Literature teaches us that things are not always what they seem to be. Discuss. You might like to refer to the literature we are studying in the classroom.

[IFerrier]

[Vicky Ricci]

When we observe something or someone we tend to pay particular attention to their physical appearance. It is in our nature to judge upon what we see, consequently fooling the viewer. In literature we are constantly introduced to new characters and new faces to imagine. By the description of characters created by the authors, one is able to construct and judge the character from their point of view. Everyone was brought up differently, with different cultures and beliefs, allowing everyone to have a different prospective. Through what we perceive and what we believe, we judge. However, in literature, we judge a character which is later developed throughout the novel, sometimes uncovering assumptions. Through the character development, we learn more about its background information and how the character deals with situations. This could result in having a different opinion on the character by the end of the novel, teaching us that things aren't always what they seem to be.

[Amir.F]

In my opinion what Vicky has said is true. Because in real life we always pay attention to how the people around us wear and how they look like, however on the other in the world of literature things tend to look different. For example when analysing an extract from Othello we really do not care about how nice Othello or Iago wear we mainly focus on their character description. This teaches us that in real life we also need to seen how people look from inside, meaning their character and soul, not how they look from the outside. This also teaches us that judging people from appearance is not something wise.    

On Sunday, January 6, 2013 4:59:10 PM UTC+1, IFerrier wrote:

[Abdourahman John]

Although my classmates have valid points in assesing how character descriptions play a valid role in showing the reader that things are not always what they seem, I believe this can be best recognized through the plot. The plot is what dictates what you know or do not know, it is what shows the reader what is truly going on. When the plot twist is filled with events, this is when we truely see that things are not what they seem. For example in Katharina Blum you read two chapters of the novel and begin to get an idea of the characters and the novel, bus suddenly the assessment you drew on katharina, or what the book would be about changes, when you realize she has killed someone. The plot shows the reader that things can always appear to be something, but that doesnt mean they are. 

[Matej Vucak]

  We see the world a work of literature is set in the way the author wants us to see it. Our only glimpse of the characters and their setting comes from the information the author willingly divulges, and even then it may be hidden so that only the more observant readers can see it. 

  In this respect, I agree with Abdou more than with Vicky and Amir. While we do not/cannot judge characters by their physical description, this does not necessarily teach us the stated lesson: when I begin reading a book, I already expect to learn more about characters as they are developed and tend to not judge them by their physical description unless an unusual amount of emphasis or explanation accompanies it.

  An author's ability to withhold information or fool the reader, on the other hand, is really able to drive the above lesson home, in my opinion. The author can "fool" the reader simply by not revealing a character's thoughts, or even by using the already mentioned physical appearance for the same purpose: emphasizing it to make the reader think it is informative regarding the character. 

 The Lost Honor of Katharina bloom is a good example of this. While the reader knows that Katharina kills a journalist, they are lead to believe that she is reasonable and cool headed and that may believe that the murder was a result of a sudden circumstance or decision. However, it turns out that Katharina planned the murder beforehand. Had the reader had more of an insight into her thoughts (something he/she was denied by the author), then Katharina's actions may not have come as a shock.

[Arafat Hasnain]

In literature, the readers do not take part in any of the events that take place but analyze the work itself. So from the readers perspective there will certainly be a level of skepticism and the author takes use of that. Through the usage of literary devices such as metaphors, symbols and allusions, the author could intentionally try to present the plot in a manner to the readers which are not "true" in the work itself. 

On the other hand, this statement might not be valid for I Know Why The Caged Bird Sings. Maya Angelou narrates her life both from Marguerite's and her point of view. Since the work in question is an autobiography, chances are Angelou does not want to fool the readers and wants to tell her story without any hidden messages.

[AugustaA.]

Literature shows us maily that first impressions are never right. As Matej already said, The Lost Honour of katharina Blum is a great example of this. As we begin reading the book we do not sympathize with Katharina, but towards the end, after her story is narrated we feel it is right to take Katharina's side. Authors construct their stories in such a way that the reader takes part in judging the characters.However, I agree with Vittoria on the fact that it is our cultural background and beliefs that make up how we read through a book and interpret its characters and their stories. Through many different stylistic features we find that the truth is always hidden behind a great story that is yet to be told. I think what the great authors of literature really want us to do is look beyond what is right under our eyes. It might be easy to judge a character based on his/her acts, but knowing the stories behind them shows that there is more to the person than a villain or a hero. 

"Don't judge a book by its cover, you have to get to- say- page fifty before you do." Oprah Winfrey

[Cole Cabibbo]

I agree wholeheartedly with Abdou, the purpose of some storylines and plots are to confuse and surprise the reader. For example if we were to look at G.K. Chesterton's Sherlock Holmes novels, we would understand that the unorthodox methodology that Mr. Holmes uses is to show that you have to look passed the surface, and see what more there is; therefore he is teaching us that everything is not as it seems.

[Chianyul]

While others pay close attention to the plot and the characterization of a work of literature, another way to approach this statement is through the author's use of literary devices.

Matej has mentioned a valuable point that everything the readers see is what the author wants them to see. It is true that in literature, we tend to look at the progression of characters, which is one reason why round characters are more interesting to us than flat ones. However, the way we see these characters are not what they are but what the author describes them to be. For example, in Katharina Blum, Katharina knowingly killed a man, yet she is still described as the heroine of the story. A despicable act such as murder would usually responded with hatred, yet Katharina's story made the readers feel sympathetic. Similarly, the author uses language and presentation to manipulate the reader's mind to either deliver a message or to hide a fact - either way things are not what they seem to be.