Realist writers sought to narrate their novels from an objective, unbiased perspective that simply and clearly represented the factual elements of the story.
The Modern Short Story: A Critical Survey, pp. If at times it walked badly it could at least be said to be walking by itself; if it did not walk far it could also be said that vast continents are not explored in a day.
It needs little perception to note the main defects of the American short story from Poe to Crane. It was often raw, facile, journalistic, prosy, cheap; it was unexperimental, and, except in rare instances, unpoetical. It was all these things, and much more; so that beside the European not English short story of the same day it appears to suffer from one huge and common defect.
In Europe, on the other hand, culture rose readily and naturally to the top of artistic life like so much cream.
By contrast with the saloon-bar back-cloths of Bret Harte, the Bowery of Crane, the embittered etchings of Bierce, the literary life and output of Europe appeared richly civilized, smooth, and settled.
In America the writers of the day appear to suffer from a certain common, and quite natural, bewilderment; half their continent is undeveloped, much unexplored; they have not found their feet, and they give the natural impression of needing not only a pen but a compass in their hands.
The literature of that America is amateurish, unorganized, still in its working clothes; that of Europe is civilized, centralized, well dressed. Under these circumstances it would be strange if Europe had not something to offer, in the short-story as well as in literature generally, that America did not and could not possess.
It would be surprising indeed if it had not produced at least one short-story writer greater than Poe or O. It did in fact produce several; but from many distinguished names two stand out as the pillars of the entire structure of the modern short story: Guy de Maupassant, born inand Anton Pavlovitch Tchehov, born ten years later.
During recent years it has become the fashion to divide both exponents and devotees of the short story into two camps, Maupassant fans on the one side, Tchehovites on the other.
To some, Maupassant's stories leave a nasty taste in the mouth; to others Tchehov's are unintelligible. To some the Maupassant method of story-telling is the method par excellence; to others there is nothing like Tchehov.
This sort of faction even found an exponent in Mr.
Somerset Maugham, who devoted a large part of a preface to extolling Maupassant at the expense of Tchehov, for no other reason apparently than that he had found in Maupassant a more natural model and master.
Odd as it may seem to the adherent of these two schools, there are many readers, as well as writers, by whom Tchehov and Maupassant are held in equal affection and esteem. Among these I like to number myself. For me Tchehov has had many lessons; but it is significant to note that I learned none of them until I had learned others from Maupassant.
I recall a period when both were held for hours under the microscope; and in consequence I have never had any sympathy with the mind that is enthusiastic for one but impatient of the other. Much of their achievement and life bears an astonishing similarity; the force of their influence, almost equally powerful, has extended farther than that of any other two short-story writers in the world.
Both were popular in their lifetime; both were held in sedate horror by what are known as decent people.
Tchehov, they said, would die in a ditch, and it is notable that Maupassant still holds a lurid attraction for the ill-balanced. The differences of Tchehov and Maupassant have therefore, I think, been over-laboured, and in no point so much as that of technique.
Their real point of difference is indeed fundamental, and arises directly not from what they did, but from what they were. For in the final analysis it is not the writer that is important, but the man; not the technician but the character. The personality behind the technician, imposing itself upon the shaping of every technical gesture and yet itself elusive of analysis, is the thing for which there exists no abiding or common formula.
There is no sort of prescription which, however remorselessly followed, will produce a preconceived personality. Thus Tchehov and Maupassant, so alike in many things, are fundamentally worlds apart. Almost each point of similarity, indeed, throws into relief a corresponding point of difference.American Realism American Realism was a late nineteenth-century literary movement that began as a reaction against romanticism and the sentimental tradition associated primarily with women writers.
Chief among the authors writing in this genre were William Dean Howells, Henry James, Walt Whitman, Mark Twain, Kate Chopin, and Stephen Crane. A Realist Analysis of the Cuban Missile Crisis Essay as consistent with a realist point of view.
Realism holds great emphasise on the obstacles enforced by human nature and the non-attendance of an international government. The realist movement later spread to other countries, most notably, Russia, England, and the United States.
In Russia, the major realist writers are regarded to be Ivan Turgenev, Fedor Dostoevsky. - The realism era is one of the most over looked time frames for literature during the last 5 centuries. In the mid s through the mid s some of the most famous authors and novels arose.
During the realist era, literature took a turn, around the romantic era changed, and the . Realism Essay Examples. 84 total results.
The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain: Realism, Not Racism An Analysis of Realism in Death of a Salesman by Arthur Miller 1 page. An Introduction to the History of Post-Civil War American Literature.
1, words. 2 pages. An Introduction to the Realism on the Western Front. words. Realism is a movement in film, art, drama and literature that strives for an objective and accurate representation of life.
The word verisimilitude, perhaps, best captures the objectives of the.