No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 16 January 2009
Although many contemporary American novelists have rejected the straightforward representation of social reality in fiction, this rejection may occur for a number of reasons. In Thomas Pynchon and William Burroughs it stems from a fear that the inanimate world is somehow superseding the animate, the sovereignty of the individual is being threatened. John Hawkes refers to the novelists ‘ who hope for more in the novel than trying to build brick walls of brick ’, and suggests that ‘ the true purpose of the novel is to assume a significant shape and to objectify the terrifying similarity between the unconscious desires of the solitary man and the disruptive needs of the visible world ’. Norman Mailer also remarks on this relationship in his essay ‘ The White Negro ’:
The second world war presented a mirror to the human condition which blinded anyone who looked into it. For if tens of millions were killed in concentration camps out of the inexorable agonies and contractions of superstates founded upon the always insoluble contradictions of injustice, one was then obliged also to see that no matter how crippled and perverted an image of man was the society he had created, it was nonetheless his creation, his collective creation (at least his collective creation from the past) and if society was so murderous, then who could ignore the most hideous of questions about his own nature?
1 Hawkes, John, ‘Notes on the Wild Goose Chase’, Massachusetts Review, 3 (Summer 1962), 785 and 787Google Scholar.
2 Mailer, Norman, ‘The White Negro’, in Advertisements for Myself (2nd ed., 1961; rpt. London: Panther, 1968)Google Scholar.
3 Barth, John, ‘Petition’, in Lost in the Funhouse: Fiction for print, tape, live voice (3rd ed., 1968; rpt. Harmondsworth, Middlesex: Penguin Books, 1972), pp. 64–76Google Scholar.
4 Barth, John, The Sot-Weed Factor (London: Seeker and Warburg, 1961)Google Scholar.
5 Barth, John, Giles Goat-Boy or, The Revised New Syllabus, 3rd ed. (1966; rpt. Harmonds-worth, Middlesex: Penguin Books, 1967)Google Scholar.
6 Barth, John, The Floating Opera (3rd ed., 1956; rpt. Harmondsworth, Middlesex: Penguin Books, 1970)Google Scholar. Barth, John, The End of the Road (3rd ed., 1958; rpt. Harmondsuorth, Middlesex: Penguin Books, 1967)Google Scholar.
7 Barth, John, Chimera (New York: Random House, 1972)Google Scholar.
8 Barth, , Chimera, p. 194Google Scholar. Subsequent references to this edition will appear in the text.
9 Barth, , Lost in the Funhouse, p. 56Google Scholar.
10 Barth, , The End of the Road, p. 97Google Scholar.
11 Barth, , Lost in the Funhouse, p. 101Google Scholar.
12 Barth, , Giles Goat-Boy, p. 317Google Scholar.
13 Updike, John, Rabbit, Run (3rd ed., 1960; rpt. Harmondsworth, Middlesex: Penguin Books, 1964)Google Scholar.
14 Barth, , Lost in the Funhouse, p. 150Google Scholar.