Today we stick with the novel Treasure Island – the treasure island which is a pioneer in the literature of the seas, pirates and perhaps adventure, which has been translated into Arabic several times and transferred in the cinema more than we can count. Its writer is the Scottish poet and novelist Robert Louis Stevenson – Robert Louis Stevenson is primarily known for this novel, although this does not prevent him from producing another iconic work, Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde. This article is not an analysis of the novel, so it does not expect an account of its events, a summary of its ideas, or a judgment on its characters and the lesson they learn from them.
Rather, we go through the text and follow random thoughts from its side on classical literature, its reproduction, evaluation, domesticity, etc., which I usually don’t do when reviewing, but the truth is that I rarely rate the novel itself and often take it as a way to present ideas about totals such as writing, fiction, etc.
We recommend that you read: Books for Arajik Magazine: novels that did not lose their status after being converted into animated filmsإقرأ أيضا:المرأة السودانية فاتنة دوماً كالقهوة والشوكولاتة
Treasure Island and Character Building
I am writing about this novel because I recently completed the four seasons that are the basis of the Black Sails series, and this is for those unfamiliar with a historical series of pirates who recite the story of the years before. the events of the novel Treasure Island. As a result, my reading of the events of the novel has been supported by an accumulation for which Robert Louis Stevenson is not responsible, and it is an accumulation that some see as a betrayal of the novel and its writer, not only because of its existence, but because of its reflection on the immortal and sacred text which is autonomous and linked to a temporal context which cannot be modified.
It’s understandable, and I even agree with some of them. But I did not quote this to defend her, but rather to show that the characters who contained pages that did not reach the hundred (in the translation of the Hindawi Foundation) had the weight of what supported and served them. . This construct may not express what was in Robert Louis Stevenson’s mind when weaving these figures, but it certainly gives a picture of what is behind them, separating them in their entirety and showing their ambiguity. When the writer introduces his character, saying he’s met a lot, I get a polite idea of something of all of this, or at least a parallel image that makes Danny’s origin guessable. As I describe the characters’ actions and their interconnections, I have in my head a spectator of what brought them together and established their relationships in this final way.إقرأ أيضا:قضية فتاة المنصورة
I wouldn’t be lying if I said it was a once in a lifetime experience, it is not very easy for someone to read something that they know so much about (however reliable it is). Imagine, for example, that you meet a person when you are loaded with a large amount of information that inevitably leads to prejudice, which is undoubtedly different from the usual blind meeting, regardless of the outcome.
But I’m not writing about the show here, I’m setting the stage for the discussion on Treasure Island itself. In fact, he’s not completely loyal to the novel, at least not to the extent of his loyalty to his ideological agenda. And that was embodied in the hateful liberal game that was rewritten yesterday to consolidate the day, it then reached a climax that almost spoiled the ending.إقرأ أيضا:Genius puzzles with solution for geniuses only!
We recommend that you read: Historical Graphic Novels: When Words Mix with Lines to Tell Human History
But I stop at this point for an additional minute, asking a question that I consider important: is it in our best interests to rewrite classical literature, or at least to redecorate what surrounds it from the back and the back. ‘before? You know my opinion on what I read of course, but you see a reason that is presented, and that is the problem of ideology, stretching thirsty wings, a miserable thirst to impose control over everything and to display each event – whatever its place or time – with its objective according to its values (or rather the absence of its values), and the concern to Inject every corner of the old world creativity with the ideas of today attributed to the flags of humanity, modernity and urbanization; A willingness to go beyond the level of besieging the events of the original in a way that calls attention to the steadfastness of modern ideas, interferes with it, transgresses it and rejects its right to self-sufficiency and constancy in his condition, centuries have passed since the departure of his companions.
All this is beautiful, but what is important – and I do not find outside the context of the exploitation of the novel to speak of classical literature in general – I ask myself, isolating this point: is it our right to reproduce the classics or even modify and beautify them in a way that suits our fragrant world to a stifling degree? Let’s leave what is our right, because reality is out of control and half a line in an article will not heal or fix, and ask ourselves the result: is it useful for literature – literature alone – this intrusion on the achievements of yesterday, far from the motives of the dominant ideology?
We recommend: Is reading novels really a waste of time? A look at the most influential art in human history
He told me again about the human desire in general to understand the past, which sometimes only occurs when he goes in and clings to its details and erects his crimes as a crime to examine and feel them, and make such a something, no matter how soft and concealed, will have an effect. And he told me of our eternal error in taking the event out of its historical context and demanding that it match our current tyrannical demands and our many restrictions and rules. He also told me about our partial inability to comprehend history with little ability and many chaos and challenges of an adversarial but warlike nature of all we know, and then our disbelief in the documentation and our denial. to convey what we have not seen categorically denying denial and no room for skepticism beyond. As for me, I bring you back to the abstract question because, sir, you keep moving away from it, this time I propose it with more bias and a spelling that is not hidden: why is ancient literature affected by negativity if we rewrite it? This brings us to our next point.
We recommend that you read: Alice in Wonderland: not just a novel but also a pathological syndrome!
I read the words of those who quote a callback from the last years of the 19th century, saying that it was undoubtedly wonderful for a person to be a reader in those days, not only were they producing classics that they didn’t know not that they would stick around for decades and top the lists for decades, but they were actually inventing new literary genres (Sherlock Holmes, Dracula, HG Wells, Dorian Gray). This is appropriate for reverence contexts, of course, but it raised in my mind the idea that: if you invent a certain literary genre and preceded it, doesn’t that mean that you also define its rules? How can I judge you – or offer you criticism of any kind – if I haven’t seen the pit you lifted and rebuilt except for an inhabited plant?
On the one hand, there are no rules in the first place for the treatment of classics, and if they exist, they are established after classifications have stabilized, proverbs have proliferated, and discussions for years have produces general chords and disagreements, and the flat speech has been compared to the old crude. Therefore, the reactions are split between a fanatic who does not accept the very idea of the discussion and a hater who usually sums up his opinion in general terms, like being bored, etc. Of course, the ground rules of the novel remain, and before them the rules of storytelling are intelligible, but what I’m saying is that the classics don’t just reside in a small area not subject to our opinions and civil laws. , but rather in a free area which is not subject to any rules.
As a result, luring it to the land of modern creativity and rewriting it doesn’t differ much in my opinion from using an animal other than what God created for him (accept from me a fleeting hope bar ). Our interaction with the classics is therefore an interaction with the idea of literary leadership which depends on criticism and rules, not with a pirate adventure, and our opinions about it express our tastes and only touch the aspect of objectivity, and our understanding of the position of their ceiling and the conditions of their creativity is more than determining something mentioned about the novels and their plots.
Maybe you take my words without regard (which I prefer, as I don’t take most of my words myself seriously), but I understand that I agree with thoughts, keeping in a area of my mind a commitment not to quarantine opinion or knowledge. The problem is, my expression of opinion is broadened to include areas that I didn’t originally include. And while the advantage of being one step ahead is sometimes not enough to take off the titles of uncompromising reverence for Robert Louis Stevenson’s novel Treasure Island, the majestic aura that surrounds his right to respect; As he gained with the advantage of this precedence an auditor above what followed him and superiority over the evaluation, but rather the classification itself.