Symbolism and Realism Essay -- Symbolism Realism Literature Essays

Symbolism and RealismSymbolism and Realism were distinct scarcely parallel literary movements that swept Europe and much of the world in the late 19th century. Social order was one of the main concerns of Symbolists and Realists, which reflects the scarce growth of the middle class and its values across Europe during that clip period. Morality and ambition were homogenized and, in some cases, institutionalized to a degree never before seen in civilized society, and many intellectuals and artists maxim this homogenization as a conformist social force that imperil respective(prenominal) perspective. Thus, Symbolists and Realists works lashed out against social institutions and values and were particularly come to about the municipal sphere, because of its dependence on social norms and shaping nitty-gritty on individual perceptions were disturbed by the decaying effects of conformism and were turbulent by the gulf between fresh individuals. Moreover, Symbolists and Reali sts argue that these three themes of domesticity, decay, and disconnection are linked, a connection explored especially in the Symbolist Charles Baudelaires poem, Spleen LXVIII (1862), in the Realist Leo Tolstoys novella, The Death of Ivan Ilyich (1886), and in the Realist Anton Chekhovs play, The Cherry Orchard (1903). Specifically, these authors argue that the various forms of modern domestic heart lead to the ruination of substantial interpersonal connection. As ample as one dr consumes in lifes tedium, asserts Baudelaire, the pitying drive and ones connections with others decay. Spleen LXVIII describes a winter rain down that pours On corpses fading in the near graveyard, On foggy suburbs pours lifes tedium (1550.II 3, 4), and, speaking of a ... ...orms in one modal value or another destroy ones connections with other human beings. Not only does such focus on forms defy the social nature of humanity, creating generations of socially approved outcasts, but also it seve rely restricts the individuals perspective by forcing it to conform to preordained, rigid structures, thereby asphyxiate the blessing of human creativity. Such restriction does not belong to modern civilization alone, however creativity never exists without limit, for every society upholds rules of go on that its members are taught to obey. Therefore, contemporary conformity is not new but kind of reborn and strengthened. Correspondingly, the task of the modern citizen is ancient, but difficult in its originality to make a balance between creativity and conformity, between pursuing our own diverse forms and following the accepted forms of society.