Kundera's Narrative Technique example essay topic

Insight into Milan Kundera's narrative This essay is specifically based on the narrative technique used by Milan Kundera in his book The Unbearable Lightness of Being. It is mostly focused in a personal critic supported with comments and critics made by important and distinguished authors. To sum up, it is an essay which main point is directed to the description of Milan Kundera's narration as well as a personal opinion supported by critics of experts. The Unbearable Lightness of Being is a work of fiction, that it is also combined with facts of history. Works of fiction can be told from the point of view of one of the characters, that means first person narration or it can be told by the author as narrator, that would mean third person narration.

Most of the time, when the author is telling the story, he tries not to be perceived or to be noticed as less as possible. There is an exception to this rule called "the intrusive narrator". This narrator addresses the reader and talks about issues concerning the narration. He tries to make his presence visible.

(O'Brien 1). Milan Kundera uses in his narrative technique the intrusive narrator. He interrupts the reading with his authoritarian voice that most of the time fell into disfavour for the reader because it distracts the mind and reduces the emotional intensity of the experience of reading by interrupting and calling attention to the act of narrating. Mostly, this type of technique employed by Kundera leads to a different perception of the narrator. He gains power by interrupting the narration with his opinions, controlling the presence of the characters, his authoritarian voice and so on. The author has influence in the reading experience.

The reader can drastically change his experience by getting to know the author and feeling his unwanted presence in the novel. Furthermore, Kundera's work in the narrative is constantly analyzed and questioned from a philosophical point of view (Corbett 1). However, it would be wrong to regard Kundera as a philosopher. He enjoys playing with his storyline's and while analyzing them rationally, he opens up an infinite way of interpreting the presented facts. Here is an example of how he plays with the storyline's in the last pages of the book: " And therein lies the whole of man's plight. Human time does not turn in a circle; it runs ahead in a straight line.

That is why man cannot be happy: happiness is the longing for repetition". In addition, Kundera applies a fiction that confuses the mind of the reader because in order to answer questions, he asks questions. As Peter Kussi wrote in his article "Milan Kundera: Dialogues with Fiction": "Kundera interrogates his characters, poses questions to his various narrator personalities, engages his readers and puzzles them into questioning themselves". (1) John O'Brien also stated that his constant asking of question instead of answering them, combined with the lack of temporal coherence is what gets the reader lost in the reading. (4) I do have to accept that Milan Kundera has a great talent in combining facts with fiction, history with fiction.

He combines them so good that is hard to distinguish them between fact and fiction. He has being admired for these combinations by some authors though they say Kundera's work have "political disillusionment" (Contemporary Literary Criticism-Select 1). Furthermore, he has also being criticized because of his discontinuity with the past (Kussi 3). Although, intrusive narrator is one of the techniques that has made a comeback in the modern writing, specially in post-modern texts where the author supposedly leaves space to the reader to think about the story being told, and how is constructed or what meaning it may have; I did not felt identified with the narration and the author. I felt very intimidated with the intrusions of the author and his authoritarian voice. Personally, when I read a book I do it for pleasure and I like to feel identified with the story, to believe what is happening as if it is something real, I like to "go inside the book" while I am reading.

With Kundera's work I couldn't because he was there, constantly remaining me, that the characters were an invention of his own. I got lost so many times with his intrusions in the reading and consequently made it difficult to concentrate while reading. In addition, his questions without answer were also the cause of a distraction. I think Milan Kundera is a man who knows his works and possibilities but he likes writing following this technique which personally I don't t like. But authors as John O'Brien and others are astonished with his narrative. Finally, I believe in different likings, for some people Kundera's narrative is a masterpiece and for some others is not even close to a masterpiece.

I stated the points that personally bothered me during the reading, though these same points are what make other people admire Milan Kundera's narrative technique. To conclude, Kundera's narrative technique is very complex and unusual, it is also very rich in history and fiction. It might being difficult the easy flowing of the reading, but I have to accept that he is a very good author, who knows what is doing. He uses the "intrusive narrator" technique, because he does not want to be a dissident writer. (Contemporary Literary Criticism-Select 1).

Bibliography

Corbett, Bob. "The Unbearable Lightness of Being". New York. October 2001.
Retrieved from Wilson Web, FSU libraries. Doctorow, E.L. "Four Characters Under Two Tyrannies". New York Times Book Review. April 29, 1984: 1.
FSU Libraries. Literature Resource Center. Kussi, Peter. "Milan Kundera: Dialogues with Fiction". World Literature Today, Vol. 57, No. 2, Spring 1983, pp.
206-209. FSU libraries. O'Brien, John. "Milan Kundera: Meaning, Play, and the Role of the Author". Critique. Vol. IV. No. 1. Fall, 1992: 3-18.
FSU Libraries. Milan Kundera: The Unbearable Stardom". New Statesman. London England: 1996.