Friday, May 31, 2019
Symbolism and Realism Essay -- Symbolism Realism Literature Essays
Symbolism and RealismSymbolism and Realism were distinct but parallel literary movements that swept Europe and much of the world in the late 19th century. Social order was one of the main concerns of Symbolists and Realists, which reflects the unprecedented growth of the middle syllabus and its set across Europe during that time period. Morality and ambition were homogenized and, in some cases, institutionalized to a degree never before seen in civilized connection, and many intellectuals and artists saw this homogenization as a conformist social force that threatened individual perspective. Thus, Symbolists and Realists works lashed out against social institutions and values and were particularly concerned about the domestic sphere, because of its dependence on social norms and shaping effect on individual perceptions were disturbed by the decaying effects of conformity and were troubled by the disconnection between modern individuals. Moreover, Symbolists and Realists argue t hat these three themes of domesticity, decay, and disconnection are linked, a connection explored especially in the Symbolist Charles Baudelaires poem, Spleen LXVIII (1862), in the Realist Leo Tolstoys novella, The Death of Ivan Ilyich (1886), and in the Realist Anton Chekhovs play, The Cherry Orchard (1903). Specifically, these authors argue that the various forms of modern domestic aliveness lead to the ruination of substantial interpersonal connection. As long as one drowns in lifes tedium, asserts Baudelaire, the human experience and ones connections with others decay. Spleen LXVIII describes a winter rain that pours On corpses fading in the near graveyard, On foggy suburbs pours lifes tedium (1550.II 3, 4), and, utterance of a ... ...orms in one way or another destroy ones connections with other human beings. Not only does such accent on forms defy the social nature of humanity, creating generations of socially approved outcasts, but also it severely restricts the indi viduals perspective by forcing it to conform to preordained, soused structures, thereby suffocating the blessing of human creativity. Such restriction does not belong to modern civilization alone, however creativity never exists without limit, for every society upholds rules of conduct that its members are taught to obey. Therefore, contemporary conformity is not new but rather reborn and strengthened. Correspondingly, the task of the modern citizen is ancient, but difficult in its originality to glow a balance between creativity and conformity, between pursuing our own diverse forms and following the accepted forms of society.