ringlo (imported) wrote: Fri Oct 25, 2002 11:26 am
I don't get this point either. This story certainly doesn't promote slavery, it merely uses it to describe different characters in different situations:
- Duncan finds himself in a position where he has a lot of power over other people. How does he use this power?
- Simon submits himself willingly to Duncan as Eric does to Alexi. Why? Certainly not because they are "stupid".
- John and Malcolm are thrown into slavery against their wills (but not "innocently", following the classical rules of drama). How do they deal with their situation?
From Homer to Stephen King there always has been one recipe for a good story: Confront the protagonist with an extreme situation and see how he reacts.
While one certainly can discuss the ethics of the different characters, I don't think a story itself can be categorized this way.
ringlo
wow! talk about a way with words! the way you put it ringlo was right on the money and to the point. thanks.
i've been thinking about gontran's post a lot. maybe there's some cultural thing going on -- some french approach to literature that native speakers of english like myself are missing. i just don't know.
when i write, all i'm really interested in is creating a setting and filling it with characters. i try to let the characters develop themselves within the context of the story -- a lot of times they insist on going in directions that are totally unexpected to me.
i'm not really interested in placing real world values on the stories, characters, ot themes. i am interested in how the characters react to the situations in which they find themselves.
but, like i said -- perhaps there is a different way of approaching literature from a different cultural approach.
david