Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
John Barth's, Lost in the Funhouse ("Ambrose wondered what Magda…
John Barth's, Lost in the Funhouse
Postmodern view is to say that the styles of the current time needs to move beyond, and it usually debates on the modernist's views.
author use metafiction as a means of ways to step away from the actual fiction in order to fiction in order to criticize the work being done
-
-
Coming of Age genre: About a boy name Ambrose who is interested in a girl while still learning about himself.
-
John Barth starts connecting himself to Ambrose and actually starts making readers confused on differentiating who is speaking in the text
There are three different people really talking in the story-- The narrator, Ambrose, and John Barth himself
-
-
He adds a short italics lesson: "italics are also employed, in fictional stores especially, for 'outside,' intrusive, or artificial voices, such as radio announcements..." (1018)
skips around a lot between plot and the commentary that he adds either about the plot itself or even historical background
barth becomes kind of self conscious in his writing-- his use of repetition of certain words and phrases make it seem like so
Barth includes his psychological knowledge about adolescents: "a girl of fourteen is the psychological coeval of a boy of fifteen or sixteen; a thirteen-year-old boy, therefore, even one precocious in some other respects, might be three years her emotional junior" (1019)
Barth referring to the women right's movement when acknowledging psychological facts about girls and the character Magda
Barth advertises a book, Ulysses, written by James Joyce to show examples of the adjectives he uses in the story to show imagery
Hard to tell if Barth or the narrator or ambrose is in love with Madga: "Magda's figure was exceedingly well developed for her age" (1024) is actually mentioned again on page 1025
I get the sense that he is writing in a somewhat structure such as showing plot, commentary on how the plot should be written, providing examples himself, and then also providing evidence such as the Joyce book.
Barth is building up his ethos by providing these contextual information-- he seems kind of conscious about what his readers will think about him as a writer
Barth starts mimicking the use of imagery and descriptions by overwhelming the readers with too many details that are not really relevant.
Sometimes Barth fails to complete a thought or sentence and just continues on to the next one. Example: "The smell of Uncle Karl's cigar smoke reminded one of." (1019)
The prenote says it all: "Barth has lost his faith in fiction and instead is self-consciously concerned with what happens when a writer writes, and what happens when a reader reads..."
Barth abruptly stops the plot and makes comments on what specific literary devices he's using in that specific line-- makes readers feel stupid.
on page 1020, a matchbook with a cover that advertises U.S. War bonds and Stamps is symbolic and Barth upright starts giving a lesson on the figures of speech.
Barth struggles on describing characteristics of Ambrose's father-- he just kind of gives up and says: "The boys' father is difficult to describe; no particular feature of his appearance or manner stood out. He wore glasses and was principal of a T---- County grade school" (1020)
There are frequent mentions of cigarettes between the adults... i think it's supposed to symbolize the chaotic stress during this time contextually.
In the 1960's America was very split on war: some were for it and some very against it. The mom provides a song: "what's good in the Army, What's left will never harm me" (1025). This kind of represents the people's view, especially that of an adult's, that war is needed and justifiable.
More useless information: "uncle karl tapped his cigar ash out the ventilator window; some particles... (not gonna finish because it's that useless)" (1025)
I feel like barth does this to make exemplify that writing a fictional story requires so much useless information.
Barth starts critiquing his writing: "the beginning should recount the event between Ambrose's first sight of the funhouse early in the afternoon..." (1021)
while laying out the rules of fiction to his readers he somewhat rebels against them and just ignores them blatantly.
Barth is showing connections towards his feelings to the countermovement in the 1960s and rebelling against formalities.
Barth knows how his readers are reading throughout his story, he even says on page 1022, "and a long time has gone by already without anything happening; it makes a person wonder. We haven't reached Ocean City yet; we will never get out of the funhouse."
Readers are feeling this sense of being in the funhouse themselves because of how lost they feel in the story with all the commentary and changing of plots.
He states, "the more closely an author identifies with the narrator, literally or metaphorically, the less advisable it is, as a rule, to use the first-person narrative viewpoint" (1022).
"Ambrose wondered what Magda would have done, Ambrose wondered what Magda would do when she sat back on his hands as he resolved she should" (1022)-- this causes Barth to seem self-conscious in his writing.
Barth defies all structure purposes. He even includes Freitag's triangle and gives readers a lesson on how it applies. He says its not necessary but that it is the most conventional means of writing a fictional story, but then he defies everything and doesn't follow the genre conventions of fiction.
Again, "at this rate our hero, at this rate our protagonist..."(1022). Barth shows incompetence once again.
He states that "Narrative ordinarily consists of alternation dramatization and summarization" (1022)-- this contradicting on what he is actually doing though because of the metafiction aspect of the story.
Barth notes that his writing has gone astray and something is wrong: "We should be much further along than we are; something has gone wrong; not much of the preliminary rambling seems relevant. yet everyone begins in the same place; how is it that most go along without difficulty" (1023). Another critique on his work.
Even after his mentioning that italics should be used sparingly, he still decides to use them throughout the text--- rebelling or is it showing one on how to use them properly.
Barth includes another repetition: "we would do the latter. We would do the latter. We would do the latter" (1023).
Barth also uses incomplete thought to showcase his struggles on his writing: "He perspires in the dark passages, candied apples-on-a-stick, delicious-looking, disappointing to eat" (1023). He's given up on writing complete thoughts... shows exhaustion
He gives reasons as to why the word "fuck" is given and then makes a long analytical paragraph describing the significance of generations and ancestors.
He includes another lesson on initials saying that it helps with liability issues and keeps the "illusion" of a story more real; to which Barth actually mocks and says, "interestingly, as with other aspects of realism, it is an illusion that is being enhanced, by purely artificial means" (1118)
He uses the work "et cetera" many times throughout the story to basically tell the readers that everything he says is irrelevant and useless.
Barth jumps from the scene of the drive to Ocean City to the scene that Ambrose is lost already... defying the rules of structure in fictional works.
-
Uncle Karl's statement: "who needed reminding just look at people's hair and skin" (1024). This refers to the civilrights movement which was amplifying during the 1960s.
-
Ambrose's kind of seems like the "hippie" for wanting to be distant from past struggles such as the long dresses, and she also believes that the fireworks don't need to be displayed because it reminds her of the real shots from war.
Ambrose's father symbolizes the pro war person: "their father said all the more reason to shoot off a few now and again" (1024).
Barth outright says "Nobody likes a pedant" (1025) He doesn't include this in a paragraph but on its own line. maybe he's trying to refer the point that bureacratical system acts as if they know what's best for everyone.
Magda almost being dragged in the pool scene on page (1025). It is representing those (hippies) in the world who dont want to dragged into the troubles and chaos but are somewhat inescapable because they are forced to.
Barth straight up tells readers about the literary symbol of the diving board-- its a clear passage and you know where you end up at; you dont get lost in the gunk of it all.
Ambrose feel insignificant to his older brother Peter. He thinks he is less masculine. this is especially weird because Barth depicts Peter as if he's a little child throughout the plot
Another depressing commentary from the fellow: "there's no point in going farther; this isnt getting anybody anywhere; they haven't even come to the funhouse yet" (1026).
Barth mentions that peter is actually the one that is insignificant: "Peter didn't have one-tenth the imagination he had, not one tenth" (1026).
He makes fun of literacy once again and his incompetency by stating, "His eyes watered, there aren't enough ways to say that" (1026).
Barth contradicts himself when he says, "...he'd stroke her hair and said in his deepest voice and correctest English" (1026). Barth incorrectly uses the word correct but then says that Ambrose would use the best grammar.
Barth captures kind of the theme of the story when he tries to describe Ambrose's future which is "your internal struggles and curiosities are aspects of the circle of life. Everybody at some point goes through it, and when you have children, they too will go through it."
Hippie movement: they were rejecting wars happening around the world that America was forcing itself on such as the Vietnam War. They wanted to completely reject the capitalist system and even created their own government with laws and leaders.
Barth connects to the Hippies. They have lost their faith in the government; meanwhile Barth has lost faith in fiction.
In the section on page 1027 from, "the day wore on..." to "he found one that you weren't supposed to find and strayed off into the works somewhere", Barth basically is insinuating that there's really no way out to your struggles and they will always be there to bite you.
Barth compares the funhouse to the diving board and says they are in fact opposites: the funhouse is a never ending hell hole that you are trapped in. There's no way out and it's confusing and distorts your train of thought.
Another depressing comment for our friend Barth, "I'll never be an author" (1028).
-
On page 1028, Barth includes different alternative routes that he could've taken rather than the one he chose but still continues on. He's already given up.
On page 1029, Barth especially brings out the awkward teenager in Ambrose by saying that people don't know what to make of him and he doesn't know what to make of himself... gives readers a sense of annihilation.
-
In the passage on page 1030, from "but i reckon we can manage somehow..." to "...acknowledgement from the other characters," shows the blending that Barth starts applying in his story which causes confusion to readers Barth is talking while Ambrose should be---- he connects to Ambrose.
Metafiction is a way of breaking down that fourth wall in literary works. We're not supposed to know that there's a narrator because it breaks the illusion but Barth does so.
"One reason for not writing a lost-in-the funhouse story is that either everybody's felt what ambrose feels, in which case it goes without saying, or else no normal person feels such things, in which case Ambrose is a freak 'Is anything more tiresome, in fiction, than the problems of sensitive adolescents" (1031).
-