I was completely unhappy with the novel We. Although I respect Yevgeny Zamyatin as a dignified, well-known author, my reading experience was difficult; the unpleasantness residing in unsynchronized sentence structure, unnecessary detail, annoying changes in mood swings by the characters, perplexing or odd diction, and lack of connection between the reader and the character D-503. This entire novel was written in the point of view of D-503, his thoughts utterly contradictory and hypocritical. I found it interesting the way the author trails off sentences so often to show word of thought, but because the human mind is such a complex tool and the thinking process very intricate, I often became confused with the storyline. I understand that this was the author’s intent; it was not, however, favorable to my humor. This novel was challenging, and although I admire this in an author for being able to provide such a challenge, it is a time-consuming endeavor. D-503’s miscommunication with the reader, of course, was another distracting factor throughout the course of the novel. Not being able to understand D-503’s set and distinct attitude towards someone or and ideal is incredibly frustrating while trying to relate. I also found myself constantly growing tiresome of the storyline in general. The ending of the novel, however, I found tragic yet exciting; despite all unnecessary observation to detail and unnecessary gratuitous descriptions of scenes. Overall, I found the novel quaint and an abnormal selection piece. Still, I must conclude that I enjoyed the subject matter and viewed the novel as immensely creative.
While I concede that the style and syntax of We may appear haphazard and confusing, it is in fact the single most vital literary element that develops the conflict of the novel. Fundamentally, We centers around D-503’s inner turmoil, stemming from his inability to rationalize emotion. Fittingly, is there anymore concise and accurate manner in which to depict the conflict, than in the internal argument of conscious thought? It would be unfitting to describe the novels events concisely and logically, as the book focuses on all humans’ inability to do so. Furthermore if the outwardly compliant D-503 was to come to logical and reasonable conclusions, lacking the contradiction of his emotional development, all that remained would be a description of a utopian society, and a man who is attracted to a woman. Surely events and actions could embody the turmoil with knowledge, but essentially a struggle with knowledge occurs solely within the mind. Thus, to remove the tumultuous and contradictory would be to defecate the conflict discussed. Does it contradict itself, yes, does it fail to articulate complete thoughts, constantly, but is this necessary to the portrayal of the novel’s meaning as a whole, resoundingly yes!
ReplyDelete