Conversation of others Review of Related Theories
social institution; and in primitive society we may even be unable to distinguish poetry from ritual, magic, work, or play. Literature has also a
social function, or ‘use,’ which cannot be purely individual Wellek Warren, 1956: 94
Here, Wellek and Warren at first acknowledge the truth about the existence of some norms that could only happen or “arise” in real-life society. They also admit
that literature is sometimes subjective in addressing the society it portrays. However, Wellek and Warren note that literature represents life and life in larger
measure is “a social reality.” Therefore, literature is a social reality and the society inside it can represent real-life society, making literature a “social institution” and
a “social creation.” Wellek and Warren add that the poets are part of society and thus their works represent the society in which they live. Toward the assumption
that literary works’ society is subjective, Wellek and Warren claim that literature has also a social function that cannot be purely individual. This means that society
in literature can somewhat represent real-life society as its poet is a member of the society and the fact that a literature has a social use.
Langland, in her book, also agrees with Wellek and Warren that literature or works of fiction in her terms can portray real life society. She notes
Studies of society must acknowledge, then, that society is a concept and a construct in fiction…
...If society is a concept and construct in art, it is also a concept and construct in life. Society in novel does not depend on points of absolute
fidelity to an outside world in details of costume, setting, and locality because a novel’s society does not aim at a faithful mirror of any concrete,
existent thing. So, too, our everyday experience of society is not of a particular, existent thing. In life as in art, society emerges from patterned,
formal relationship among aspects of our existence Langland, 1984: 4-5. Langland’s view of society provides interesting insight here. She states that if
society is a concept and a construct in real life, it is also a concept and construct in
literary works. This means there is no difference between the society portrayed in the novel and real-life society. Toward the assumption that society is too abstract
to be portrayed in the novel, Langland says the novel does not aim to become a “mirror” or an exact-concrete and detailed copy of society. This is because the
novel tends to shows the society from “patterned, formal relationship” among the people, which is truly existant in real-life society and does not depend on
absolutely fidelity to the outside world costumes, setting locality. The two theories provide facts that from a novel, a real-life society’s
condition can be seen and therefore provides an answer to the previous question: Could we study a society reflected in the novel to see the real society? In
conclusion, the writer can show how a real-life American society treats Chinese- Americans by seeing what happens in the novel that pictures it.