|
To elaborate on the last paragraph in my previous post, I think many readers interpret Edwardian fiction as fluffy and pointless. Modernism can be so ungenerous in what it gives to the reader that you just know and assume that there is something going on beneath the surface. Just think of Hemingway's iceberg theory. With Victorianism the themes are explicit and unmistakable. Edwardian fiction is not quite either. If you come into the work expecting nothing to be handed to you, like you would with a modernist work, you'll find that the narrator does give you something, and therefore conclude that the work is premodern. But when you try to read it as Victorian fiction you find that the narrator doesn't have nearly as much to say as Victorian narrators, and therefore conclude that the book itself has little to say.
|