Sulkdodds
Companion Cube
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2003
- Messages
- 18,845
- Reaction score
- 27
Welcome to the fourth Hl2.net short story contest.
The Rules
- Entries must be between 100 and 5000 words.
- Entries should be in prose form, though abberations are acceptable.
- Entries must be originally created for the Short Story Contest (tm)
- Contestants may write about anything they wish as long as it conforms to the stated topic.
- Closing date is midnight on the 20th September.
- NO discussion in this thread, only entries.
Discussion thread here.
The Prize
At worst, a custom title and +++respect. At best, the true ear of Van Gogh preserved in formaldeyhyde.
The Topic
The subject this time around is: 'Pathetic Fallacy'.
The pathetic fallacy is a literary technique that ascribes human characteristics to natural phenomena. In a wider sense, it is the use of natural phenomena to instill meaning in a story - most commonly applied to weather. We've all read stories where the clouds darken with the mood, a storm rages during the climax, and the sun shines on a happy ending. "Pathetic" doesn't mean 'sad', it means "sympathetic" - objects in sympathetic relation to human events, as if the whole world were a mystical litmus paper for testing the soul of man.
And if that's enough to make you write something then stop reading here. I want you to use the pathetic fallacy to do something interesting. Here are some examples of its application.
Shakespeare's King Lear is dominated by a complex version of this trope. The storm that thunders throughout most of the action of the play is at first a reflection of political turmoil on earth. Lear is seen “as mad as the vexed sea, singing aloud”; he is “minded like the weather, most unquietly”. The storm is a mirror hung in the sky to reflect the social state of the play and the internal states of its tormented protagonists (see also Macbeth). But it is such a powerful symbol with such a variety of meanings, and relates to the protagonists in so many ways, that it eclipses that function, and becomes something antagonistic and wholly alien to the play's human beings, while Lear
Another great user of the pathetic fallacy was Charles Dickens. I refer not only to his environments (houses described as if their windows were eyes, their doors mouths, their streets dinner tables around which they sit and grumble; tall buildings lean down to spy through skylights) or to his objects (troublesome hats, seemingly alive, conspire to jump off shelves) but also to his people. Their personalities and characters are inscribed outwardly in a set of characteristics: a forehead like a brick wall or a nose like the prow of a ship. These outwardly visible characteristics express inward meanings, but physiognomy is a discredited science, and we all know one cannot tell a criminal by the distance between his eyes. So this is another kind of pathetic fallacy.
And of course those reified objects are too: a talking toilet or a chair that broods is pathetic, as is a weeping willow or a babbling brook. So that's your mission this time around: take the technique and use it, whether faithfully or playfully. And think about how you can perhaps abuse it, and change it, and make it something new.
GET WRITING
YOU PATHETIC
FAILURES
(<3)
Resources:
- Wikipedia: Pathetic Fallacy
- John Ruskin coins the phrase (but you needn't pay too much attention to him)
- Two key passages from Joseph Conrad
- Rather literally taken to task by scientists
- I don't know if this is actually pathetic fallacy and I don't care http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_h3Cvs1caeA
The Rules
- Entries must be between 100 and 5000 words.
- Entries should be in prose form, though abberations are acceptable.
- Entries must be originally created for the Short Story Contest (tm)
- Contestants may write about anything they wish as long as it conforms to the stated topic.
- Closing date is midnight on the 20th September.
- NO discussion in this thread, only entries.
Discussion thread here.
The Prize
At worst, a custom title and +++respect. At best, the true ear of Van Gogh preserved in formaldeyhyde.
The Topic
The subject this time around is: 'Pathetic Fallacy'.
The pathetic fallacy is a literary technique that ascribes human characteristics to natural phenomena. In a wider sense, it is the use of natural phenomena to instill meaning in a story - most commonly applied to weather. We've all read stories where the clouds darken with the mood, a storm rages during the climax, and the sun shines on a happy ending. "Pathetic" doesn't mean 'sad', it means "sympathetic" - objects in sympathetic relation to human events, as if the whole world were a mystical litmus paper for testing the soul of man.
And if that's enough to make you write something then stop reading here. I want you to use the pathetic fallacy to do something interesting. Here are some examples of its application.
Shakespeare's King Lear is dominated by a complex version of this trope. The storm that thunders throughout most of the action of the play is at first a reflection of political turmoil on earth. Lear is seen “as mad as the vexed sea, singing aloud”; he is “minded like the weather, most unquietly”. The storm is a mirror hung in the sky to reflect the social state of the play and the internal states of its tormented protagonists (see also Macbeth). But it is such a powerful symbol with such a variety of meanings, and relates to the protagonists in so many ways, that it eclipses that function, and becomes something antagonistic and wholly alien to the play's human beings, while Lear
The point is that if a raging storm represents political chaos on earth, at least one thing is stable: the connection between earth and the heaven that imitates it. But by the end of King Lear it seems like the truth is even bleaker, much worse: heaven, or nature, is completely indifferent to the struggles of mankind, and they are powerless before it. So Shakespeare takes the well-worn pathetic fallacy and uses it to play on the expectations of his audiences. He lets it mutate into a new thing.Strives in his little world of man to outscorn
The to-and-fro-conflicting wind and rain. (III.i.4-11)
Another great user of the pathetic fallacy was Charles Dickens. I refer not only to his environments (houses described as if their windows were eyes, their doors mouths, their streets dinner tables around which they sit and grumble; tall buildings lean down to spy through skylights) or to his objects (troublesome hats, seemingly alive, conspire to jump off shelves) but also to his people. Their personalities and characters are inscribed outwardly in a set of characteristics: a forehead like a brick wall or a nose like the prow of a ship. These outwardly visible characteristics express inward meanings, but physiognomy is a discredited science, and we all know one cannot tell a criminal by the distance between his eyes. So this is another kind of pathetic fallacy.
And of course those reified objects are too: a talking toilet or a chair that broods is pathetic, as is a weeping willow or a babbling brook. So that's your mission this time around: take the technique and use it, whether faithfully or playfully. And think about how you can perhaps abuse it, and change it, and make it something new.
GET WRITING
YOU PATHETIC
FAILURES
(<3)
Resources:
- Wikipedia: Pathetic Fallacy
- John Ruskin coins the phrase (but you needn't pay too much attention to him)
- Two key passages from Joseph Conrad
- Rather literally taken to task by scientists
- I don't know if this is actually pathetic fallacy and I don't care http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_h3Cvs1caeA