New works, old structure

"I'm not saying there's nothing new in literature: I'm saying that everything is new and yet recognizably the same kind of thing as the old," (p. 23)

This line, taken from Frye's second lecture, comes after an explanation of how very old works are quite similar to newer works. Frye uses the books Odyssey and Huckleberry Finn as examples to back up his position. Frye explains how "Superficially, they're very different, but the better you know both the Odyssey and Huckleberry Finn, the more impressed you'll be by the resemblances:" (p. 23). Frye then goes on to list resemblances between the two works such as "the disguises, the exciting adventures that often suddenly turn tragic, the mingling of the strange and the familiar, the sense of human comradeship stronger than any disaster." (p. 23) After Frye makes these comparisons, he builds on this idea with the line, "I'm not saying there's nothing new in literature: I'm saying that everything is new and yet Recognizably the same kind of thing as the old," (p. 23) This line seems to repeat one of his main ideas in his first lecture, literature is timeless, but at the same time it adds a new thought to this idea. Frye, in my mind, is saying that although litreature can be repetitive, the fresh twist to a story caused by the distinct voice of the writer, makes a work of literature new. Frye's abnormal but brilliant metaphor is a very interesting way of looking at this concept. I had to read this metaphor more than once to gain an understanding of what Frye is trying to say. Frye uses a new born baby to explain is opinion, stating that this new baby is something new but also something very common, a human being. If we replace the new born baby in this metaphor with a book or poem, Frye's meaning becomes quite clear. A new book is something new but it is among billions of other books that have the same structure it does. The thing that makes each work different is not the cover but what's on the inside.