People – which we are weak. Nasty cowardly little people, torn in a thousand little scraps of contradictions, desires, passions, impulses, sense of duty, something strange called love imposed rules, moral cruelty, and wish only to be heard and understood. If you can, to be loved. And if they’re lucky enough to love. I’m not talking about reciprocity and balance. What is this?
Dreiser looks at wallowing in their own feelings of people caught up in these feelings, in relationships, in thoughts, and explains to the slightest movement of body and soul. Prepares, lays out, and then collects again, to be clear, so the main character has no chance to escape from the all-seeing Eye of the author. And the right to all the authors knew their characters, no, this understanding is not peculiar to each writer (in my imperfect opinion it is inherent Faulty, Tolstoy, Dostoevsky, more offhand can’t remember, maybe Maugham). Perhaps it’s the all-Seeing Eye Matures even too much, or not. Not so.
Here it is slightly tiny little minus of this book. Dreiser does not leave clues absolutely nothing. He writes a comprehensive picture, a huge canvas filled with tiny parts, here the corner of the lips down, then heard a small sigh, wherever you look – everywhere the light the emotion and the explanation developing in a woman. And I want to lay down. But that is so subjective. This book will not appeal to those who like to empathize with the main characters and wants to read about Mary sue. The main character is not Mary sue at all.
He’s weak, cowardly, easily comes under to another’s influence, in short, an ordinary man. However, he also is very perceptive to others emotions, empathic slightly, but the sense of his knowledge is zero. Fall in love with a girl – easy to love yourself – even easier, but what to do with it then? To invent some plan, the strategy of behavior people can not, it is for their sexual desires … like flies to sweet, and doesn’t want to do anything with them. Control? No, not heard. About the plot? And do you need it? “An American tragedy” – it is a kind of American “Crime and punishment”.
The first part tells the story of a hapless childhood and youth of Clyde Griffiths, the son of religious missionaries living in extreme poverty. Here Clyde is already weak and a coward (fled the scene, though, and was not guilty), and here begins his powerful desire to break out into the world, become the American dream.
In the second part of the Clyde invites to work on his uncle Scrooge, that is, his rich uncle is an entrepreneur and Clyde happily agrees, but he has to work in the most prestigious departments and workshops of the factory for the production of collars (on collars did?) And there at the factory Clyde breaks the pattern. Who am I? The trembling creature or have the right? I’m related to rich people or low-wage employee? Who can I make friends? How to behave? How to behave I ask?
His quest drags in high society, because it seems that’s it, lend a hand, by descent because you are already there in the alluring world of endless walks on a yacht and partying at the pool. But it’s all a house of cards, illusions, for Clyde, Aki you poor Church mouse, and these are your illusions drive in the coffin first, the girl has managed to fall in love again, and then the you. But it’s not illusion killed Robert? That Clyde killed her? Or he is not guilty, and it’s all an accident. Can you blame the person for the intention? Or need a fait accompli? I completely understand the jury of this court, in truth, Clyde was impossible to believe. But, hell, the eyes of Dreiser, we see much, much more than this jury, and that there is no clear framework and rules.
Many people probably agree with the verdict. And I (all such in a white coat) can’t blame Clyde that he’s just a man. He wanted to commit, but not committed. Or made, but unintentional. He too suffered terrible punishment for their cowardice and indecision. And why no one is blaming Robert? She is also a member, it takes two to tango. It also proved to be weak. Well, she fell for a pretty face Yes passion. But soon she saw who he was, why he continued to believe, when it’s not not believe it was impossible? Well, a fool. But here, Dreiser softens. Well, she loves him. Loves a weak. And this is the explanation I accept.