| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立高雄師範大學 === 英語學系 === 92 === Abstract
Both E. M. Forster and V. S. Naipaul already have got celebrity in literature, and were also honored, admired by contemporary writers and readers during their different time eras. Although Forster wrote much fewer novels than Naipaul, this would not prevent Forster from becoming popular. Forster’s A Passage to India was regarded as the most successful novel of his works, and An Area of Darkness was considered as Naipaul’s most famous and life-like traveling writing. It is worthwhile to examine and compare the distinctions (strengths and weaknesses) between these two novels about the different time zones of India. Needless to say, different authors will naturally produce different styles of writing, but there is more than that. So my intention of writing this thesis is to explore the main factors that constitute their differences instead of discovering their flaws and merits through the historical-biographical aspects.
There are five sections in my thesis. The introduction explains my motives and methods of comparing and evaluating these two novels, as well as delineates these two novelists’ backgrounds and the most influential factors on them. Furthermore, it explores the major themes of these two novels.
Chapter one concentrates on the textual analysis and comparison of these two novels and makes and judgments about their strategies and tones toward India. A Passage to India was looked upon as an imperial and modern writing, while An Area of Darkness was a postmodern one. In other words, E. M. Forster’s strategy was more traditional and conservative, and V. S. Naipaul’s was more casual and easy to read. Forster’s tone was sympathetic and warm in contrast with Naipaul’s mercilessness and wryness.
Chapter two focuses on their rhetorical differences through the historical-biographical perspectives. It can’t be denied that their time eras had great impacts on their usage of English and writing techniques. Forster’s words are simple, condensed, meditative, and poetic; on the contrary, Naipaul’s are colloquial, detailed, critical, and prosaic.
Chapter three deals with these two authors’ different religious beliefs. Religion plays a very important role in these two authors’ themes as well as the characters in their novels. Forster had keen observations of friendship and conflicts among his characters, especially paying attention to the moral and philosophical unresolvabilities during the British imperial occupation of India. He was pessimistic with human nature, so he had been longing for the peace of religion. Naipaul kept tracing his originality to clear up the darkness in his mind and imagination so as to attain a psychological wholeness and harmony as well as to examine the psychological formulations of the postcolonial minds of his characters.
The final section wraps up some major differences between these two novels and sums up the purpose of my thesis.
|
|---|
