Setting the Tone

As I see many other people did, I immediately noticed the sentence in the preface which states: "One consideration which deterred me was, that, having kept no journal during a greater portion of the time in which I was absent, I feared I should not be able to write, from mere memory, a statement so minute and connected as to have the appearance of that truth it would really possess, barring only the natural and unavoidable exaggeration to which all of us are prone when detailing events which have had powerful influence in exciting the imaginative faculties" (43). Obviously, given our discussions in class, I found this very interesting. It particularly brought me back to an idea that I presented at the end of our last class. Both Lansing and Albanov present very early on their take on the "truth" of their narrative; Lansing promises truth, while Albanov acknowledges his own concern about time altering his memory. I wondered in class whether their "setting the tone" in this way affected your reading of the texts. To answer honestly for myself, I found myself thinking "was this how it happened?" and "is this real?" and "why did he choose to include that?" in the texts that warned me of their own prejudices. However, I appreciated it more, since I felt like they had forced me to acknowledge the nature of narratives and our own "slanting" that always happens when we relay events. While the tone that was set affected my reading by making me more suspicious, I felt that I engaged in the text more because it welcomed me to doubt.
With this, I was brought back to the idea Janelle posed about Voyage of the Narwhal: these stories, the ones that engage with the slanting of narrative (even within their own text), may act as Bildungsromans (I couldn't resist bringing it back to this) for the reader as they require a more critical reading. I think after these last few books and the tones they set with this admissions of prejudice (or conversely professions of truth) made me believe even more in this idea. What do you guys think?

Suspense in Pym

The dark, suspenseful narrative common in Poe's works certainly adds a completely new dynamic to the genre of adventure narrative. While we've encountered a lot of stressful, suspenseful and dramatic situations in our earlier texts, Poe’s flair adds a whole new level to the idea of narrative suspense.

Pym’s narrative voice reminds me of what Simpson’s might have been, if he had written a horizontal adventure novel. The chapter in which Pym is trapped in the crawlspace under the ship, running out of food and waiting for his friend to come could be compared with Simpson’s description of his exhausting journey down the mountain after falling into a crevasse. Both characters are undergoing physical stress and narrating their stories in the first person, speaking directly to the reader.

Yet for some reason, while I read Simpson’s text and find it suspenseful because it is nonfiction, I don’t have that same response to Poe’s novel.  Poe creates a completely different type of narrative thrill, through his use of unexpected plot twists and creating believable out of the unbelievable. Simpson’s novel was relatively predictable, and the elements of foreshadowing throughout the beginning of the novel hinted at the disaster that was to come. Yet in Pym, we are completely caught off guard. While many of the scenarios in Pym seem objectively unbelievable (like his dog showing up out of nowhere) when told by this first person narrator, they seem to have the authority of a nonfiction story. 

"Natural and Unavoidable Exaggeration" in every narrative

From the beginning of Pym I have been taking note of the commentary on what it means to write a narrative. From the beginning of the preface I thought that Poe clearly addresses the question of authenticity that we have discussed often in class. How authentic is it? Why do we care? Poe articulately describes how narratives and the aim for truth work naturally-- "as to have the appearance of truth it would really possess, barring only the natural and unavoidable exaggeration to which all of us are prone when detailing events which have had powerful influence in exciting the imaginative faculties" (Preface, 2). And furthermore, "In no affairs of mere prejudice, pro or con, do we deduce inferences with entire certainty, even from the most simple data" (13). These quotes looks at the inevitable flaws in human recollection, specifically narratives.

Poe highlights how no narrative is accurate or entirely true. Everyone manipulates a narrative they construct simply because it is our brain and our imagination that has created it, and everyones mind is different and will perceive, process, and interpret things differently, even if it is only to the slightest degree. No narrative is flawless and exactly aligned with what "actually" happened. This addresses the concept of authenticity within technically non-fiction books but does not really apply to our discussion on fiction versus nonfiction and how we evaluate those differently. Poe (or Pym) says that the narrative is so absurd it may be hard for readers to believe it, he can only hope for belief... how does this impact the way we read Pym's narrative- does it at all? How are we viewing this narrative different to the others we've read?

Poe's Armchair Adventurers and the Sea's Appeal

Armchair adventurers are mentioned in the first sentence of the preface. Arthur Pym says: "several gentlemen... were... urging it upon me, as a duty, to give my narrative to the public. I thought that this was very interesting because it suggests that people's adventures are received as gifts to the public, which I would not agree is a fact. Arthur Pym goes onto admit that he is not a good writer and thus the task of writing the narrative fell on Poe. It is interesting that Poe felt it important to construct this scenario behind the narrative. In some ways, it seems to be meant to acknowledge the reader. I am eager to see where class discussion about this goes tomorrow.

On another note- I am always fascinated with people's seemingly instinctive categorization of the sea as a romantic and appealing place. I thought that Arthur's urge to be at sea after his harrowing experience with Augustus the evening of the party, was interesting. I suppose this gets at what we've been asking all semester: why sail? I think that reasons to sail include the desire to live on the ocean, on a 24 hour schedule. The striking difference of life at sea as compared to on land allows many people to formulate new perspectives. Beyond that, it often allows for peaceful, solitary nights on watch, under gorgeous stars while the boat rocks you back and forth. However, as we know and as Arthur has experienced, this is not consistently the case. There is a lot of suffering involved for those few magical moments. As far as I have read, Arthur has yet to even experience one....

What makes an effective adventure narrative?

In the intro of “Pym,” Kennedy writes, “Defying the conditions of its own composition, Pym offers a memorable portrayal of the rite de passage by which a young man loses his innocence and achieves a horrifying view of the deviousness and cruelty inherent in human nature” (xi). Many of the books we have read this semester act as coming of age works. In “Touching My Father’s Soul,” Norgay reaches self-actualization after successfully following in his father’s footsteps, but the path to self-actualization is never easy. There has to be bumps along the way in the telling of the story to entertain the reader. At the beginning of “Pym,” Poe shakes things up with some conflict, and we get a sense of Pym’s devious and innocent side. He makes the drunken decision to sail out to see with his friend Augustus, and things go sour from there, which is something—drinking times—we as college students should all be able to relate to in one way or another. Was this the boys’ first time drinking? Rather than coming of age stories, it seems like we are intrigued by stories about “firsts.” The first ascent of Mount Everest, the first ascent led by a Sherpa, ect. Effective adventure narratives seem to center around a first experience and start from a point of conflict. When the narrative starts on a point of conflict, there is nowhere to go but forward. There is a lesson to be learned. For Pym, he takes control of the ship on behalf of his drunken friend, completing his first lesson in being a man. 

The Dangers of Fictitious Truth and Vice Versa

On page 3 of the preface of Poe’s The Narrative of Arthur Gordon Pym and Related Tales, the “author” clearly states the importance of distinguishing fiction from truth. I found this really interesting to be in a work of fiction and I can only assume that it is there purely because Poe was clearly aware of the problems that occur when the line between fiction and truth is blurred. If this is the case, I totally sympathize with Poe’s sentiment as I, myself, have felt somewhat betrayed by an author if, when reading a supposed “true story,” I discover that much of the events and dialogue have been embellished or even created. As soon as I discovered this in several of the narratives we read this semester, the author, in my mind, completely lost his credibility and my interest in the work took a serious hit. Consequently, in light of this, it seems that Poe, recognizing the potential dangers and the possibility of insult to the reader, is either making fun of the reader and playing with satire, since this is a novel, or he is, through the voice of A. Gordon Pym, cleverly hinting at the fact that this novel is in fact a work of fiction in the case that an ill-informed reader mistakes the fictitious events in the life of A. Gordon Pym for a true story. 

The morality of survival

I feel that a recurring theme in the narratives we keep coming across is the questionable morality of certain actions in survival situations.  In Poe's Pym, we run across cannibalism in chapter seven, where Pym and his companions are forced to draw lots to see who is eaten among them.  And yet, despite how awful an act this is, I found myself accepting of their actions because of their desperate circumstances.  I similarly found myself approving of the actions of Simon in Touching the Void when he chose to cut the rope to save himself, and in Into Thin Air when rescue climbers chose to leave behind climbers on the mountain who couldn't be saved.  My acceptance of such things really leaves me wondering what else could I rationalize doing if my life depended on it?  I think this is a question that anyone would ask put in the right set of circumstances.  But what really strikes me about Poe's narrative is that his account is fictional, but ultimately believable.  There have been instances where sailors have had to eat other humans to survive because they had no other options.  This is what makes me believe that what Pym goes through could actually happen, and why I am able to rationalize their cannibalism.  Yet, I think that if this never happened in real life, I wouldn't be able to accept their actions.  I think that we the reader are only able to accept such low moral choices in fiction if they are based in truth.  Thus, despite Poe's, let say interesting, narrative choices, I am able to accept that Pym and company had to resort to eating each other in order to survive.  In survival situations like the one the faced, it happens to be a valid option.