Or so says Cameron, in explaining how Keating passed over the Realism section in the "Pritchard" textbook. Perhaps it makes sense to you now after reading stories like Bartleby, The Yellow Wallpaper, Paul's Case, and The Second Choice. I'm reminded of the exchange of verse between Keating and the Latin teacher:
Latin teacher: Show me a man unfettered by foolish dreams, and I'll show you a happy man.
Keating: But only in his dreams can a man truly be free; twas always thus and always will be.
Latin teacher: Tennyson?
Keating: No, Keating (with a wink).
So what I'm wondering is, what do you think of these realist stories? Do you think they are more relevant because they are more realistic? I sometimes think of American Literature as reaching a peak of liberation and unadulterated transcendental freedom with Walt Whitman... then everything that has followed has served to complicate the idea, to show how it's not as easy as it seems to get through the mud and muck to reach the hard bottom and say, This is. "Paul's Case" is complicated, but one thing I think it's about is how easy it is to fall into a trap where you think you are some kind of romantic individualist, but in the end you really just think you're better than "common" people. That's a dangerous trap. And while everyone would like to think they would make the brave choice and stand up against the heavy wave of social expectation, don't you think that the vast majority of people would, like Shirley, choose the easier, safer path of least resistance?
