Debate Topic III
Resolved: that the most important factor in the longevity of an individual work of narrative art is not story or character, but wit.
Discuss.
Leave a Reply
Commenting is closed for this article.
Resolved: that the most important factor in the longevity of an individual work of narrative art is not story or character, but wit.
Discuss.
Commenting is closed for this article.
I just re-read Tropic of Capricorn and enjoyed it the second go-round more than my first encounter in college. So, I have to agree. Story and character can suffer neglect— even disappear for long stretches— as long as the prose is sufficiently exuberant, musical or funny.
— turnbuckle · Jan 8, 06:12 PM · #
No humor in the Bible? Which is technically largely a “work of narrative art,” by a number of individuals, but I guess doesn’t really count
— paul h. · Jan 8, 06:16 PM · #
I guess Tolkein will tell….
— Freddie · Jan 8, 06:20 PM · #
Hm.. the brevity of wit is both a boon and a curse when it comes to longevity. On the upside, it is far easier to get to know a witty artist, I’d say the quotability of Oscar Wilde definitely gives his work a higher profile than they would have otherwise. That said, the brevity also means heavily relying on context. Thus wit that is self-contained in a piece probably is a great indicator of the longevity of a piece, but only represents a portion of wit used in the narrative art.
— Greg Sanders · Jan 8, 07:07 PM · #
Think about the oldest works we still read regularly, a list including Homer, Virgil, and Shakespeare’s tragedies. Some wit in there, but it’s hardly a defining characteristic of our most-remembered works.
— Dan Miller · Jan 8, 07:12 PM · #
I think Turnbuckle has the right definition of “wit” here: not just funny but exuberant or musical. If that’s the criteria, it’s easy enough to see why we still read Homer but not Hesiod (although I kinda like Hesiod), and clear as day why we read Virgil but not Ennius.
And as far as the Bible goes, I’m pretty sure Psalms and Proverbs are more widely read than Chronicles and Kings.
— Paul B · Jan 8, 07:37 PM · #
I’m sure you’ve got “higher art” in mind, but there’s not much wit in The Lord of the Rings.
— Phil · Jan 8, 07:44 PM · #
I don’t agree. Wit often doesn’t age well, and seems to be te product of era and culture. When I read classics, I’m not doing so in search of wit. And when it does appear, it’s more gravy than turkey. I think it’s the broader themes that are the absolute prerequisite for longevity more than wit.
— pc · Jan 8, 08:58 PM · #
Is this more or less true for movies? We’re now almost 40 years past Godfather, and that movie seems about as likely to endure as any other in the interim. Not a whole lot of wit there, either.
— pc · Jan 8, 09:13 PM · #
Maybe it stretches the definition too far, but can’t wit encompass the broad pleasure we take from an artist’s presentation? In other words, wit lives in a musical or atmospheric realm not necessarily connected to story, and from this the work resonates (or doesn’t).
Perhaps the Godfather is quite witty after all, but not in the way that the dialogue between the protagonists in Dangerous Liasons is witty. Rather, the amazing atmosphere created by shot sequences and cinematography conveys wit of a high order. The same might be said of Kubrick’s Barry Lyndon.
Except for some bumptious tavern scenes, Moby Dick doesn’t stand out as a work defined by its wit. However, the atmospheric, often unwieldy prose— what DH Lawrence called its “strangeness”— is pretty fantastic and results in a pleasure of perception that could be taken as wit. (Admittedly, wit doesn’t often unfold so slowly— you’re on page 114 and they still haven’t boarded the fucking boat!)
Even when his films aren’t openly funny like Wild at Heart, David Lynch typically presents a rich and witty, if inscrutable, vision.
By this generous— perhaps mistaken— interpretation of wit, one artist who leaps out as an exception, one whose works possess almost no discernible wit yet have achieved longevity is Ayn Rand. I know some undeserving ones always make it in, but the fact that she has endured with greater impact than Dos Passos or Donald Barthelme, to name a few, is a bit of a bummer.
— turnbuckle · Jan 8, 10:35 PM · #
This is certainly true for one of the greatest works of art in the last 20 years, “The Big Lebowski”
There are wonderful narrative twists and tricks in this movie, but really it’s its wit that drives it and what stays with you.
— Keith Malone · Jan 9, 12:26 AM · #
Don Quixote should be an example under consideration in this thread.
— Conor Friedersdorf · Jan 9, 01:02 AM · #
Milton, Wordsworth, Dickens, George Eliot: all holding up fairly well, last I looked, despite not merely a paucity of wit but hostility to the notion that wit is something an author should aim for.
— kth · Jan 9, 02:52 AM · #
What is “Brevity is the soul of wit”, Alex?
— Tony Comstock · Jan 9, 11:38 AM · #
For the affirmative, I present the Odyssey. For the negative, I present the Iliad.
— Alex Knapp · Jan 9, 07:01 PM · #
I think wit is nice but not a basic necessity. If it were the most important thing for longevity, then we wouldn’t still be reading War and Peace (USA, for that matter).
— cw · Jan 10, 04:25 AM · #
Everybody read the Aeneid for 1900 years, and then 100 years ago they stopped reading it. I don’t think it’s clear that the Iliad or Hamlet or whatever won’t suffer the same fate.
— Steve Sailer · Jan 10, 05:47 AM · #
I’d say the Aeneid has safely secured its place, even if high school students are rarely exposed to it anymore. It continues to make reading lists for plenty of history/classics/literature courses at the university level.
Sailer suggests another interesting discussion topic related to the first. What constitutes longevity? Is it properly achieved by works supported almost exclusively in the academic realm, or is some degree of wider appeal required? Do massively popular works tend to get trapped in their times without the continued interest of scholars? Is it a knock against its longevity that almost nobody in America reads Gargantua and Pantagruel, even though it continues to provoke new enthusiasm/scholarship in the rather obscure confines of university literature departments?
— turnbuckle · Jan 10, 04:38 PM · #