Zamyatin is the epic writer of WE. He creates the setting in the text, which seems like an illusion of actual life from the responder’s point of view. Initially, he entices his readers into the world of the “One State”. The One State consists of people who are given numbers for their identification and they are forced to be happy. The language he uses throughout matches with the milieu and period portrayed. A good example is the language which describes the absurdity of killing, “To kill one individual… to diminish the total sum of human lives by fifty years, was criminal.” The average life expectancy at the time Zamyatin wrote the text was fifty and this milieu matches his language. Not only does the writer use language but also creates it. He has created his rules and forms by using authoritative first-person narration, “I shall simply copy, word for word…” By talking directly to the audience, there is intimate relationship between him and the responder. The story is more lively and exciting, “I love- I am certain I can safely say, we love- only such a sterile, immaculate sky.” Furthermore, the use of neologisms adds to the development and enrichment of Zamyatin’s language. One of his created word is “sic”, which adds to his emotion and feelings towards spring.
I think that this is a good analysis of "We" but you don't really mention "On Language" in your blog. You are writing more about "We" and the writing style of the novel and how it relates to actual history. There was a mention about history in “On Language” but you should show how. I think if you wrote some similarities and differences between the two pieces such as how they were written it would be better. You did mention "We" relates to history and this is cool because it gives more insight on how the author was actually part of the Russian Revolution like the quote about the absurdity of killing. I also like how you incorporated that Zamyatin makes up his own words in the novel.
ReplyDelete