O’Connor goes into detail about the different approaches novelists have, describing one as being concerned with sociology and the other with the absurdity of existence. The grotesque author who writes about a mystery writes about one he hasn’t solved before beginning to write. He won't attempt to deliver the obvious or ordinary, but rather distort a fact we think is “concrete” and relate it to a truth he believes in, delivering a different reality. What is produced is a kind of grotesque that makes the audience theorize why the author has chosen to create these characters and whether or not they are a reflection of reality. Another point I missed, is how the modern reader attempts to understand and interpret grotesque characters in a way that involves “sentiment” or empathy. Commenting on the grotesque writer's compassion, which implies their characters “carry an invisible burden; their fanaticism is a reproach not
O’Connor goes into detail about the different approaches novelists have, describing one as being concerned with sociology and the other with the absurdity of existence. The grotesque author who writes about a mystery writes about one he hasn’t solved before beginning to write. He won't attempt to deliver the obvious or ordinary, but rather distort a fact we think is “concrete” and relate it to a truth he believes in, delivering a different reality. What is produced is a kind of grotesque that makes the audience theorize why the author has chosen to create these characters and whether or not they are a reflection of reality. Another point I missed, is how the modern reader attempts to understand and interpret grotesque characters in a way that involves “sentiment” or empathy. Commenting on the grotesque writer's compassion, which implies their characters “carry an invisible burden; their fanaticism is a reproach not