notes on literary style concerning male protagonists: early-mid 20^th century vs. turn of 21^st century

– seems like an interesting thing to investigate, have noticed some interesting differences

– in significant works of early-mid 20^th century male protagonists seem to uphold certain amounts of confidence, toughness, dominance, even in the face of hardship, emotional experience, or tragedy

– beginning in late 20^th century, moving to 21^st, male protagonists seem to experience greater awkwardness, greater sense of helplessness and hopelessness, less ambition, less necessity to uphold spirit and status

– looking at early-mid 20^th century case study:

• heart of darkness (1899) – joseph conrad → protagnonist experiences the toils and fears of the dark continent and the death of significant character and has to deliver the news of death, never gives hint of emotional response besides disturbance, moves ‘overall’ confidently and dominatingly through the events of the story
• the dead (1914) – james joyce → gabriel finds out that his wife will never love him as much as this other man who died in youth, he seems disturbed, but okay with it overall, his revelation displays less emotional response than one should expect
• great gatsby (1925) – f. scott fitzgerald → gatsby experiences loss of love, something crippling and depressive, however, holds up social status, extravagant lifestyle, doesn’t cry, goes down ‘valiantly’
• goodbye columbus (1959) – philip roth → neil experiences loss of love, something depressing, wildly offensive based on social status and sexual experimentation, however, takes the thing in as a whole, rational experience, and ‘moves on’ ‘valiantly’
• revolutionary road (1961) – richard yates → frank leads to the essential suicide of his wife and the dismembering of his family due to his callousness and carelessness, seems kind of sad, but moves on ‘valiantly’ ‘picking up the pieces’
• seems kind of ridiculous how the male protagonist ‘moves on’ in all of these novels

– looking at turn of 21^st century case study:

• chilly scenes of winter (1976) – ann beattie → pervasive awkwardness, unfulfilledness, depression, desire, helplessness and hopelessness conveyed through the life and tribulations of protagonist charles, character is never able to ‘move on’ or ‘take control’ of life or ‘find happiness’ on his own, he is dependent, perhaps pathetic
• less than zero (1985) – bret easton ellis → clay fails to have any ambition or sense of direction, he lacks an ability to take control and make sense of things, he lacks ‘morals’ and has trouble controlling depression/emotions, he cries
• norwegian wood (1987) – haruki murakami → watanabe fails to make sense of his life, sexuality, sense of self, emotional connections to women, aimlessly dependent on emotions and sex, stuck in head, possibly ‘pathetic’
• everything is illuminated (2002) – jonathon safran foer → all three male protagonists experience a touching and intense journey, filled with emotion, introspection, love, leads to suicide of alex’s grandfather because he cannot handle the emotions and internal disturbances associated with his past, extremely emotional book/experience
• eeeee eee eeee (2006) – tao lin → pervasive awkwardness, lack of confidence, depression, desire, unfulfilledness, and open-endedness concerning andrew’s life, goals, experiences, overall sense of helplessness

– possible theories for variances in the actions/emotions/mindsets/approaches for the male protagonist which drastically have changed in a relatively short aesthetic time period:

• absence of military draft weakening sense of ‘strong powerful dominating man’
• improvements in technology creating sense of alienation, dependence, disillusionment
• absence of physical labor weakening physical and psychological libido and overall sense of ‘strength’ and ‘manhood’
• absence of ‘trying to impress father’ or ‘living for family honor’ or something
• active, rather than passive, displays of emotional via miranda july’s ‘new man’ theory from ‘the shared patio’
• advancements in female status/feminism
  • i.e. in the beginning of the 20^th century, there were few major female writers and these females writers who were major focused on females protagonists and experiences, while today there are more or less equal amounts of major female and major male writers, and females writers have even focused on male protagonists in stories and novels, perhaps this ‘second outlook’ has ‘degenitalized’ and ‘humanized’ the male protagonist in literature, taking away from the overall sense of ‘gallantness’ formerly associate with the male protagonist

– this whole idea seems insane

– why does this even matter

– the male protagonist is hilarious

– am i displaying something ‘overall’ about the male character in writing these notes