracted to, perhaps because it makes it easier to move on with our choices. If we develop an artificial layer of logic we can then continue to build upon it as a means of stability. Otherwise I suppose we would never be able to get anything done. But it was a really interesting and engaging discussion.
You can surmise from this that:
Two of my classes are fukawesome.
Two of my classes are 'kay.
One of my classes is ugh. UGH.
With that said I now leave you my audience of unknowns.
No comments:
Post a Comment