|
|
|
Writing Photography Past Projects Interact Artists |
Samuel
Johnson: Limiting Creative Freedom Samuel Johnson’s argument in The Rambler that literature should portray only reality and only those aspects of reality worth imitating is limiting to mankind in several ways. It cuts from the literary canon several genres, removes from the populace a part of their free will in the governance of their thoughts and expression, and provides a means for a small group to determine the modes of behavior of the populace. Johnson recalls texts prior to the Realist movement, saying of them “why this wild strain of imagination found reception so long in polite and learned ages, it is not easy to conceive” (Johnson, 67), suggesting that the ability of the poet to create something greater than nature is not one to be employed in art and that such unrealistic imaginings are not “polite and learned,” but the opposite. He further states that “almost all the fictions of the last age will vanish, if you deprive them of a hermit and a wood, a battle and a shipwreck” (Johnson, 67). Literature, according to Johnson is neither an imaginative endeavor nor a heroic or epic adventure. Already he has taken from us all of Classical literature, all mythology, all Medieval literature, and much more. He denounces satire when he states that when writing, one should “cull from the mass of mankind, those individuals upon which the attention ought most to be employed” (Johnson, 69). What, then, are writers to imitate and readers to read? “Our present writers,” Johnson states, must present “portraits of which everyone knows the original” (Johnson, 68). This idea lends itself almost too easily to the perpetuation of stock characters in literature. It also denies the reader the excitement of meeting someone new, if every character he encounters can be met with “I know him.” Johnson removes from the writer the ability to write literature to expand the readers’ knowledge of the world or of its possibilities, by saying that only those things which are known are those which should be written. To Johnson, the purpose of literature is not to explore the world, but to contain and perpetuate it. Taking up Johnson’s ideas that literature is to present the world as it is, but only those parts which are worth imitating, leaves one final dilemma: what behaviors are those worth imitating? Clearly, someone must decide this. In fact many people have, and some have put into practice this idea of censoring those works which they feel do not imitate and perpetuate a moral world. The Soviets, in their reign, imprisoned those who spoke out against them for the moral good of all. Adolf Hitler’s Germany did much the same thing, burning texts felt to have the power to corrupt the citizens. It is easy for a man to say what is right, but to impose that morality upon other men is contrary to man’s ability to discover these truths for himself. Johnson’s theories on literature constrict man’s creative impulse, dictate to him moral standards, and discredit any attempt to display a world greater than our own. Works Cited Johnson, Samuel. Rambler “No. 4, 31 March 1750.” Johnson as Critic. Ed. John Wain. London: Willmer Brothers Limited, 1973. 67-71. top – discuss – essays
|
All original material © 2003 Erika Salomon.
