Of all the Chinese courses, I learned the best part about literary theory. The so-called learning is the best, not based on the judgment of personal values, but only the top of the final grade. Imitation, romanticism, post-colonialism, Aristotle, Husserl and other ghost terms, I can still talk nonsense a few words, at first glance, it seems that there is no big problem.
Initially, I had a rather lofty desire to study, hoping that literary theory could be used in my literary creation. I remember when the teacher talked about "zero-degree writing", I really thought that I had found a ray of light in the boundless darkness. This is not my exaggeration. "Yeah, write at zero degrees, let your pen be as accurate and ruthless as a surgeon, and get rid of those surging lyrical discussions that are actually irritating, yes, what a good thing!" My work has been completed, and after a quick thought, I sighed: What JB stuff!
Over the course of several semesters, I almost settled on the fact that literary theory is different from literary creation. Literary theory is the hallmark of smart people in the literary circle, and literary creation is still an art of coding that is difficult to explain. Therefore, writers do not have to go to great lengths to dismember their own works, tell the cause and effect, the production process that should be combined with the inside and the outside, or analyze whether there are some environmental factors, inevitability, etc. behind those illusory things. When writers talk about their own works, they are more involved in some creative thoughts than the routines of literary theory.
I randomly thought that there are two issues in the concept of creation that should be paid attention to: one is what to write, and the other is why. The first appearance of literature was accompanied by the sacredness of religion and sacrifice, and after thousands of years of development, it inevitably took the path of the common people, writing about common people's affairs and speaking common people's words. As Barton Funk said in the movie, he wrote for the general public, not for the heroes. In recent years, Carver's works have become popular, and research articles on Carver's works have appeared one after another. Some time ago, I saw a statement that he believed that Carver was just a sign that he marked the rise of a group of smart, mediocre little writers. Not that they appreciate this style, but because, this style is almost their only choice. Barton Fink is not so, at least he does not think so. He thought that ordinary people's joys, sorrows and sorrows were not the same as those of emperors, and at the same time, people at the bottom might also have glittering dreams. In other words, the ordinary people he thought were also great people and noble people.
As for why to write, it is a question of creative motivation. It is roughly divided into two, one is writing for oneself, and the other is writing for society. Private writing is more of a part of writing for oneself, to get what you need by writing your most private things. While writing for the society, apart from writing for oneself based on personal experience, the works often show a great sense of social responsibility and social awareness. As Lu Xun said, the effect they hope to achieve is to wake up thousands of people who are sleeping in cages. At the beginning of the film, Barton Fink talked about his literary creation, roughly expressed as: he does not want to fish for famous things after one of his works is successful, because this will dry up his literary thoughts and prevent him from moving forward. . And his own most desired success is to write a dramatic work that can be recorded in the annals of history. Barton Fink belongs to the type of author with ambition, and the achievement of such ambition sometimes requires good luck far beyond the stars in addition to excellent talent.
A Novelist's Life
Novelist is one of my dream careers that I've always dreamed of. Because compared to the real world we live in, he has an extra world of imaginary space. In that world, there is only what you can't think of, and nothing you can't do.
But compared to the last poetic work we see, the life of a novelist is the least poetic. For example, the protagonist of the story, Barton Funk, we see that most of his living conditions are living in a room, not looking for a job, no entertainment, and no wife or female companion. The only typewriter was not only his life partner, but also his spiritual partner. People outside often don't know what he's up to and think he's idle, maybe even a homeless person. Therefore, the life of a novelist can easily fall into the predicament that no one cares about.
On the other hand, similar to the profession of an actor, there are many people living in the life of a novelist. These people are his characters, but always inevitably into his real life. It is extremely normal for him to cry and laugh for the characters in his pen, and his heart is broken. This is a test of one's mental willpower. When Barton Fink arrived in Hollywood, he couldn't open the door of his inspiration for a long time, so he maintained a state of "self" for a long time. And this state of "self" is precisely a taboo state, because he cannot enter another virtual world, and the writing of the novel must enter a dead zone.
The more typical embodiment of Button Funk is the point of "action dwarf". First of all, on the outside, I don't know if it is because the writers are mentally laboring, and their physical features often show a static or even rigid performance. At the same time, on the other hand, if in his writing, he is majestic and dignified, in reality he is often cowardly and timid. For example, when the neighbor next door quarreled with him, he explained the situation to the waiter and hoped to be dealt with. And when this neighbor stood in front of him, he would worry about any accidents and conflicts, and he seemed to be submissive in the process. Another example is that he keeps saying that his writing serves the general public, but when the people stand in front of him and plan to tell him their stories, he lacks enough patience and interest.
A little thought about pain
Last semester, in a foreign literature class, the teacher talked about loneliness. He generalized loneliness as a state that everyone has and a private emotional experience. The former is roughly the loneliness of each person as an individual, while the latter's loneliness is a higher level of loneliness, which may be more intense when you are placed in a crowd. In the end, the question of loneliness has never been made clear, and it can only end with an apologetic subjective answer.
Pain, this topic is not easy to talk about. Generally speaking, people are used to divide it into physical pain and psychological pain. I agree with Wilde that I would rather suffer mental pain than physical pain. As a student, I thought the most intense pain level was the 800m run, an experience that has always enveloped me with nightmarish magic. In the history of literature, there are not many writers suffering from physical torture. Such as Akutagawa Ryunosuke, such as Proust, such as Dostoevsky. And their literary achievements are often to overcome the disease and write shocking works. Of course, the proportion of normal people is higher, such as Barton Fink and his ilk.
The film sets the time in the hot summer. Summer often represents restlessness, restlessness and frenzy. It's also a miserable season. When I was reading Russian literature recently, I was puzzled: Why do I feel that Russians are so passionate and need exclamation marks to speak? Friend replied: I think this is probably related to their severe cold weather. The weather froze their minds, and when they erupted, it was not a momentary passion, but a lasting reverberation. I agree that there is indeed a deep connection between weather and events.
But Barton Fink and the others suffer more from the pain of their hearts. In the film, there seems to be evidence of Button Fink's suffering in every place: lack of human care, sadness of unsatisfactory career, inexplicable involvement in murder and so on. But as Rilke said, all suffering is good for the poet. For example, Dostoevsky, without the experience of death row prisoners and exile, it is difficult to say that he may just be a mediocre writer.
I remember Cai Kangyong once said that happiness is a shallow thing. In other words, suffering is a relatively profound thing. But while Barton Fink suffers, I fail to catch a glimpse of the dawn, and it's a suspenseful ending. The writing process itself is full of freshness and challenges. You don't know what will happen, maybe you will kill Cheng Yaojin halfway through, which is a happy thing. But pain is more like a commonplace meal.
I don't know if the pain made him nirvana, this is a philosophical proposition.
View more about Barton Fink reviews
