I imagine the aim of the novelist is for the reader to have an understanding/sympathy of the protagonist, but not overly identify with them if they are pursuing something reckless that will lead to their destruction. Does that make sense? Sometimes I find myself 'rooting' for a character, as it were, and then they do something that I just can't swallow morally/ethically speaking. The novelist likely has this in mind as they're writing, and that makes it all the more daunting a task to write good literature. Or perhaps that's not what Flannery is saying here. I'll have to think on this...
That makes perfect sense, Melisa. It’s a tricky balance for a writer—to elicit sympathy for the protagonist while at the same time showing how we should judge the choices of the protagonist. That book by Wayne Booth, and especially the chapter on Emma, is all about this.
I imagine the aim of the novelist is for the reader to have an understanding/sympathy of the protagonist, but not overly identify with them if they are pursuing something reckless that will lead to their destruction. Does that make sense? Sometimes I find myself 'rooting' for a character, as it were, and then they do something that I just can't swallow morally/ethically speaking. The novelist likely has this in mind as they're writing, and that makes it all the more daunting a task to write good literature. Or perhaps that's not what Flannery is saying here. I'll have to think on this...
That makes perfect sense, Melisa. It’s a tricky balance for a writer—to elicit sympathy for the protagonist while at the same time showing how we should judge the choices of the protagonist. That book by Wayne Booth, and especially the chapter on Emma, is all about this.