In the history of literature, authors often reflected the social situation of their time through their works. For this reason, many of the greatest works were seen as depictions of certain social affairs, wars, political movements, and other events of the time period during which the literary work was written. When it comes to more contemporary American literature, one of the biggest names is Chuck Palahniuk. With his great literary explosion in 1996, when he published Fight Club, and the subsequent film adaptation starring Brad Pitt and Edward Norton, Palahniuk has become more of an icon of modern American literature. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get Original Essay In my essay, I will try to focus on Palahniuk's depiction of society in his novels. The novel I will focus on most is Fight Club, due to its international success and the continuous debate among critics. I will begin with some scholarly ideas about his view of politics, which I will follow with my understanding of Palahniuk's depiction of society. Finally, I will mention some criticisms and praises directed at Palahniuk and try to analyze it. I will try to highlight the importance of Palahniuk in American literature. Some of the scholarly criticism leveled at Palahniuk concerns his political views on society, as well as his depiction of violence in novels. Many critics argue that his characters represent the current situation of American society and perhaps the rest of the world. It is not unknown that its main characters often rebel against existing social and political systems. Is Palahniuk trying to say that American society is closed-minded and politically ignorant? Are you trying to say that Americans are violent? Can we place Palahniuk's criticism of politics only in the postmodern era?Charles Michael Palahniuk was born in 1962 in Washington, United States. His surname is of Ukrainian origin. His parents divorced when he was only fourteen. He graduated from Columbia High School, after which he attended the University of Oregon. In 1986 he graduated with a degree in journalism and worked for a short time as a reporter for the Portland newspaper. According to Chaplinsky, Palahniuk also worked in a hospice and as a mechanic. His most important novels are Fight Club (1996), Invisible Monsters (1999), Survivor (1999), Diary (2003), Beautiful You (2014). Palahniuk's vision of society as seen through his novels An interesting proof of Palahniuk's political vision of fascism in Fight Club was proposed by the critic Peter Mathews. His claim is that Fight Club's central character, Tyler Durden, displays a revolutionary figure with his idealistic leadership that can be considered fascist. Mathews' idea is that fascism itself should not be considered a primarily left-wing or right-wing political movement, and is also mixed with communism. He claims that fascism is “fundamentally nihilistic,” which is a perfect definition of Palahniuk's protagonists. Many of the scholars who spoke openly about Palahniuk's works often took Fight Club as a direct commentary on the immediate political situation of his time. However, I believe that the existentialist nature of his writing criticizes not only the current political situation but also society as a whole and the nature of human behavior in general, which is a statement also made by Mathews. “The criticism of Fight Club, after all, is not limited to the “postmodern” world, but repeatedly refers both to the foundations of modernity (to events such as the French Revolution) and even morefar away, to the past, to ancient religious ceremonies and rituals (such as human sacrifice).” (Mathews, 2005, 84) An academic critic, Henry Giroux, wrote that “Fight Club seems to offer a critique of late capitalist society and the misfortunes it generates” (Giroux, 2001). Mathews argues that Giroux calls Palahniuk's work "a symptom of a contemporary culture of cynicism, a recent trend in American culture." (Mathews, 2005, 81) In his essay, Mathews argues that Palahniuk's character, Tyler Durden, represents a fascist figure. However, fascism should be understood neither as a left-wing nor as a right-wing movement, since all authoritarian movements were originally left-wing. He concludes that Palahniuk wanted to warn readers not to blindly follow any seemingly trustworthy movement and this is a perspective that can be applied not only to politics but also to everyday life. The whole idea of ​​creating a Fight Club involves having your own rules and a leader who enforces those rules. This, in fact, can be interpreted as fascist. However, I personally think that even such a “club” is a paradoxical element of this novel, because it includes men who are angry and dissatisfied with their average life in a country governed by consumerism (a system that you cannot change on your own, you have to change). agree with the rules and live life accordingly), yet they create a society where, once again, they accept new rules and agree with their leader without asking questions or even thinking about breaking the rules. So I think this is Palahniuk's commentary on human nature: we seek life in a community, and being in a community requires having rules that apply to everyone, including everyone. Whether or not this represents a specific political idea is an open question. Another example of this idea of ​​a “community” of some kind can be found in Palahniuk's Survivor. In this book, the main character is the last remaining survivor of a secret suicide religious cult. The final rule of this cult is final suicide, which is a sort of "enlightenment" to a new life. All members of this society commit suicide. A scholar Antonio Casado de Rocha stated in his essay, "Survivor is a parody of religion in America, but all the narrator wants is to be redeemed from his Christ-like role to be accepted back into the human community." (de Rocha, 2005, 106) Once again, there is a group guided by rules and its members are blind followers of them. Furthermore, this religious fanaticism is an obvious criticism of today's craze influenced by mass media and lack of rationality, which I also understood as Palahniuk's commentary on human nature.Criticism and ApprovalsThe reception of Palahniuk's works is very varied; some love him and others criticize his work. In any case, the way his novels are interpreted seems to be radically different. There are numerous different interpretations behind the meaning of each of his characters, as well as the ideas behind Palahniuk's novels. One endorsement comes from Jesse Kavadlo, who suggests that the obvious nihilism and expressions of violence in Palahniuk's novels are actually the result of internal, not external, struggles. In his essay Chuck Palahniuk, Closet Moralist, Kavadlo states: “Palahniuk's narrator rebels against what the books present as the emasculating conformity of contemporary America (IKEA takes a harsher beating than members of Fight Club), but in in reality what the narrator has fought, literally and figuratively, is himself." (Kavadlo, 2005, 5). He goes on to say that Palahniuk's writing is influenced by his personal insecurities. This point of view distances us from the idea that Palahniuk criticizes society.