The Real

Just when I was thinking Terry Eagleton is generalizing a lot of novels written in that time, he says, "It is true some texts seem to approach the real more closely than others" (173). And the point that he makes is that books have their own truth, society, and rules, but in some instances it will parallel that of history. He states that literature has the freedom to veer away from history. I think this ability allows it to exaggerate what was going on socially at the time to make a point, or make a whole other reality to juxtapose with current society. Regardless, I think the text does and should serve a purpose, the author should have a message.

Eagleton tries to make a distinction between expressing ideology and making a production of it. It sounds like the same thing to me. Is the distinction what I said before: that the literature parallels history? The way he explains it it's like he is telling us what it doesn't do, "A dramatic production does not 'express,' 'reflect,' or 'reproduce' the dramatic text on which it is based," but then he goes on to explain that it is a production. So, I take that to mean it makes it's own real that may or may not be similar to its current society.