Blogs

    I’d like to start this off by first giving attention to the details. The amount of imagery put into this novel was incredible. The narrator painted an authentic picture of the Passage de l’Opéra and the Buttes-Chaumont. I have never read anything quite like this where I was so vividly transported into the scenes. It takes the reader and places them directly into the eyes and thoughts of the narrator. One thing that I found really added to the novel was the incorporation of different menus, signs, and newspaper clippings, the visual element gave more dimensions to the story that made the reader feel as if they were there too. As well as the visual elements I thought it was cool that Aragon incorporated a playlet on page 74 and a fable on page 68 to add new elements.

    The narrator is constantly analyzing their surroundings and putting intellectual reasoning behind everything he sees. So I found it amusing on page 101 when he says “I would have never thought of myself as an observer,” contradicting the whole novel. Not only did the detail transport us to the setting, but through the narrator's inner monologue we were given a chance to immerse ourselves into the setting and what it was like to walk through an arcade  at this time. I like the fact that the narrator was just wandering aimlessly around without purpose because you never get to see from that perspective. With nothing to do except walk around and observe, and the fact that it is the narrator's domain, everything feels more genuine. I think everyone is usually so busy and with purpose in both reality and in fiction and the author was able to give us an outlook that we do not usually see.

I found it hard to follow along with this text as it didn’t follow any of the traditional makings of a story. I found it confusing and I think reading it a few more times would help me make sense of it. I have no background knowledge on surrealism in literature, but I thought that Paris Peasant was a good place to start. This was a new point of view that I have never come across before. However, I also think a lot of the context went over my head. My Question for this post is: What did you think of this perspective? Did it give you insight and provoke thought or did you find it difficult to make sense of?

read full post >>

    I’d like to start this off by first giving attention to the details. The amount of imagery put into this novel was incredible. The narrator painted an authentic picture of the Passage de l’Opéra and the Buttes-Chaumont. I have never read anything quite like this where I was so vividly transported into the scenes. It takes the reader and places them directly into the eyes and thoughts of the narrator. One thing that I found really added to the novel was the incorporation of different menus, signs, and newspaper clippings, the visual element gave more dimensions to the story that made the reader feel as if they were there too. As well as the visual elements I thought it was cool that Aragon incorporated a playlet on page 74 and a fable on page 68 to add new elements.

    The narrator is constantly analyzing their surroundings and putting intellectual reasoning behind everything he sees. So I found it amusing on page 101 when he says “I would have never thought of myself as an observer,” contradicting the whole novel. Not only did the detail transport us to the setting, but through the narrator's inner monologue we were given a chance to immerse ourselves into the setting and what it was like to walk through an arcade  at this time. I like the fact that the narrator was just wandering aimlessly around without purpose because you never get to see from that perspective. With nothing to do except walk around and observe, and the fact that it is the narrator's domain, everything feels more genuine. I think everyone is usually so busy and with purpose in both reality and in fiction and the author was able to give us an outlook that we do not usually see.

I found it hard to follow along with this text as it didn’t follow any of the traditional makings of a story. I found it confusing and I think reading it a few more times would help me make sense of it. I have no background knowledge on surrealism in literature, but I thought that Paris Peasant was a good place to start. This was a new point of view that I have never come across before. However, I also think a lot of the context went over my head. My Question for this post is: What did you think of this perspective? Did it give you insight and provoke thought or did you find it difficult to make sense of?

read full post >>

From the degree of the angle to which a building is adjacent from another, to the palpable explanations of otherwise mundane objects, like a chair, Aragon’s words draw the reader in as imagination blends with description. I had never read a book quite like this before. With little plot, but extensive descriptions mixed with existential […] read full post >>

Paris Peasant was an incredibly unique literary experience that left me in a haze of contradicting emotions and thoughts. As was stated previously in the lecture Louis Aragon does this through putting aside traditional narrative convention altogether in favour of … Continue reading → read full post >>

Hello! I just finished reading Aragon’s Paris Peasant and here are some of my thoughts. I initially read the first 50 pages or so and enjoyed the prose, but it was often confusing and it felt like there was little structure, so I had trouble understanding it. Individual sentences seemed to make sense but I often […] read full post >>

Aragon’s “Paris Peasant” was a strange experience to read. The text describes venturing through the Passage de L’Opéra, which includes cafes, theatres, and small shops. The journey is rather imaginative due to its ambiguity. A consistent theme in this book is its surrealism. There are illogical scenes combined that make the text so unordinary. For […] read full post >>

 

I actually absolutely despised this book when I first started it. It was really difficult to get into for me and also the weird comments like him wishing to touch women with *atleast* his hands in the beginning (page 8) really threw me off. Anyway, thankfully after like 20 pages of reading mindlessly and absorbing absolutely no information I actually came to enjoy Paris Peasant. I’ve never read a surrealist novel before and I wasn’t quite sure what to expect but in the end I found it very fun to read. While the confusing and nonsensical structure of the book bothered me at first once I realized I should view the book more as an artwork than a conventional story with a beginning, middle and end, it became really intriguing. I noticed that Dada/Dadaism was mentioned quite a few times (actually it may have not been that many but it really stood out to me anyway). Dada or Dadaism is an art movement that is mentioned pretty frequently in art courses due to its effect on the art world. The movement developed after/in reaction to WW1 and spanned many types of art including literature. I believe that Paris Peasant itself could be described as “dadaist” (is that an adjective?) but honestly I don’t understand the movement well enough to say for sure. In my opinion it fits the “anti-art” ideal that Dada came from. Paris Peasant is definitely not what I would expect from a novel, it is avant-garde and breaks away from traditional narration due to it’s surrealism. For me, the few mentions of Dada made the focus on change and modernization, or perhaps the attempt to deny it was happening, more clear to me.

On a different note. 

This may just be me but I found that the detailed descriptions that showed up constantly throughout the novel caused me to feel that sort of hazey, never quite woke up that day type of feeling. The days where you feel removed from all the situations you're in while still noticing every little detail. Because there wasn’t really a classic plot to follow, I didn’t have anything to grasp onto, no character to watch change and evolve, only specific places, objects, people. I had no choice but to continue reading and immerse myself into the dreamlike state I imagine the narrator was also feeling. Overall I found this novel a lot more fun to read than I originally expected but I am very curious if anyone actually managed to read this without getting incredibly lost at some point, especially when reading the first little section. 

That's all for now, same as last week I probably missed some incredibly obvious theme but alteast I enjoyed it haha. 


read full post >>

 

I actually absolutely despised this book when I first started it. It was really difficult to get into for me and also the weird comments like him wishing to touch women with *atleast* his hands in the beginning (page 8) really threw me off. Anyway, thankfully after like 20 pages of reading mindlessly and absorbing absolutely no information I actually came to enjoy Paris Peasant. I’ve never read a surrealist novel before and I wasn’t quite sure what to expect but in the end I found it very fun to read. While the confusing and nonsensical structure of the book bothered me at first once I realized I should view the book more as an artwork than a conventional story with a beginning, middle and end, it became really intriguing. I noticed that Dada/Dadaism was mentioned quite a few times (actually it may have not been that many but it really stood out to me anyway). Dada or Dadaism is an art movement that is mentioned pretty frequently in art courses due to its effect on the art world. The movement developed after/in reaction to WW1 and spanned many types of art including literature. I believe that Paris Peasant itself could be described as “dadaist” (is that an adjective?) but honestly I don’t understand the movement well enough to say for sure. In my opinion it fits the “anti-art” ideal that Dada came from. Paris Peasant is definitely not what I would expect from a novel, it is avant-garde and breaks away from traditional narration due to it’s surrealism. For me, the few mentions of Dada made the focus on change and modernization, or perhaps the attempt to deny it was happening, more clear to me.

On a different note. 

This may just be me but I found that the detailed descriptions that showed up constantly throughout the novel caused me to feel that sort of hazey, never quite woke up that day type of feeling. The days where you feel removed from all the situations you're in while still noticing every little detail. Because there wasn’t really a classic plot to follow, I didn’t have anything to grasp onto, no character to watch change and evolve, only specific places, objects, people. I had no choice but to continue reading and immerse myself into the dreamlike state I imagine the narrator was also feeling. Overall I found this novel a lot more fun to read than I originally expected but I am very curious if anyone actually managed to read this without getting incredibly lost at some point, especially when reading the first little section. 

That's all for now, same as last week I probably missed some incredibly obvious theme but alteast I enjoyed it haha. 


read full post >>

I enjoyed the book immensely when it comes to Louis Aragon’s Paris Peasant, even though the text started as somewhat confusing for me. Though, what I found most interesting about the text was the plot, or rather the lack of plot in the story. Much of the novel tends to describe different locations in the city […] read full post >>

Before I read this week, I decided to watch the lecture before reading rather than afterward like I did last week. It really helped me to grasp at themes to expect while reading. I really kept in mind Professor Jon’s question of “how does Aragon view or depict the passage of time? What sense of …

Continue reading "Paris Peasant by Louis Aragon"

read full post >>