A trickster, essentially, is a character who disobeys the norms, though carries greater knowledge and has mainly been discussed in mythology, folklore, and religious texts, and has consistently been viewed in indigenous context. The trickster is often the anthropomorphic personification of a hidden, allegorical world. Linda M. Morra and Deanna Reder’s Troubling Tricksters: Revisioning Critical Conversations, propose that the purpose of every trickster tale is to “[articulate] ambiguous distinctions between human and divine realities, with the final goal being in the development of ‘civilized’ codes of morality, values, and ideology” (30). Any culture is influenced by the trickster and the narrator in Eugene Onegin, written by Alexander Pushkin
…show more content…
Onegin, a superfluous Byronic hero flies off the pages with his silly back-and-forth dialogue and conversation with not only the other characters, but the readers. Right from the beginning, Onegin gives a charming, yet feckless first impression: “In my days of cheery lustfulness I used to be madly fond of balls. There’s nowhere safer to declare your love or slip a letter into someone’s hand. Respected husbands, I offer you my services: I beg you, mark what I say; I want to give you fair warning. And you too, fond mamas, keep the strictest watch on your daughters; hold your lorgnettes up straight!” (Pushkin 13). Moreover, Craig Cravens in “Lyric and Narrative Consciousness in Eugene Onegin” straightforwardly calls Eugene “an idiosyncratic figure” (683) and mentions that “the narrator at times appears to be confused by events, or to lose track of his characters. At other times, he is an omnipotent and omnipresent being commenting on events or on the novel itself” (685). This is significant because readers become confused and flustered with the novel since it is not a traditional first-person narration. However, due to the humorous tone, the confusion is accepted and creates a game for readers to …show more content…
I disagree. That is why the trickster traits are significant in Eugene Onegin; the narrator is in a disguise to seem “simple” and carefree, though he is not. Onegin is complex. What is amusing about Leslc’s article is that on the same page, she addresses the plot of the story and states, “the complex questions of the relationship between literature and life, demands of a culture, and individual desires for a meaningful life” (1075). Talk about simple, huh? Luckily, Leslc’s article ends on a rational belief: “[the end] is brought to an even higher level: not only do we not know what happens next, but we are not even sure what happens throughout the story, or, as we shall see more specifically… whom to trust”
Onegin, a superfluous Byronic hero flies off the pages with his silly back-and-forth dialogue and conversation with not only the other characters, but the readers. Right from the beginning, Onegin gives a charming, yet feckless first impression: “In my days of cheery lustfulness I used to be madly fond of balls. There’s nowhere safer to declare your love or slip a letter into someone’s hand. Respected husbands, I offer you my services: I beg you, mark what I say; I want to give you fair warning. And you too, fond mamas, keep the strictest watch on your daughters; hold your lorgnettes up straight!” (Pushkin 13). Moreover, Craig Cravens in “Lyric and Narrative Consciousness in Eugene Onegin” straightforwardly calls Eugene “an idiosyncratic figure” (683) and mentions that “the narrator at times appears to be confused by events, or to lose track of his characters. At other times, he is an omnipotent and omnipresent being commenting on events or on the novel itself” (685). This is significant because readers become confused and flustered with the novel since it is not a traditional first-person narration. However, due to the humorous tone, the confusion is accepted and creates a game for readers to …show more content…
I disagree. That is why the trickster traits are significant in Eugene Onegin; the narrator is in a disguise to seem “simple” and carefree, though he is not. Onegin is complex. What is amusing about Leslc’s article is that on the same page, she addresses the plot of the story and states, “the complex questions of the relationship between literature and life, demands of a culture, and individual desires for a meaningful life” (1075). Talk about simple, huh? Luckily, Leslc’s article ends on a rational belief: “[the end] is brought to an even higher level: not only do we not know what happens next, but we are not even sure what happens throughout the story, or, as we shall see more specifically… whom to trust”