This essay aims to address the dichotomy faced by the ‘creator’ in the European novel – a collision between the fundamental desire to strive for immortality by projecting a shadow of oneself through time, or to adopt a hedonistic disregard for convention born from a failure (or unwillingness) to achieve the aforementioned compulsion.
Table of Contents
1. Hedonism and the Hobbesian: the dichotomy of the creator in a European literary State of Nature
Research Objectives and Themes
This essay explores the existential dichotomy faced by 'creators' in European literature, specifically investigating how the failure to achieve the fundamental human instinct of creating a lasting legacy drives individuals into a Hobbesian 'state of nature', subsequently leading to hedonistic or destructive behaviors to substitute for lost purpose.
- The Hobbesian concept of the 'state of nature' in a literary context.
- St. Augustine’s 'great elemental point' as the primary motivation for human creation.
- Existential crisis resulting from the failure of creative self-actualisation.
- Comparative analysis of creative failure in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein and Dezső Kosztolányi’s Skylark.
- Hedonism as a coping mechanism for individuals lacking meaningful creative outlets.
Excerpt from the Book
Hedonism and the Hobbesian: the dichotomy of the creator in a European literary State of Nature
“Our lives are a working out of the process of creation”, wrote St. Augustine. “All our ambitions and intelligence are beside that great elemental point.” Creation, therefore, is the human privilege, the cynosure of the most fundamental process born from millennia of human instinct to survive – to preserve oneself by extending one’s creation into a future populated by the produce of countless others’ identical compulsions. This intrinsically human desire to ‘create’ remains constant despite the undulating nature of society and institution, but it is by no means uninhibited.
This essay aims to address the dichotomy faced by the ‘creator’ in the European novel – a collision between the fundamental desire to strive for immortality by projecting a shadow of oneself through time, or to adopt a hedonistic disregard for convention born from a failure (or unwillingness) to achieve the aforementioned compulsion. The absence of the former is something of an anthropological phenomenon, as it seems to defy what Augustine refers to as the ‘great elemental point’. For those for whom this is the case, it seems to stand in defiance of the necessary intent propagated by generations of habit, and potentially throws the objective of one’s own existence into confused futility.
Summary of Chapters
Hedonism and the Hobbesian: the dichotomy of the creator in a European literary State of Nature: This chapter establishes the theoretical framework by linking Hobbes's political philosophy to the existential struggle of literary characters who fail to create, arguing that this failure leads to a state of nature characterized by isolation, hedonism, and despair.
Keywords
Hedonism, Hobbes, State of Nature, Creation, Frankenstein, Skylark, Existentialism, Solipsism, Mortality, Self-actualisation, Literary Theory, Legacy, Identity, Bellum omnium contra omnes, Human Instinct
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the fundamental premise of this paper?
The paper examines how the human drive to create a lasting legacy acts as a primary motivator and how the failure to fulfill this drive causes individuals to descend into an existential state of nature.
What are the central themes discussed?
The central themes include the philosophical connection between creation and immortality, the psychological impact of creative failure, and the use of hedonistic behavior as a surrogate for meaningful purpose.
What is the primary research question?
The essay seeks to understand the dichotomy between the desire to achieve immortality through creation and the adoption of a hedonistic disregard for societal norms when that creative goal remains unfulfilled.
Which scientific or theoretical methods are applied?
The author applies Hobbesian political theory and Augustinian philosophical concepts to literary analysis to interpret the behavior of characters in Shelley's and Kosztolányi's novels.
What is covered in the main body of the work?
The main body focuses on a comparative analysis of Victor Frankenstein and his monster, as well as the character Ákos Vajkay from Skylark, analyzing how each experiences and responds to the failure of their creative goals.
Which keywords best characterize the research?
Key terms include Hobbesian state of nature, creative compulsion, existential dichotomy, literary hedonism, and self-actualisation.
How does Victor Frankenstein represent the 'failed creator' in this study?
Victor represents a failed creator because he creates life that is a perversion of nature, which in turn leaves him existentially haunted and drives him into a state of war against his own creation.
In what way does the character Ákos Vajkay in Skylark relate to the theory?
Ákos is interpreted as a father who views his daughter as a failed creative project, leading him to abandon his parental identity and seek solace in youthful hedonism at the Panther club.
Why does the author associate the 'state of nature' with the absence of creation?
The author argues that without the 'common power' of a purposeful creative goal, individuals lose their societal anchor, mirroring the Hobbesian condition of a life that is 'nasty, brutish, and short'.
- Quote paper
- Harry Taylor (Author), 2011, Hedonism and the Hobbesian: the dichotomy of the creator in a European literary State of Nature, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.hausarbeiten.de/document/207920
