Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Prompt #4 from JJ Bach
In the handout "Structure as a starting point," Robert D. Spector states, "The concept of rhythm is, in fact, another good approach to the problems of structure and unity amid the apparent chaos of Tristam Shandy" (52). Among the types of rhythm described by Spector are "sequences of incidents, groupings of character through the growth of a symbol as it accretes meaning from a succession of contexts, combining words and phrases, and the interweaving and interactive relationship of themes" (52). Which, if any, of these elements of rhythm have helped you the most thus far in your reading and which, if any, have helped you the least and why?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
24 comments:
Kristine’s response to the prompt:
Tristram Shandy is filled with non-stop side-steps and turns, which causes confusion and frustration for the reader. However, amongst this topsy-turvy and seemingly unorganized story, there is a sense of rhythm. I have found that the interweaving of themes can often add to the confusion, however, when a link (relationship) is formed between them, the plot becomes easier to follow. There is also the growth of a topic, such as Tristram’s birth and the squashing of his nose. While these topics are discussed at nauseum (sp?), their development helps keep the reader on track. The groupings of characters has helped the least, as often I become confused with the rapid switching of characters. Overall, the chaotic Tristram Shandy becomes easier to read with the employment of rhythms and repetition of ideas.
J.J. B response to his own prompt:
Tristram Shandy is a very confusing book for most readers and if it weren't for Spectors handout I would be completely lost even on my second run through the first two volumes. For now sequences of incidents is working the best for me because Shandy begins with his birth and as is the case with most stories like this a person's birth is where most people start. It also establishes for me kind of a time line as to when and where a certain section of the story is taking place. Interweaving and interactive themes is probably the most difficult because if for no other reason I haven't seen it yet and if it has showed itself I have completly missed it. Overall I think all these aspects of rhythm will eventually show themselves it's just up to the individual reader to choose which one is the best for them.
I think what has probably helped me the most is "the interweaving and interactive relationship of themes." When a particular theme is evident during one part of the book, and becomes evident again later on, it brings unity to what may have otherwise seemed like two unrelated events or topics. Recurrent themes thus bring some sense of order to "apparent chaos of Tristram Shandy." Right now, I cannot recall any of these rhythmic elements being unhelpful. What I have found most difficult in reading this novel, is the incredibly long run on sentences. In the middle of almost every sentence (or seems like every sentence) Tristram goes on a tangent. When I finish reading the tangent and am back to what the sentence was originally about, I become confused because the tangent disrupted the grammatical flow. I have to reread the beginning of the sentence to connect it to the end.
Most helpful to me is looking at word association and Sterne's fascination with the way the brain (the mind) loops and circles. I can so clearly see a link with James Joyce and with Virginia Woolf (whose characters in To the Lighthouse and Mrs. Dalloway loop from idea to idea like a bee or butterfly). Our own ideas loop in that way, too. Also, I look at "simultaneity of events." While one thing is happening (Tristram's father is pontificating), one or two other events are taking place (Trim is fixing part of the mock battlefield or is with Susannah). Paula
Mel's Response to the Prompt:
The best concept right now for reading Tristram Shandy that (so far) is semi-working for me is connecting all of the events along a time line, or rather the "sequence of incidents". Even this though I'm having some problems because like Melissa, I'm thrown off by the numerous tangents that are randomly thrown into the middle of a thought. I still have yet to find a recurrent theme and I think that this is due to constantly going back to make sure that I understood what was previously stated.
I am lost in this novel so trying to find a rhythm has been difficult. Mostly, I haven't been able to find a rhythm because of the constant tangents that detract for like 7 pages. I am trying my best to give it the benefit of the doubt, but I am having a hard time concentrating on this one. Go Brewers!!!
Kristine's response to Melissa Brooks:
I agree that the long, extremely numerous tangents are distracting and make it difficult to keep track of everything that is happening in the story. Reflecting on what I have read thus far, I wonder if the reason Tristram always goes on tangents is because he cannot remember what comes next in the plot of the story he is telling. Sometimes, when we recall stories from our past, especially those from when we were very young, we stop and pause within the telling of the story in an attempt to sort out the specifics details of what happened. This pause is either filled with an awkward silence or more than likely, rambling until we remember the next part of our stories. Perhaps this is what Tristram is doing...rambling until he remembers what he was talking about and what details come next.
Kristine's response to Melissa Pie':
Just as you commented, I find myself constantly rereading and looking back to gather what I have just finished reading. All of Tristram's rambling is distracting, and since characters and plotlines are constantly intermingled, it makes it difficult to follow Tristram's stream-of-consciousness reporting of events. A suggestion for you - if you are having trouble keeping everything straight (I definitely struggled when I first started the book), take a look at sparknotes to refresh your memory - it helps to organize everything and chances are, you will find that you gathered and retained more information than you think you did!
Kristine, can you pinpoint a time when you felt it was hard to follow the rapid shifts in characters? Paula
J.J.B's response to all:
This is an open question but are we taking the tangents to seriously? We still have to read them because they serve as a reference, to the reader, as we each read the story. But what I also think we have to remember is that Shandy feels he has to explain himself for everything he has written and in a way he doesn't trust the reader to fully understand what he is saying and by doing so he throws us off the story. I would suggest turning the majority of our focus toward the story and less toward the tangents that way the flow or rhythm of the story, in theory, would be less interrupted by the tangents. I could be wrong.
J.J. Bach. Go Brewers!
Paula to J.J.B.--
That might be an interesting exercise in class next week, J.J., to throw out a tangent and see if we make the novel more coherent--also if we harm what Sterne is doing (I suspect the latter). But we could try it. I suspect also that we ALL have more tolerance for people we know who are good storytellers who digress and diverge. If we are not in a hurry with a timetable, we enjoy that, right? Paula
Paula to Melissa Pie:
I think we could fairly easily construct a timeline that would help us with the novel. But--Sterne is subverting the linear (as did Joyce and Woolf) by deliberating looping and holding back information. We don't actually know everything until the very end.
J.J. B response to Paula:
I see your point Paula. However I wasn't suggesting we throw the tangents out completely I was only trying to suggest an easier way to read the book. J.J.
Melissa B.'s response to J.J.B's response to all:
I agree that Tristram feels the need to explain himself over and over again because he doesn't "trust the reader to fully understand what he is saying." I've been noticing lately that Tristram constantly talks about his method of writing the book, almost to the point where it exceeds the actual mention of the plot itself. This almost makes it seem as though the story Tristram is writing is hypothetical idea, something that is never actually divulged but referred to in general terms so he can go into specific details about it's construction.
This too relates to Tristram worrying about whether or not we fully understand him; in discussing his writing, it often seems he is pointing out the clever and ingenious things he has done, and does not want us to miss. For instance, in Vol. 1, Chapter 22, p. 51, Tristram says it is abominable when a man does something commendable, but goes "out of the world with the conceit of it rotting in his head." His point is that he thinks he has mastered the art of digression, and does not want us to miss this.
Melissa B.'s response to Paula:
Paula, you mentioned Sterne's fascination with the way the mind loops and circles. I have definitely noticed this fascination reflected in Tristram. As I'm reading, I feel I'm constantly going in circles because Tristram keeps going back to certain ideas. I feel like every time I've sat down to read this book the past week, Tristram brings up his uncle Toby's character, hobby horse, and "the many perplexities he was in" (58). Tristram wants to exlain his uncle, and everything in full, I think in part so that we don't form hasty judgments, and he doesn't want us to have a narrow vision of anyone. Because of his ever shifting focus, he always returns to a topic, like his uncle Toby, because he wants to provide the most accurate all encompassing image that he can.
Paula to Melissa B--
We could spend some time in class (for instance, our first discussion of the novel) by pinpointing the places where Tristram digresses and then the actual page when he resumes that same discussion. Sterne does tell us the date pretty often and also sometimes the time. Paula
Paula to Kristine--
That's an intriguing idea, Kristine, that perhaps Tristram is rambling while telling his story(perhaps he too, like Blue, is unreliable?).
J.J.B response to Melissa B:
I agree that there are a lot of run on sentences both in the story and the tangents. I think it goes to show the level of arrogance that Shandy has in his writing. It's all based on what seems to be his belief that he doesn't have to explain himself to the people whom he is addressing simply because he thinks they are all inferior to him. This kind of an attitude could prove to be disasterous for him
Jeremy's Response to Paula and Melissa
We have been exploring looping narrative in Non-Western Lit. It is an intentional device that follows the development of a thought in much the same way as a memory is remembered then another memory is triggered that leads to another tangent eventually leading back to the original memory. I think Sterne is very much a master writer and a little cocky in his constant drawing attention to his own brilliance and importance to literature. He almost establishes that from the very beginning when he talks about his conception and birth as momentous events to the story. I think the looping serves to emphasize the return to Sterne's brilliance in employing this strategy.
Paula's response to J.J.A.--
The Eighteenth Century writers had a different attitude, I think, towards their own brilliance and their own wit. And it would be interesting for us to talk about that. I liked your description of Sterne's method and the parallel to nonwestern lit. But of course it's not Sterne's birth, but Tristram's.
Paula's response to J.J.B--
Interesting response, J.J. I think Sterne is spending considerable attacking preposterous experts--scholars, judges, lawyers, theologians--whose "knowledge" is ridiculous. Where do you see Tristram as acting arrogant towards the reader?
Jeremy's response to Kristine
(sort of)
I totally agree with the confusion and frustration caused by the sidebars. The rhythm takes serious concentration to get into the flow. The rhythm is more a sense of inevitable divergence than a traditional flow of language. It seems like Sterne forces us to follow Shandy's tangents just to disrupt the rhythm of the narrative and thereby creates a kind of discordant rhythm. It is like watching a basketball game. You know there will be cheering and booing, but you can never tell when it is coming during a game. I think it is effective as a unique literary voice, but it definitely takes a concerted effort to keep everything in that rhythm.
In response to JJ being lost...
Like all of us, I too am lost. It's pretty much like when you're speaking with a child or an individual who just jabbers on. You begin to lose your focus. Finding a particular rhythm, while it has the potential to be helpful, sometimes can add to the consternation because you have to divert your focus from processing the words and grasping the meaning to structuring a method of receiving the words.
In response for general consideration...
Is it possible to avoid the potential for overanalysis of Shandy's method as chaotic or rambling and look @ him as relating the tale from the mind of a creative genius? We all know that writer's tend to have a genius (rather than arrogance JJB) that oftentimes exceeds the mindset/thinking process of the non-writer. Writer's tend to think on a different plane. Not all, but many. Just a thought...
Post a Comment