Writer 1879: Solitary Journey in France

Chapter 41: Can you handle this answer that represents fifty years of accumulated skill?

If a 20th or 21st-century writer heard this question, they would first widen their eyes in surprise, and then burst out laughing.

Whether a writer has "pity" for the characters he creates, and whether he infers from them whether they possess "humanitarian spirit," is something that later writers would consider utterly absurd and ridiculous.

However, in the 19th century, it was perfectly normal for criticism of the moral orientation of a work to extend to criticism of the author's own moral values.

Writers deemed "morally corrupt" can be prosecuted in court, facing fines in minor cases and even imprisonment in serious ones.

After Baudelaire's "Les Fleurs du Mal" was published, he was fined 300 francs by the court for "offensive to public morals" and ordered to remove six of his major poems from the collection. At the time, only a very small number of people in the French literary world stood by Baudelaire.

Maupassant also encountered a similar lawsuit—he once published a poem titled "A Young Girl" in the magazine *Modernist and Naturalist*, the content of which was roughly as follows:
I am searching, searching within stories… / I am searching for a young girl. / A girl whose body may still be free, but whose soul is bound, / Bound by vows, promises, or verbal commitments. / A noble girl, well-educated, proud, and self-respecting… / The kind of girl a man can say to her, “You are mine!”

Although the poem contained no obscene language, the Ettenpo court still deemed it offensive and prepared to bring Maupassant to trial.

Later, through the intervention of his teacher Flaubert, and the efforts of a group of writers using their connections and public opinion, he was spared imprisonment.

Therefore, Professor Gaston Boischer's question was quite sharp, directly addressing the core of the novel "The Old Guard".

Lionel certainly couldn't simply copy those literary theories that only emerged in the 20th century, such as "the bystander," "the news media," and "the death of the author," as that would only enrage these 19th-century scholars and make them think he was a madman.

Lionel did not avoid eye contact with Professor Gaston Boischer, then stood up and replied, “Professor Boischer, thank you for your attention to perspective. But on the contrary, I believe this ‘little guy’ perspective is the path to the deepest compassion.”

Pity, Professor Boischer, doesn't always manifest as tears or cries; sometimes, it lies hidden beneath a kind of 'ignorance' shaped by the social atmosphere.

This statement sparked a brief discussion, and Hugo was clearly surprised by this insightful remark.

He had just finished reading "The Old Guard" and also had doubts about whether such a masterpiece was written by the young man in front of him.

But Lionel's words convinced him of most of it.

Lionel's young, clear voice echoed in the hall with its towering dome: "Young man, the 'I' in the novel, was not born cold-hearted; he is a product of that tavern world, that rigidly hierarchical society."

His apathy reflects the widespread indifference of society. Therefore, I want him to "see" without "understand," and "record" without "judgment."

Only in this way can the reader fill in that enormous emotional void—to feel, beneath the seemingly 'cold' narrative, the old guard's silent screams as his dignity is repeatedly trampled upon, and the cruelty hidden in the laughter of the onlookers.

The word "spectator?" immediately drew attention when Lionel uttered it. Even the erudite Professor Gaston Boischer paused for a moment, subconsciously pondering the connotation of the word.

For a time, he couldn't find a more accurate or profound corresponding work or image in the vast world of French literature, or even in the entire European literary world.

But this does not mean that "spectators" do not exist—on the contrary, "they" are common among the French. "They" are not a specific person, but a cold and indifferent attitude towards the tragedies in life.

Most writers in France or other European countries are immersed in grand narratives and have never brought such people to the literary stage.

Lionel, however, achieved this in his *The Old Guard*—at this point, Professor Gaston Boischer's doubts about Lionel have been largely dispelled. No one but the creator of the work could have answered this question so perfectly.

But Lionel's response did not end there: "This 'dehumanized' presentation is itself the greatest indictment of a society that devours humanity and forgets heroes."

The object of my pity is not only the old guard, but also the spiritual wasteland of the entire society that numbed the "I" in the novel.

Shouldn't the humanism of literature reveal the cruelty of this 'collective unconscious' rather than merely offer a cheap, sentimental perspective of sympathizers?

"Collective unconsciousness?" Professor Gaston Boischer was once again lost in thought about this term, feeling as if his brain was about to boil.

He then discovered that this word, like "spectator," accurately depicts, from a psychological perspective, the behavior of people in a social environment who express their emotions without thinking and simply follow the crowd.

This is also an area that French or European literature has never touched upon before—"naturalism" attributes all human psychological and behavioral motivations to the influence of hereditary diseases. Zola even wrote a novel, "The Rougon-Macquart Family," to interpret this idea.

To some extent, most of the Sorbonne's professors, including Gaston Boischer and Hippolyte Taine, were believers in "naturalism".

This is related to the overall social reflection following France's crushing defeat in the Franco-Prussian War of 1871—the French generally believed that the defeat was due to the fact that French society and culture were not "scientific" enough, were too "sentimental," and overly revered "art."

Simply put, they think there are too many liberal arts students in France!
As a result, a vigorous "scientific and technological" movement swept through French society, and many famous writers and artists were expelled from university campuses. The Sorbonne even considered whether to close its Faculty of Arts.

In this atmosphere, literature, painting, and music all began to seek their own "scientific basis," and "naturalism" based on pathology, genetics, and psychology became everyone's lifeline.

However, Lionel's concept of "collective unconsciousness" seemed to have a magical power, gently shaking the tower of "naturalism" in the minds of Gaston Boischer and the other professors present.

The length of "The Old Guard" is too concise and brief to fully demonstrate the profound meaning of the "onlookers'" "collective unconscious," but it has already deeply shaken them.

With just one question, Professor Gaston Boischer felt that the inquiry was no longer a test for Lionel Sorel, but an opportunity for the young man to step onto the historical stage.

Lionel was secretly amused. Lu Xun's "spectator" and Jung's "collective unconscious" were terms he had carefully selected, which were born in the early 20th century.

Even if these late 19th-century scholars could not precisely understand their meaning, they could still feel their impact.

This answer contains the wisdom gained from fifty years of development in literature and psychology. Can you handle it?
Just as the atmosphere was becoming increasingly delicate, Professor Paul Jannet, sitting to Hugo's left, spoke up: "Mr. Sorel, you are the young man I have ever met who is most adept at creating 'new words'."

But let’s talk about structure. This novel has almost no 'plot' in the traditional sense. It consists of a series of fragmented scenes: the old guard appears, is mocked, interacts with the children, talks about the past, and finally suffers a tragic broken leg and dies silently.

Without intense conflict or dramatic climax, it seems to lack the tension of a novel. How do you explain this narrative style that seems to violate the dramatic principles established by Aristotle?

Is it merely a matter of technical laziness or a failed experiment?

(Please vote with monthly tickets! Thank you everyone!)

(End of this chapter)