ENL 10B: “A Close Reading of “The Tyger” by William Blake”

Jolene Patricia Brown
Dr. T. Morton
ENL 10 B
8 February 2010

A Close Reading of “The Tyger” by William Blake

    In reading “The Tyger” by William Blake the first thing one notices is that the lines are all uniform on the page whether typed in an anthology or seen directly on the original plates done by Blake.  The lines are short and simple, organized into six quatrains of almost equal length.  The lines that might be considered longer, though only slightly, occur in the middle of the poem in quatrain three due mainly to word length and not as much to increased number of metrical additions.  The sentences in the poem are mostly hypotactic consisting of long strings of words that build more details of the image as the sentence goes on.  An example is in the first quatrain:

Tyger! Tyger! burning bright
In the forests of the night,
What immortal hand or eye
Could frame thy fearful symmetry? (1-4)

The speaker begins first by describing what he wants to discuss, where it is located, only to end it with a question who might create such a creature. The first two lines frame the subject of the poem and the last two lines frame the question the speaker hopes to ask in his words but since they are locked into one long question the syntax is considered hypotactic.
    The rhythm of the poem consists of lines that are trochaic tetrameter with a catalexis at the end of each line: there are three trochees per line, consisting of first a stressed syllable and then an unstressed syllable, with a stressed syllable at the end of each line.  There are few variations from this pattern but not many.  One instance of variation occurs in lines 10-11 when the speaker inquires about the heart of the tiger:

And what shoulder, & what art,
Could twist the sinews of thy heart?
And when thy heart began to beat,
What dread hand? & what dread feet? (9-12)

Line 9 consists of three trochees followed by a catalexis at the end of the line (the stresses notated above with underlining). Line 10, however, reverses the stress to iambs, at the exact line in which the speaker refers to the heart, creating a heartbeat-like effect that continues through the next line.  There are two other places in the poem where the speaker switches to iambs: in line 20 when he asks if the creator of the Lamb is the same of the tiger, and i the final line of the poem when the speaker changes the fourth line of the poem to the word “dare” calling for an emphasis on the word that replaces “could.”  Each of these lines refer to a power higher than what the speaker would possess which is why he might want a heartbeat effect: the sound of the iamb shows a humility towards the creator of the tiger, emphasizing his weakness of heart compared to something so great to have created so much.

The rhyme of the poem is two couplets in each quatrain in an AABB pattern which have perfect rhyme with the except of two couplets that occur in the first and last quatrain which are imperfect rhyme.  The unmatched couplets are identical to one another, since the second quatrain is only a repetition of the first with the exception of one word.  The unmatched rhyme occurs between the words ‘eye’ and ‘symmetry’ which, though they end in a e sound, do not rhyme perfectly as the other couplets in the poem.  All other couplets consist of perfect rhymes such as bright/night (1-2), and aspire/fire (6-8). Each of the rhymed couplets, whether they are perfect or imperfect, are masculine rhymes because they rhyme on a stressed rather than unstressed syllable.  There are many instances of repetition throughout the poem, the most significant is the first and last quatrains which are identical except for the substitution of the word “could” in line 4 with the word “dare” in line 24.  There are several instances of consonance throughout the poem with such words as burning/bright (1, 21), frame/fearful (4, 24), distance/deeps (5), stars/spears (17) which occur on the first line of each quatrain.  This repetition and consonance unifies the sound structure of the poem for the reader, making the lines easy to read, yet they complicate the meaning of the poem subtly, especially the imperfectly rhymed lines that change in the last quatrain: that slight off rhyme and then the word change in the last line of the poem creates an unsettling feeling for the reader.  There is very little change in the rhyme throughout the poem except for the lines already discussed.

    The poem is a series of questions about the tiger; there are no statements to answer the questions posed to the reader.  There are especially enlightening images within the poem that shed insight into the speakers answers to his questions without giving direct thoughts.  The first occurs in the fourth quatrain when the speaker wonders:

What the hammer? what the chain?
In what furnace was thy brain?
What the anvil? what dread grasp?
Dare its deadly terrors clasp? (13-16)

Here the speaker imagines the tiger being forged, perhaps out of metal, by a hand that would “dare its [the tiger’s] deadly terrors" with a “dread grasp” in a place hot enough to be called a “furnace.”  The image is given to the reader with a dark connotation with words such as deadly, terrors, dread and dare which challenge the idea of the tiger having a benevolent creator. Instead one imagines a hell-like domain and is forced to consider the tiger being created by a more sinister force.  The tiger itself is described in the first and last quatrains as “burning bright” so this idea of it being forged in a hell-like place only helps to reinforce the original image.

    This idea is continued in the next quatrain in which the speaker presents an image of warrior-like stars who “threw down their spears/ And water’d heaven with their tears” (17-18).  The creation of the tiger would strike these warrior-stars in heaven into such awe and fear they would be impelled to tears; then the speaker wonders if the creator would smile.  The most interesting line is the final one in this quatrain: “Did he who made the Lamb make thee?”  The question is one of doubt: could the same benevolent creator of the Lamb, capitalized so instantly linked to Christ, be the same as the one of the tiger?  “The Tyger” presents the reader with a series of questions regarding the form of the tiger and a curiosity about its beginnings. 

ENL 122: "Words to Remind you: Milton's Subtle Reminders"

Jolene Patricia Brown

Dr. R. Levin

ENL 122

15 Oct 2009

Words to Remind You: Milton’s Subtle Reminders

Beyond this flood a frozen continent

Lies dark and wild, beat with perpetual storms

Of whirlwind and dire hail, which on firm land

Thaws not, but gathers heap, and ruin seems (590)

Of ancient pile; all else deep snow and ice,

A gulf profound as that Serbonian bog

Betwixt Damiata and Mount Casius old,

Where armies whole have sunk: the parching air

Burns frore, and cold performs th’ effect of fire. (595)

Thither by harpy-footed Furies haled,

At certain revolutions all the damned

Are brought: and feel by turns the bitter change

Of fierce extremes, extremes by change more fierce,

From beds of raging fire to starve in ice (600)

Their soft ethereal warmth, and there to pine

Immovable, infixed, and frozen round,

Periods of time, thence hurried back to fire.

(Page 49, second edition.)

Words Defined:

Fierce (line 599): Fierce is a word that has two very different meanings according to the OED. In one instance it can mean a “formidably violent and intractable temper, like a wild beast” but it can also mean “high spirited, brave, and valiant.” These two definitions ring together in line 599, as the word is not mentioned once, but twice in the same line. Milton gives Satan all of these qualities: he rises against his creator violently, but he is also a hero among his men for his valor and heroism in battle. Hell, it seems, takes on the same qualities of its king in that the extremes of hell are such that those who are damned must suffer physically under the angry torment but also remember that which they lost. In hell one can have no valor, so the memory of such a grand emotion only compounds the terror and pain of existence in the place furthest away from God.

Extremes (line 599): An extreme is the “farthest from the center” and if two things are in extremes they are “removed as far as possible from each other in position, nature, or condition” (OED). This word in its line context reinforces the effect of the word fierce (above) creating a juxtaposition of God/Satan and Heaven/Hell. This reinforcement, especially as this word is also repeated in this line, contrasts one with the other setting them as opposites in the scope of the universe, and the reader is forced to see the good in heaven and the evil in hell. By doing this Milton has given no room to doubt that hell is, in every way, the opposite of heaven, and Satan the opposite of God. There is no confusing the two, despite the charisma and beauty that Milton might endow Satan and hell with, and the reader must look past the deception to realize that in being in opposition with heaven, there is nothing worthy or virtuous in hell.

Starve (line 600): This word was particularly interesting as it, surprisingly, is used specifically to describe a “pestilence” or “a pestilent being (esp. applied to the devil).” It is a usage that is described as rare in the OED but Milton, as well-educated as he was, probably had knowledge of the word in this form. The context in which it is used in the poem refers to being “brought gradually nearer to death” as well as “to suffer extreme cold.” Each definition ties in deeply to other words and ideas presented in the passage: Satan as a pestilent devil, the damned gradually dying of their suffering in hell, as well as the cold heat that is described. It is obvious that Milton used this word very deliberately in this passage, as the word has many definitions and meanings that are relevant to his vision of hell. It is also a word that raises fear in the reader since to starve is a terrible, prolonged way to die, so it would be appropriately used if Milton wants to make clear the torments that are waiting for sinners in hell.

Pine (line 601): Continuing the succession of words that reinforce one another in Milton’s description of hell, the word pine is, according to the OED a “punishment, torment, torture, suffering or loss…as punishment” especially in hell or purgatory, but it is also “suffering caused by hunger or lack of food” and the OED even calls it a “starvation.” The word gives strength to the word starve in the line immediately before it, but it also conjures the ideas of punishment for sins committed against God. It is not only the sinners who are suffering starvation, it is the fallen angels as well, who through their rebellion are forever punished, banished from heaven. Both definitions are integral in connecting the mortal sinners from the immortal; both sinners will suffer for their choices infinitely through the torment of hell.

Immovable (line 602): This word stood out among the other three descriptors in this line (infixed, frozen) because it implies the inability of the situation in hell to change. This damning of the sinners and the angels and their suffering is not changeable by just any being. In placing this word right after the word pine, Milton continues to make his case for the uncomfortable, unceasing torments that await sinners against God. Neither angel nor mortal will be able to change his own circumstances; it is only through the asking of forgiveness that hell will cease to exist and since Satan will not relent on his position, hell will continue, immovable, until the end of days.

Stylistic Devices:

Imagery (lines 587-590): Milton opens this passage in a surprising way: hell is not a burning, fiery place, but instead a place that is frozen, dark, wild and stormy (586). This image is different from what we now imagine hell to be with heat, fire and burning lakes. This contrast is important to note because hell is the furthest place from God and this implies that God is a source of heat. A frozen wasteland would be barren of life, uninhabitable by plants, animals and, of course, man. The imagery that he is presenting is one without life, pleasure, comfort and nothing like the warm paradise of heaven and that of the newly created earth.

Simile (line 592): The simile being used in this line compares the deep snow and ice of hell to that of a “Serbonian bog.” The deepness of that bog is one “Where armies whole have sunk” (596) and is an image of helplessness. The comparison that Milton is drawing is one of despair since the sinners cannot help themselves and, like a bog or quicksand, they only fall further into the depths. Hell is cold, but it also renders sinners helpless, and the more they fight the depths of hell the deeper they will sink into despair.

Paradox (line 595): I had a hard time deciding whether line 595 was a metaphor or if it was a paradox. I have decided that it is a paradox because Milton takes two opposing sensations and uses the comparison to enhance the meaning of the ideas. The comparison being made is between cold and fire: “cold performs th’ effect of fire” is an overwhelmingly simple paradox where the reader immediately can imagine the burning cold as much as they can imagine the cold fire. Those two things are contradictions, therefore paradoxical, signifying the true power of God over this hell. A true paradox cannot be solved by imperfect reasoning. God, however, is perfect so his reasoning would be perfectly capable of imagining and creating a world of paradox that would harbor both cold heat and hot cold. I believe Milton is using the idea of a paradoxical hell to indirectly show the power of God in comparison to the weakness of Satan.

Alliteration (lines 595-603): There is an immense number of alliterative words that occur in lines 595-603, especially words that begin with the letter f. It begins with the two words in opposition: frore and fire in line 595, and the word fire is repeated three times in the following lines. Other words include footed, Furies, feel, fierce (mentioned twice), From, soft, infixed, and frozen bringing the total of f-sounding words to eleven, in a very short nine lines. This is significant to the tone of the poem because Milton has just described hell as a cold, inhospitable place yet they are on a lake of fire. It seems Milton wants to remind the reader of the burning of hell with the series of f-sounds that do sound similar to burning when pronounced by the reader. The reminder is subtle but effective and the use of this recurring f also reminds us of the paradox of hell: the cold heat torture that awaits those who sin against God.

Repetition (lines 595-603): There are three words that get repeated in these lines: fierce, extremes, and fire. These words are significant first because of the words themselves. They are each words without a trace of ambiguity, as they conjure of definite images within the mind of the reader. They are words with which one might describe hell, as indeed Milton does here, but they are also words of passion that would be used in both good and bad contexts. The repetition is what makes the words all the more interesting. The words fierce and extremes are each used twice and in the same line (599). As in the definitions state above, I believe that Milton wanted us to ponder these words carefully and note the different ideas that are encompassed by those words. The word fire is used three times, reinforcing the fiery image of hell, and the repetition acts as a reminder, between the descriptions of ice, that hell is a wasteland of paradox, evil, and curses which one should avoid at all costs.

ENL 10A: "Light of Hidden Fire": Love and Change in Marlowe's Hero and Leander"

Jolene Patricia Brown
Dr. R. Levin
ENL 10A
13 Oct 2009

“Light of Hidden Fire”: Love and Change in Marlowe’s Hero and Leander

Home when he came, he seemed not to be there,
But like exilѐd air thrust from his sphere,
Set in a foreign place, and straight from thence,
Alcides-like, by mighty violence
He would have chased away the swelling main (605)
That him from her unjustly did detain.
Like as the sun in a diameter
Fires and inflames objects removѐd far,
And heateth kindly, shining lat’rally,
So beauty sweetly quickens when ‘tis nigh, (610)
But being separated and removed,
Burns where it cherished, murders where it loved.
Therefore, even as an index to a book,
So to his mind was young Leander’s look.
O none but gods have power their love to hide: (615)
Affection by the count’nance is descried.
The light of hidden fire itself discovers,
And love that is concealed betrays poor lovers.
(Page 1017)

Words Defined:
Sphere (line 602): A sphere is enclosed: it is a bubble, protective, perfect in its shape and circumference. Leander, having a beautiful outward appearance would take his beauty with him where he went. The OED defines sphere as “the apparent outward limit of space” which does not imply an end so the limits are apparent, but not definite. In using the word sphere, Marlowe is endowing Leander with seemingly limitless potential to love, as Leander—it is clear—is a lover. The OED also lists sphere as “a province or domain in which one’s activities or faculties find scope or exercise”: a sphere has unlimited potential within contained boundaries that are perfectly constructed. Leander’s sphere is expanding to include Hero and as he gains experience his sphere will come to include his maturation in his role as a lover. Leander was an individual, a lover without his beloved, until Hero was thrust into his sphere allowing him to pursue his full potential. The rest of the line “like exilѐd air thrust” implies this change in his sphere; the change is welcome and will expand his bubble expanding the limits of Leander’s potential.

Foreign (line 603): This word is in the line following sphere which only emphasizes the unification of two worlds. The OED defines foreign in one way as “proceeding from other persons or things” but also as “out of doors; outside.” Here’s sphere was foreign to Leander’s because she is outside of him, but the changes that are taking place in Leander’s sphere are a direct result of his meeting Hero. Hero is the trigger of foreign changes in the sphere: she precedes the emotions and desires that he is now facing from outside of his own sphere. It might also be cupid, whose golden arrows so effectively pricked both lovers, who is the outside force, while Hero is the one that proceeds. Both interpretations seem equally as valid; each introduces a foreign emotion to Leander, changing the balance within his sphere.

Swelling (line 605): Swelling is an interesting word because it has several meanings in this context. It is referring to a “swelling main” in this line; main, according to the OED is a form of “power.” Swelling, according to the OED, is “the rising of emotion” but it is also “an abnormal or morbid enlargement in or upon any part or member.” Swelling refers to the new growing emotions of Leander, but also has sexual connotations as he learns to manage his sexual desire that is enflamed by his sexual arousal. The power to which swelling refers could be either his sexual power to manipulate Hero into loving him or to his power as a lover that is growing with each experience he has.

Diameter (line 607): In using diameter here, Marlowe is reminding us of the sphere around Leander, but also using it to show opposition. According to the OED one interesting definition of diameter is “the diametrical or direct opposite; contrariety, contradiction.” This is especially enlightening as it immediately conjures up images of the opposite of the sun: the moon, the night, the darkness; all of these are realms of the lovers but also imply a darker side to their love. The sun in this passage is described as a “kindly” head, and the opposition to that would be a precarious place for lovers. In the first definition, the one which the modern reader is probably more familiar, the imagery of the sun as a circle in the sky and the diameter is the measurement across the circle. The second definition is far more enlightening: it draws opposition to a number of things in the poem such as the dark foreboding that is hinted at throughout the poem, but also as an opposition to beauty as stated in line 610 when Marlow writes “So beauty sweetly quicken when ‘tis nigh” taking the reader from the heat of the sun to the sweet comfort of beauty of a lover.

Affection (line 616): Affection is, according to the OED,“feeling (as opposed to reason)…a powerful or controlling emotion, as passion, lust” but it is also described as a physical “state, condition, or relation which is temporary or not essential to the object.” Affection has some ominous undertones implying the potential for unhappiness in the union of these two lovers. Affection is counter to reason and logic, limiting the rational decisions that man should make in situations involving love. It is also a physical state of discomfort, on that is temporary, even fleeting and the reader wonders if the love Leander feels is also temporary, one only driven by his physical desires. Leander might love Hero, feel affection for her in the most literal sense, but the other implication is that love is a temporary, physical ailment that will subside in time.

Stylistic Devices:
Simile (line 602): Marlowe compares directly Leander to “exilѐd air” and in doing so gives the reader an interesting juxtaposition to ponder. One wonders if air, an unseen, uncontrollable (at least during Marlowe’s time) substance can be truly “exilѐd” from anywhere, including the sphere that Marlowe claims. He may instead be referring to the force with which air can have as it escapes from an enclosure, or the force of the wind; in this context air can have a power to set one off-balance, and destroy objects. Further, the air is “thrust” from the sphere into exile which is a violent image, adding to the violence of the simile and giving depth to the invocation of the Herculean allusion that is presented in line 604.

Allusion (line 604): In line 604 Marlowe makes an allusion to Hercules in an indirect way by describing the exiled air as “Alcides-like.” In crafting the image of the exiled air, by using this direct comparison of Hercules to show the force of the exile it gives strength to the image and to the following description of “mighty violence.” Hercules is a masculine figure of power and strength, which is in contrast to how Leander is portrayed earlier in the poem being outwardly the lover who is confused as a woman. In giving Leander these power Herculean feelings, Marlowe attributes a masculinity to him that is both sexual, emotional and physical. By drawing this comparison the reader is privy to Leander’s change from boy to man.

Alliteration (line 608): Line 608, “Fires and inflames objects removѐd far” is beautiful because the sounds of the “f” in the words “fires,” “inflames,” and “far” sounds like a burning fire when the words are said out loud. This emphasizes the sensation of the “heateth kindly” in the next line for the reader. The sound of the alliterative “f” throughout the line adds a soundtrack to the image of a comfortable fire that burns to heat those around it. In using these sounds to add emphasis to the imagery of the hot sun and the sweet beauty, Marlowe is allowing the reader into the world of Leander’s love for Hero, showing the beautiful characteristics of it, despite some of the ominous signs were are seeing in other places throughout the poem.

Imagery (line 613): The image that is presented to the reader by the comparison of Leander’s mind to that of a book’s index is one particularly interesting and confusing. I have decided to call this short sentence “imagery” because I believe that Marlowe’s purpose was to draw a visual comparison between the index and the mind, however he does not seem to make a full commitment to the use of the simile. Instead he uses the words “even as” to introduce his index and in the next line turns Leander’s look inward to his mind. The image being presented is of an index to a book—a useful tool in locating information within the pages of a book—compared with Leander’s “look” into his mind. By using the index of the book Marlowe implies that the information that Leander seeks, perhaps moral guidance or romantic inspirations, will be found within his mind if he only searches what he already knows. Leander knows how to be a lover and will be successful in his wooing of Hero but only if he turns his questions inward and looks for those things he already knows and uses them to his advantage.

Personification (line 618): Love in line 618 is personified and done in such a way to impose an ominous foreshadowing on the love of Leander and Hero. Love is something that if concealed will betray those who conceal it. Betrayal, especially in terms of love, is significant because it undermines the trust that must develop between lovers and if love betrays the lovers then the lovers are left without their bonds.

ENL 110B: "Why Read Literature: Literature, Science and the Problem of Subjectivity"

Jolene Brown

Dr. T. Morton

ENL 110B

30 July 2009

Why Read Literature:

Literature, Science and the Problem of Subjectivity

Those who cannot empirically measure the importance or value of literature have often questioned the value of it beyond basic storytelling or perhaps historical motivations or moral growth. It does seem counter-intuitive for a person to put a numerical value on the importance of literature in society, after all, the subjectivity that is implied by the idea of enjoyment is interpreted as a strict form of subjectivity, not reconciled to a single value that is the same to each person equally. Examples of this sort of subjectivity are found everyday in conversations about literature: people who will argue that one book is better than another for various reasons or an author is better than another because emphasis of certain stylistic qualities that change importance from person to person. It does seem absurd that the author would intend or even expect his text to have a "universal" interpretation for all readers. With the myriad of personalities in the world and the enormous potential for readership, the possibility of even two people identifying, interpreting and mentally constructing the text in an identical fashion is a statistical fantasy. It is, of course, up for argument that one can even distinguish intent of the author as an identifiable construct, or even that the ideas of the audience can be articulated in such a way to make them available for side by side comparison. It must be asked then, is there a certain particular, universal reason to read literature?

Superficially it would seem that science does not suffer the ambiguity of subjectivity as literature does. Instead, science maintains an attitude of ‘objectivity,’ expecting the same from all other studies. Biology, physics, and chemistry have descended upon the other disciplines as a merciless predator tearing away at the flesh of their victims with methodical scientific evidence, undermining all other superiority with the intended purpose of explaining and defining the world “objectively.” What the humanities, especially, have left are the few remnants of those things not yet explainable by science. Literature, which is at best an abstraction of reality, cannot compare to science with its powers of explanation, but literature has a strength that the sciences do not: literature can rule the realm of the imaginary because it is not limited by the numbers, empirical measurements and scientific method that bars science from exploring those things inside the realm of the mind. The measurements that science demands are exactly those things that literature can operate either with or without, so the flexibility of literature is exemplified in its flexibility of not demanding an empirical construct.

Of course it seems that literature has a certain inherent subjectivity in the way it is constructed that is eliminated in science by the use of methods and standards of measurements. For example, literature is often told from the perspective of one or two characters, which may or may not be identifiable with the audience for which the piece is written. This identification (or lack of) on the part of the audience seems to justify subjective interpretation: if each reader, ideal or otherwise, can cultivate their own an identity that either counters or cooperates with the identity of the character of the literature then is it hard to believe that the literature is creating an individual (subjective) experience for each member of its audience? Surely the author does not create his text with the intent that each reader should feel exactly the same way about the characters or the events. However, science may be expecting too much in their objectivity and find itself victim to the same kinds of subjective problems. Before any scientist can set out to measure his work he, must first establish a basis of measurement be it the meter, the ounce, the gram, another construct of comparison. Once he establishes a method for measurement accurate enough for his purpose, he must convince others of the accuracy and relevance of his measurement. This process, though mostly unconsidered by the scientific community, might be a cause for concern only because the implication may be that measurement itself is based on completely arbitrary objects or lengths.

It must be wondered how this gap between science and literature might be reconciled or if it can be at all. The Formalists took a step to create a “science of literature that would be both independent and factual” (Eichenbaum 1062). The Formalists subscribed to the idea that science maintained a conviction for truth, and would not compromise itself to falling short of finding the truth: “science lives not by settling on truth, but by overcoming error” (1062). At first glance it seems that the Formalists may have found the olive branch to science; by adopting its structure and formulating an approach that understood all literature through the same basic “method” there might finally be some way of organizing the value of literature based on a set standard of criteria. Critics would be able to ask the same questions of each piece and attempt to find the answers given, and there might be a direct connection between literature and science.

Can Formalism account for the broad spectrum of forms that are interwoven into so many literatures? Mikhail Bakhtin argues for the artistic formulation of the novel as both an aesthetic form and as a versatile use of language that exceeds poetry in its scope. The novel incorporates so many stylistic functions that it cannot be captured by only one set standard or subscribe to the same expectations of poetry.

The novel as a whole is a phenomenon multiform in style and variform in speech and voice. In it the investigator is confronted with several heterogeneous stylistic unities, often located on different linguistic levels and subject to different stylistic controls...These heterogeneous stylistic unities, upon entering the novel, combine to form a structured artistic system, and are subordinated to the higher stylistic unity of the work as a whole, a unity that cannot be identified with any single one of the unities subordinated to it. (1191-1192)

Formalism, because of its limited approach, cannot account for the multi-form structure of a work that is as complex as the novel, where there is more to the from than an algorithm or equation that dictates the placement of words in a kind of universal form.

Where might one turn to reconcile the ties between science and literature? Communication is necessary in both disciplines without which even the most basic of ideas cannot be constructed for consideration among peers or the public. The next place to look might be found within the one thing that both disciplines have in common: language.

At any given moment of its evolution, language is stratified not only into linguistic dialects in the strict sense of the word…but also…into languages that are socio-ideological: languages of social groups, “professional” and “genetic” languages, languages of generations and so forth. (Bakhtin 1199)

There are, of course, different kinds of languages for different disciplines, made clear when one directly compares the words and styles used by science and literature when communicating within the disciplines. However, the fundamental elements of language are present, the syntax and grammar rules remain mostly intact, and communication can be maintained between two different people of two very different disciplines with mostly ease and only little explanation of terms. The reconciliation then, must take place within the structure of language itself and the recognition of the heteroglossia that permeates the language throughout, lending itself to constant comparisons and contrasts for the sake of importance or social relevance.

Though taking a scientific approach to literature does not seem effective in its empirical study of literature, at least in the way it has been explored by the Formalists, one might be inclined to wonder what would happen if science was explored through literature. Science fiction explores the ideas of science in great depth, but another way to look at science ‘literarily’ might be to take scientific theories and explore them not only as if they were fiction, but postulate them as fiction, removing entirely any links to the reality which they try to explain, and instead imagine the possibilities of a world where these empirical facts were deemed meaningless or unimportant. Given the arbitrary nature of measurement, as described above, it is not much of a stretch to imagine the shortcomings of science in such a way to render the discipline helpless in the realm of the imaginary. Literature, on the other hand, can operate both in the realm of science, as a tool for exploring hypothetical scenarios, and in the realm of the imaginary, by creating worlds where the laws of science are not only inapplicable but deemed completely useless or even unnecessary.

For example, in science the concept of time is an important tool of measurement to assist in the accuracy of experimentation and longevity of scientific measurement. Time is not questioned in science except to establish a ground for comparison between experiments, and it is not doubted that time is an influence on the outcome of experimentation. Literature, in the realm of science, is also subject to time—the time of the reader to sit and physically read the text—which constitutes participation in a sort of science experiment by timing the point at which a subject begins reading and finishes reading a text. Once the same experiment is moved into the realm of literature, the same rules do not necessarily apply: within the text what is postulated as truth is what is true, regardless of the experience of the reader. If an author writes, for instance, that there exists no concept of time within the frame of the novel, then it does not matter how much science attempts to interfere with the experience of the words on the page, the literature is impenetrable to the effects, and science is helpless to influence the experience of the reader since science cannot operate in the imaginary, enforcing absolute objectivity and adherence to its rules.

Why read literature? Literature is an opportunity to cultivate ideas in a realm free from the constraints of not only science, but also of subjectivity. Though it feels like a safe argument to say that all literature is subjective, due to the nature of language, without any inherent qualities, it can be argued that the perceived subjectivity is only a product of disciplines—like science—enforcing rules and methods on the world in an attempt to make sense of reality according to their own standards. The rules are an illusion to bring sense to an otherwise unpredictable world. Even the rules of language fall victim to the incessant rules and regulations of science, but they are only constructs of the human mind. These constructs allow us to see patterns, but they also enforce the rule of subjectivity—an interpretation that can only be conceived of within the constructs of the rules of both science and literature. Literature, however, offers more freedom for ideas, allowing the mind free reign and ultimately an escape of the confines of law and rules, which may be seen as a great reason to find one lost in a good piece of literature.

Works Cited

Bakhtin, Mikhail. From Discourse in the Novel. The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism. First Edition. Editors: Leitch, Vincent B., et. al. W.W. Norton & Company, New York and London, 2001. Pp. 1190-1220.

Eichenbaum, Boris. From The Theory of the “Formal Method”. The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism. First Edition. Editors: Leitch, Vincent B., et. al. W.W. Norton & Company, New York and London, 2001. Pp. 1062-1087.