Add me On Facebook

Sunday, February 12, 2012

Approaches and methods:-Comparing Dualism and Monism

We can see that justice of Lodge's claim that there is no discontinuity between the way language is used in prose and in poetry.But this conclusion should lead us to an accommodation between dualism and monism rather than rejection of one in favor of the other.The monist can be as easily floored by awkward questions as a dualist.We can challenge the monist by simply asking"How is it possible to translate a novel?Everyone seems to agree that it is easier to translate a novel than a poem:that one may appreciate that greatness of Dostoevsky in translation in a way that is not possible of Pushkin.It is addmittedly relatively easy for monist to show that even the best translation of prose work loses something of the original.But this is not sufficient:the monist must show how it is possible to translate a novel into the visual medium,as a film..
                                                          To put it most simply,a dualism is happier with prose and monism with poetry.But this oversimplifies a more complex situation.If the difference between prose and poetry is defined at its most banal level,by the absence or presence of verse form,then some types of poetry are more "prosaic"then others and some types of prose are more "poetic" than others.Here we may confront Lodge with his fellow critic-novelist,Anthony Burgess,who is joysprick: an introduction to the language of James Joyce,proposes a division of novelists into "class 1 and class 2".A class one novelists 1 who work language is a zero quality,transparent,unseductive,the overtones of connotation and ambiguity totally damped".The Class 2 novelists is one for whom "ambiguities",puns and centrifugal connotations are to be enjoyed rather than regretted,and whose books,made out of words as much as characters and incidents,lose a great deal when adapted to a visual medium.................

No comments:

Post a Comment