Introduction
The concept of time, a seemingly universal and immutable force, has long been a subject of philosophical, cultural, and literary exploration. Within the field of Literature and Language, time emerges not merely as a chronological framework but as a complex construct shaped by human perception, language, and narrative. This essay seeks to address the provocative question: do we make time, or does time make us? By examining time as both a human invention and a controlling force, this discussion will explore how literary texts and linguistic structures reflect and influence our understanding of temporality. The essay will first consider time as a human construct through language and narrative, then analyse how time appears to govern human experience in literature, before concluding with reflections on the interplay between these perspectives. Drawing on academic sources, this exploration aims to offer a balanced perspective, acknowledging the duality of time as both a creation and a creator of human identity.
Time as a Human Construct: Language and Narrative
One of the primary ways in which humans ‘make’ time is through language, which serves as a tool to categorise and comprehend temporal experience. As Sapir (1921) argued, language shapes thought, and temporality is inherently embedded in linguistic structures such as verb tenses and temporal adverbs. For instance, the English language’s division of past, present, and future allows speakers to conceptualise time as linear and sequential. However, not all languages encode time in the same way; indeed, some, like the Hopi language, lack explicit tense markers, suggesting a cyclical rather than linear perception of time (Whorf, 1956). This linguistic relativity implies that humans actively construct their experience of time through the frameworks their languages provide.
Beyond language, narrative in literature further demonstrates humanity’s role in shaping time. Authors manipulate temporal structures to create meaning, often disrupting chronology to reflect memory or psychological states. Virginia Woolf’s Mrs Dalloway (1925), for example, compresses an entire day into a stream of consciousness that interweaves past and present, illustrating how subjective time diverges from objective clock time. Woolf’s narrative technique arguably reveals that time is not a fixed entity but a malleable construct shaped by human perception and creativity (Banfield, 2000). Such literary innovations suggest that, in crafting stories, humans exercise agency over time, bending it to reflect internal realities rather than external measures.
However, this perspective is not without limitations. While language and narrative allow humans to conceptualise and manipulate time, they are themselves products of cultural and historical contexts. Thus, the question arises: are we truly making time, or are we bound by pre-existing structures that dictate how we perceive it? This tension invites a deeper exploration of time as a force that shapes us.
Time as a Governing Force in Literature
In contrast to the notion of humans crafting time, numerous literary works portray time as an omnipotent force that dictates human existence, often with a sense of inevitability. This perspective aligns with philosophical views, such as those of Kant, who posited that time is an a priori condition of human experience, an inescapable framework through which we interpret reality (Kant, 1781, cited in Guyer, 2006). In literature, this idea frequently manifests as characters struggling against the relentless march of time, only to find themselves powerless.
Shakespeare’s sonnets provide a poignant example, particularly Sonnet 60, in which time is personified as a destructive force: “Time’s scythe” reaps beauty and life indiscriminately (Shakespeare, 1609, cited in Vendler, 1997). Here, time is not a human creation but a tyrant that shapes destiny, rendering human efforts to resist it futile. Similarly, in modernist literature, T.S. Eliot’s The Waste Land (1922) depicts time as fragmented and oppressive, mirroring the disillusionment of a post-war society unable to reclaim a coherent past or envision a hopeful future (Rainey, 2005). Eliot’s cyclical imagery of decay suggests that time governs human consciousness, trapping individuals in a repetitive, unchangeable cycle.
Furthermore, time’s role as a shaper of identity is evident in narratives of ageing and mortality. In Toni Morrison’s Beloved (1987), the protagonist Sethe is haunted by a past that continually intrudes upon the present, demonstrating how temporal experiences—especially trauma—mould personal and collective identities (Caruth, 1996). Morrison’s work implies that time is not merely a backdrop but an active force that constructs who we are, often against our will. Generally, these literary representations underscore the argument that time makes us, imposing limits and shaping experiences in ways that transcend human control.
Interplay Between Making and Being Made by Time
While the above sections present time as either a human construct or a controlling force, a more nuanced view emerges when considering the reciprocal relationship between the two. Literature often portrays a dialectical tension wherein humans attempt to master time while simultaneously being mastered by it. For instance, in Marcel Proust’s *In Search of Lost Time* (1913–1927), the narrator’s obsessive recollection of the past through involuntary memory reveals an attempt to reclaim time, yet the very act of recollection is dictated by time’s passage and the inevitability of loss (Shattuck, 2000). This duality suggests that while humans can ‘make’ time through memory and narrative, they are ultimately shaped by its relentless progression.
Moreover, cultural studies of time, such as those by Ricoeur (1984), propose that narrative itself is a bridge between human agency and temporal inevitability. Ricoeur argues that storytelling allows individuals to configure time into meaningful patterns, yet these patterns are always constrained by the human condition’s temporality—birth, life, and death. Therefore, the act of making time through language and literature is inherently limited by the broader framework of time that defines existence. This interplay highlights a complex interdependence: we shape time through our expressions, but time, in turn, shapes the very possibilities of those expressions.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the question of whether we make time or time makes us reveals a profound tension at the heart of human experience, particularly as explored through literature and language. On one hand, linguistic structures and narrative techniques, as seen in Woolf’s temporal manipulations, demonstrate humanity’s capacity to construct and control time. On the other hand, literary depictions from Shakespeare to Morrison portray time as an inescapable force that defines identity and destiny, often beyond human influence. However, a more balanced perspective, informed by works like Proust’s and theories such as Ricoeur’s, suggests an interdependent relationship where humans and time mutually shape each other. This duality has significant implications for literary studies, as it underscores the importance of temporality in understanding both texts and the human condition. Ultimately, while we may strive to master time through language and storytelling, we remain, to a large extent, products of its unyielding framework—a paradox that continues to inspire literary and philosophical enquiry.
References
- Banfield, A. (2000) The Phantom Table: Woolf, Fry, Russell and the Epistemology of Modernism. Cambridge University Press.
- Caruth, C. (1996) Unclaimed Experience: Trauma, Narrative, and History. Johns Hopkins University Press.
- Guyer, P. (2006) Kant. Routledge.
- Rainey, L. (2005) The Annotated Waste Land with Eliot’s Contemporary Prose. Yale University Press.
- Ricoeur, P. (1984) Time and Narrative, Volume 1. University of Chicago Press.
- Sapir, E. (1921) Language: An Introduction to the Study of Speech. Harcourt, Brace & Company.
- Shattuck, R. (2000) Proust’s Way: A Field Guide to In Search of Lost Time. W.W. Norton & Company.
- Vendler, H. (1997) The Art of Shakespeare’s Sonnets. Harvard University Press.
- Whorf, B. L. (1956) Language, Thought, and Reality: Selected Writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf. MIT Press.
