Does the End of Romance Mean the End of the Narritive?
Posted by Cassia on October 25, 1997 at 16:45:38:
One of the things that annoyed me when reading Possession for the first time were the assumptions: that there is no 'self', that roamntic love is an illusion, that narritive no longer matters because things don't have beginnings, middles and ends. So much of scholarship seems to work on these premises and I cannot believe they are true.
In a way, all of the assuptions are a single assumtion: if we have no story then we have no need of love or self. We are all our stories, what we have done and what we shall do in the future are what we are made of as much as the complex proteins that make up our DNA. Yes we are sacks aof chemicals and electricity then again, so is the universe but we also have memory and we shape taht into conscieous. (Yes I know I spelled that really wrong but I hope you can make it out, I have no idea of the correct order of the letters). The need to shape the raw materials of our lives is why we have narritive, and this gives us meaning.
So while it was good of the scholars to question, they gone down a false path and it is time to retreat.
Posting followups to old messages is disabled; instead go to the main index and post a new message which mentions this one.