DTCF Dergisi 57.2 (2017): 822-837 SENTIMENTAL DISCIPLINE: A NARRATOLOGICAL ANALYSIS OF SUSAN WARNER'S THE WIDE, WIDE WORLD SENTİMENTAL DİSİPLİN: SUSAN WARNER'IN “THE WIDE, WIDE WORLD” ADLI ROMANI ÜZERİNE ANLATIBİLİMSEL BİR İNCELEME Elif ÖZTABAK AVCI Yrd. Doç. Dr., Orta Doğu Teknik Üniversitesi, Eğitim Fakültesi, Yabancı Diller Eğitimi Bölümü, [email protected] Abstract The narrative strategies that Susan Warner uses in her evangelical, sentimental novel The Wide, Wide World (1850) to develop sympathy in the reader have mainly been analyzed at the level of the “story” whereas the role the narrator plays in the production of sympathy Makale Bilgisi has not received as much attention. The aim of this paper is to examine the sympathetic Gönderildiği tarih: 17 Temmuz 2017 relationship between the narrator and the novel's heroine, Ellen Montgomery, as well as to Kabul edildiği tarih: 9 Ekim 2017 show how such a relationship contributes to the novel's sentimental rhetoric. Richard Yayınlanma tarihi: 27 Aralık 2017 Brodhead's theory of “disciplinary intimacy” that he develops in Cultures of Letters (1993) and Gérard Genette's Narrative Discourse (1972) will constitute the theoretical framework of the study. Article Info Date submitted: 17 July 2017 Öz Date accepted: 9 October 2017 Date published: 27 December 2017 Susan Warner'ın The Wide, Wide World (1850) adlı evangelist, sentimental romanında okuyucu ve metin arasındaki sempatinin "öykü" düzeyinde nasıl kurulduğuna dair pek çok çalışma bulunmasına rağmen, sempatinin "anlatma" düzeyinde nasıl inşa edildiği Anahtar sözcükler derinlemesine incelenmemiştir. Bu çalışmanın amacı, romandaki anlatıcı ve romanın ana Susan Warner; The Wide, Wide karakteri Ellen Montgomery arasındaki sempatik ilişkiyi incelemek ve bu ilişkinin World; Sentimental Roman; romanın sentimental bir retorik etki yaratmasına nasıl katkıda bulunabileceğini Sentimental Disiplin; Anlatı Kuramı tartışmaktır. Richard Brodhead'in Cultures of Letters adlı eserinde geliştirdiği "sevgi yoluyla disiplin" kavramı ve Gérard Genette'in Narrative Discourse'da formule ettiği Keywords anlatıya dair kavramlaştırmalar bu çalışmanın kuramsal çerçevesini oluşturacaktır. Susan Warner; The Wide, Wide World; Sentimental Novel; Sentimental Discipline; Narrative Theory DOI: 10.1501/Dtcfder_0000001540 The narrative strategies that Susan Warner uses in her evangelical, sentimental novel The Wide, Wide World (1850) to develop sympathy in the reader have mainly been analyzed at the level of the “story” whereas the role the narrator plays in the production of sympathy has not received as much attention. The aim of this paper is to examine the sympathetic relationship between the narrator and the novel's heroine, Ellen Montgomery, as well as to show how such a relationship contributes to the novel's sentimental rhetoric. The analysis, therefore, will focus on the narration to explore how sympathy is built at the extradiegetic level of the narrator. Richard Brodhead's theory of “disciplinary intimacy” that he develops in Cultures of Letters (1993) and Gérard Genette's Narrative Discourse (1972) will constitute the theoretical framework of the study. It will be argued that the narration in The Wide, Wide World works in line with Ellen's “discipline through love” at the story level and thus contributes to the overall sentimental project of the novel. 822 Elif ÖZTABAK AVCI DTCF Dergisi 57.2 (2017): 822-837 Jane Tompkins in her “Afterword” to the novel’s 1987 Feminist Press edition points out the parallels between American women’s involvement in the evangelical reform movement in the years before the Civil War and women’s sentimental fiction. Susan Warner and her sister, Anna Warner, belonged to an evangelical organization, The New York City Tract Society, the purpose of which was “to help the city’s poor by distributing a religious tract to every family once a month” (Tompkins 594). Tompkins cites their Eleventh Annual Report (1837) to demonstrate the commonalities between what guides the activities of such religious societies and the writing of sentimental fiction: “Be much in prayer” the directions given to the members of the Society insist. “Go from your closet to your work and from your work return again to the closet” (Qtd. in Tompkins 594). According to Tompkins, To understand what made these Directions meaningful and effective for the people who carried them out is to understand the power of what has been labeled pejoratively, and in retrospect, ‘sentimental’ fiction. ‘Sentimental’ novels take place, metaphorically and literally, in the ‘closet.’ Their heroines rarely get beyond the confines of a private space – the kitchen, the parlor, the upstairs chamber – and most of what they do takes place inside the ‘closet’ of the heart… This fiction shares with the reform movement a belief that all true action is not material but spiritual (594). In The Masochistic Pleasures of Sentimental Literature (2000) Marianne Noble holds that “the cult of sensibility” arose as a reaction to “Hobbesian pessimism”1 and “Calvinist determinism”2 in the late seventeenth and eighteenth centuries (62). As opposed to such pessimistic conceptualizations of human nature, sentimentalism posits that “human beings are naturally inclined to virtuous actions because of the pleasurable feelings such actions generate and because of the unpleasurable feelings of not doing them” (62). The sentimentalist philosophy propounds that through an “innate” faculty of “moral sense” we all can “experience another’s pains … through sympathetic identification” (63). As a consequence, “sympathetic identification” is considered a means to “virtuous/benevolent actions.” There is, in other words, an indivisible relationship between sympathy and morality, 1 “Hobbes took the very worst view of man in a natural state,” hold Bronowski and Mazlish (204). “He assumed that there would be a war of ‘every man against every man,’ each distrusting the other and all desiring power; that there would be no industry or culture in such conditions; and, that, in his famous words, ‘the life of man, [would be] solitary, poor, nasty, bruitish and short’” (204). 2 Noble states that Calvinism “tended to see human nature as inherently sinful, the body and feelings as sites of corruption and confusion, and passion as ‘the devil in the inside of man’” (62). 823 Elif ÖZTABAK AVCI DTCF Dergisi 57.2 (2017): 822-837 as is developed in The Theory of Moral Sentiments (1759) by Adam Smith, who sees “sympathy as the foundation of any moral society” (Qtd. in Noble 63).3 Noble uses the expression, “sympathetic extensions into each others’ experiences,” interchangeably with “sympathetic identification” in order to emphasize that “the sentimental project is one of unification” (64). “Sentimentalism”, in Elizabeth Barnes’s words, “is a manifestation of the belief in or yearning for consonance – or even unity” (597). In brief, sentimentalism is a philosophical, political, and aesthetic tradition that maintains a belief in an inherent moral capacity of sympathy in all human beings, through which we can go beyond the limits of our individual selves and thus form a union with others. In the light of these basic tenets of sentimentalism, Noble formulates the defining characteristics of sentimental writing as follows: [S]entimental authors idealized characters who sympathized with and assisted those who suffered; they encouraged readers similarly to feel the experiences of fictional characters, to seek the truth of a book through emotional and physical identification; they urged them to adopt appropriately humanitarian behaviors accordingly. They endorse an epistemology that is neither purely rational nor purely sensual but blends both in a form of apprehension that is best – though imperfectly – understood as ‘intuition,’ consultation with the ‘heart,’ or simply ‘feeling’ (64). Departing from Noble’s definition it can be held that in sentimental writing sympathy functions at more than one level: there is, first of all, “sympathetic identification” between characters in the text; second, the reader is “encouraged” to sympathize with these characters; and, finally, the reader, trained in sympathizing, is expected to act accordingly in her/his life, as well. In addition, at all these levels, “sympathetic identification” has its roots in the “heart” rather than in pure reason; in other words, this is a heart/feeling based cognition. Noble’s passage above also pinpoints some of the strategies sentimental writing uses to create sympathy in the reader: the story includes “suffer[ing]” as well as benevolent characters who share the sufferer’s pain and help her/him; these good-hearted characters are “idealized”; and, themes emphasize the notion of 3 The connection Adam Smith draws between sympathy and “moral society” is built on Shaftesbury’s theory of a “moral sense,” according to which, “in addition to the familiar five physical senses, an innate human faculty…determines right and wrong by allowing one person to experience another’s pains and pleasures through sympathetic identification, to know intuitively and experientially rather than through reason” (Noble 63). 824 Elif ÖZTABAK AVCI DTCF Dergisi 57.2 (2017): 822-837 sympathetic union, which, however, is broken apart as the story unfolds. “Sentimental tears are shed over sundered unions”, holds Noble (65). Suffering in the story results from the disruption of unions; yet, this eventually gives birth to other unions both between the suffering character and the characters symphathizing with her/him as well as between these characters and the reader. Unions are “sundered,” in other words, so that some others can be built; and, the reader is invited to observe this construction process so that s/he can learn (by heart) how to create similar bondings in her/his own life. Noble states that “in keeping with the rise of a secular culture, the sentimental plot frequently conceives of the unity that has been ruptured in psychological rather than religious terms: intimate relationships between mother and child, or husband and wife, or friend and friend”; she further adds that “one of the most frequently represented forms of separation in sentimentality is that of mother and child” (65). The Wide, Wide World employs all these sentimental strategies. The affectionate union between Ellen Montgomery and her mother is disrupted at the beginning of the novel. Since her mother is very ill, Ellen’s father takes her to Europe leaving Ellen with her aunt, Miss Fortune. Ellen is left alone in the wide, wide world at an early age, which, however, paves the way for her entry into unions with other characters such as Alice and her brother John Humphreys, who sympathize with and assist her in her journey of life. Warner’s novel follows “the paradigmatic plot” of women’s sentimental fiction, which, according to Baym, involves “a young heroine who is sundered from a unity enjoyed with her mother and family, set adrift upon the world, and driven to recreate that lost state of plenitude, usually in marriage” (Qtd. in Noble 65). It is hinted that Ellen gets married at the end of the novel; yet, the marriage union in this evangelical novel emerges as a means to Ellen’s union with God, which compensates for that initial “lost state of plenitude.” In other words, the original union with her mother is disrupted so that she can learn to submit to God’s authority and love him the most. “Ellen’s real mother is shown to be nothing more than a vessel, or channel, for the spirit of God. As the minister on the ship tells Ellen, your mother ‘has only been, as it were, the hand by which he supplied you’” (Bromell 140). Her love for her prospective husband, John, does not detract from her love for God. On the contrary, they coincide, which could be illustrated by the following dialogue between Ellen and John towards the end of the novel where they meet in Scotland after a long period of separation: 825 Elif ÖZTABAK AVCI DTCF Dergisi 57.2 (2017): 822-837 ‘Oh, John! Sometimes lately I have almost thought that I should only see you again in heaven.’ ‘My dear Ellie! I shall see you there, I trust; but if we live we shall spend our lives here together first. And while we are parted we will keep as near as possible by praying for and writing to each other. And what God orders let us quietly submit to.’ Ellen had much ado to command herself at the tone of these words and John’s manner, as he clasped her in his arms and kissed her brow and lips. She strove to keep back a show of feeling that would distress and might displease him. But the next moment her fluttering spirits were stilled by hearing the few soft words of prayer that he breathed over her head. It was a prayer for her and for himself, and one of its petitions was that they might be kept to see each other again. Ellen wrote the words on her heart (565). Like all the benevolent characters that sympathetically help Ellen in the difficulties she faces in her life, John also teaches Ellen to submit to “what God orders” to gain eternal peace and satisfaction. As Tompkins puts it, “the endlessly demanding attempt to achieve self-sacrifice…is the principle of Ellen’s education” (586). In what follows, it will be argued that it is not only Ellen but also the reader who receives the same education about “self-sacrifice.” As pointed out early on, sentimental literature aims to effect a change in the reader by addressing the reader’s “heart” so that the reader, upon return from the storyworld back to her/his actual life, can put into practice the principle of “sympathetic identification” with others. In the case of The Wide, Wide World, the object of this desire to unite, more than anything else, is God. Consequently, the reader, too, is encouraged to seek to be one with God. “Learning to resign oneself to the will of God,” Tompkins holds, “was not regarded as cowardly or defeatist behavior but as a realistic way of meeting the facts of life” in the pre-Civil War period (593). Warner’s novel, informed thematically and formally by the ideology of self-sacrifice and submission to the authority of God, is a paradigmatic text of its time. “[M]ost readers [of The Wide, Wide World] found the doctrine [of submission] familiar and persuasive, for it belonged to the ideology of the evangelical reform movement that had molded the consciousness of the nation in the years before the Civil War” (Tompkins 593). 826 Elif ÖZTABAK AVCI DTCF Dergisi 57.2 (2017): 822-837 In Cultures of Letters, Richard Brodhead analyzes The Wide, Wide World and some other nineteenth-century American works of fiction in the light of the theory he calls “disciplinary intimacy” or “discipline through love” (17-18). According to Brodhead, …the cultural assertion embodied in disciplinary intimacy generates on one front an animus against corporal punishment; on another front a normative model of character formation; on another, a particular configuration of training institutions designed to support that character-building plan; and on yet another, a new place for literary reading in cultural life (18). Before dwelling on “disciplinary intimacy,” Brodhead focuses on corporal punishment from within the framework of American cultural history in order to show the differences between the two types of discipline. Corporal punishment is “discipline performed on the body” (13) the tools of which are, for instance, lash, cat or rod (16). This mode of discipline is characterized by bodily harm given to “the transgressor” in a “publicly visible form” (16). Corporal punishment is not limited to the type of discipline performed on slaves or criminals in the antebellum America; it was also the major approach to child discipline, especially in the Calvinist America4. As Goshgarian puts it in To Kiss the Chastening Rod (1992), “Puritan educators…conceived childrearing as, at bottom, a process of smashing the satanic toddler’s congenital resistance to authority” (37). In the post-Calvinist era, however, especially after the 1820s, anticorporal thinking and the “discipline of intimacy” gained ascendancy (Goshgarian 39). According to Brodhead, “the primary assumptions” of this new kind of discipline as regards pedagogy are “extreme physical and emotional closeness between parent and child and…the parent’s availability to make the child the center of his or her attention” (22). In other words, “disciplinary intimacy” keeps the child under the parent’s/teacher’s perpetual and close surveillance. The surveiller, however, is not, in Brodhead’s view, the invisible authority, in “modern social regulation” (16) as is conceptualized by Foucault in Discipline and Punish. On the contrary, “disciplinary authority,” Brodhead holds, “reside[s] in persons and … persons in authority make their authority, as it were, dissolve into their merely 4 “Colonial America was predominantly Calvinist because its settlers came from England (Congregationalist Puritans), Scotland and Ulster (Presbyterians), the Netherlands and Germany (Dutch and German Reformed Churches), France (Huguenots), as well as other nations. They took with them the teachings of Calvinism as it expanded and engaged issues in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries” (Andrew J. Waskey 100). 827 Elif ÖZTABAK AVCI DTCF Dergisi 57.2 (2017): 822-837 personal presences” (19). In “disciplinary intimacy,” then, authority is not an abstract force that is represented by the authority figure. Rather, authority is embodied in a person. So, one of the distinctive features of this new disciplinary program is “the personalization of authority [and]…its downgrading of any presentation of authority as abstract imperative” (19). The personalized authority is characterized by being “humanize[d]” in that the authority figure is now required “to put on a human face” (19). Drawing on nineteenth-century books of conduct, Brodhead illustrates the “humaniz[ation]” of authority. The passage he cites from Horace Bushnell’s Christian Nurture (1847), for instance, draws a very clear picture of the new authority figure: “The violent emphasis, the hard, stormy voice” of the parent, Bushnell recommends, should be replaced with “a kind of silent, natural looking power” (Qtd. in Brodhead 19). Another distinctive feature of “discipline through love,” is “a purposeful sentimentalization of the disciplinary relation” (19). What Brodhead means by “sentimentalization” is the “strategic” use of emotion in the relationship between the authority figure and the child/person who is subject to her/him. “The emotional bond” between them is “conscious[ly] intensifi[ed]” so that the authority can “express its power not as authority but as affection” (19). Thus, the rules are transformed into expressions of love; love (instead of lash) becomes the tool as well as the pre- condition of discipline. The child/person who is loved by the authority obeys the authority. S/he does not obey the authority because s/he has to but rather wants to. “Enveloped” in “warmth and love,” the disciplinary subject, too, loves the authority. Thus, loving and obeying become one and the same thing: to love the authority means to obey her/him. “This mode of authority”, Brodhead states, “aims to awaken a reciprocal strength of love, and to fix that love back on itself” (20). Consequently, in this sentimental mode of discipline, the distance between the authority and the subject, which characterizes the Calvinist “corporal punishment,” disappears entirely because “the child’s continuing desire for its parents’ warmth and favor…establishes an agency, within the child’s nature, that enforces the feeling of obligation to parentally embodied values” (20). Having internalized the rules, the child becomes, in Alcott’s words, “a law to himself” (Qtd. in Goshgarian 39). When the child reaches that point, there remains no need for physical closeness between the parent/the teacher and the child. The authority figure, once moved into the child’s heart, never leaves her/him alone; Thus, the child, being disciplined through 828 Elif ÖZTABAK AVCI DTCF Dergisi 57.2 (2017): 822-837 love, becomes her/his own constant surveiller. As Lyman Cobb5 writes, “[a] child or pupil, who obeys his parent or teacher from LOVE purely, can be relied on when absent, as well as when present” (Qtd. in Brodhead 21). Brodhead holds that Susan Warner’s The Wide, Wide World “offers the most impressive recognition of discipline through love” (30). In his analysis, Brodhead compares and contrasts the households where Ellen stays in terms of the disciplinary programs to which they subscribe. Ellen’s aunt Miss Fortune’s household is not, Brodhead explains, “affectionate” as opposed to the households of Ellen’s mother, Mrs. Montgomery, and Alice Humphreys. Miss Fortune is “untender and impious … too busy to care about Ellen in Alice’s and Mrs. Montgomery’s way” (32). Miss Fortune’s disciplinary relationship with Ellen, therefore, contrasts sharply with the discipline carried out by her affectionate parents/teachers. He continues then with his analysis of Ellen’s relationship both with Mrs. Montgomery and with her surrogate parents – Alice and John. Ellen’s love for these authority figures, Brodhead states, “makes [her], in and of herself, want to do and be what her mother would require of her” (33). In brief, Brodhead examines how The Wide, Wide World “dramatizes” (33) what he calls “discipline through love.” Brodhead’s reading of Warner’s novel focuses solely on the story level. Yet, as it will be argued in the rest of this paper, the theory he develops can well be adapted for the analysis of the narration. In Narrative Discourse, Gérard Genette names the level where “the narrating act” takes place the “extradiegetic” (228); the level whose events are narrated (at the extradiegetic level) is named “diegetic” or “intradiegetic” (228). He also distinguishes between “two types of narrative” in terms of the participation of the narrator in the story: “heterodiegetic” where “the narrator [is] absent from the story he tells” (244) and “homodiegetic” where “the narrator [is] present as a character in the story he tells” (245). On the basis of these distinctions, Genette formulates “four basic types of narrator’s status” as follows: (1) extradiegetic-heterodiegetic paradigm: Homer, a narrator in the first degree who tells a story he is absent from; (2) extradiegetic- homodiegetic paradigm: Gil Blas, a narrator in the first degree who tells his own story; (3) intradiegetic-heterodiegetic paradigm: Scheherazade, a narrator in the second degree who tells stories she is on the whole absent from; (4) intradiegetic-homodiegetic paradigm: 5 Lyman Cobb, The Evil Tendencies of Corporal Punishment as a Means of Moral Discipline in Families and Schools Examined and Discussed (1847) 829 Elif ÖZTABAK AVCI DTCF Dergisi 57.2 (2017): 822-837 Ulysses in Books IX-XII, a narrator in the second degree who tells his own story (248). The narrator in The Wide, Wide World is both “extradiegetic” and “heterodiegetic” which is a position usually occupied by the “omniscient narrator,” whose superior narrative level entails a superior vision. The omniscient narrator is “capable like God himself of seeing beyond actions and of sounding body and soul” (Genette 209). Yet, not all extradiegetic-heterodiegetic narrators are equipped with an all-encompassing vision, since, as Genette points out, the one “who sees” and the one “who speaks” in a narrative do not always coincide (186). In other words, the agent whose perception informs the narrative may not always be the one who narrates it. Therefore, Genette introduces the term “focalization” and theorizes it under three sub-headings: (a) “nonfocalized” narrative, or, “narrative with zero focalization”; (b) “narrative with internal focalization”, which is divided into three groups – (i) “fixed”, i.e., “where we almost never leave the point of view” of one character, (ii) “variable,” where there is more than one “focal”/ point of view character, (iii) “multiple”, “as in epistolary novels, where the same event may be evoked several times according to the point of view of several letter-writing characters”; and (c) “narrative with external focalization,” in which the reader is never “allowed to know [characters’] thoughts or feelings” (189-190). Genette contends, however, that “any single formula of focalization does not…always bear on an entire work, but rather on a definite narrative section, which can be very short” (191). A narrative, in other words, can employ more than one of these focalization types. The extradiegetic-heterodiegetic narrator in The Wide, Wide World is not omniscient since its vision is restricted by its persistent focus on the heroine. Ellen is an internal focal character in that in some sections of the novel we see the world in the story through her eyes. The following passage, for instance, contains one example of internal focalization, which allows the reader to see the world in the story through Ellen’s eyes: Ellen opened the window. The rain was over; the lovely light of a fair September morning was beautifying everything it shone upon. Ellen had been accustomed to amuse herself a good deal at this window, though nothing was to be seen from it but an ugly city prospect of back walls of houses, with the yards belonging to them, and a bit of narrow street (emphasis added 16). 830 Elif ÖZTABAK AVCI DTCF Dergisi 57.2 (2017): 822-837 The second sentence in the passage above represents a glimpse of Ellen’s vision as she sees the view from her window. In the next sentence, however, the narrator’s voice and vision come to the fore, which is suggested by the stark contrast between the way the view is described by the narrator – “an ugly city prospect of back walls of houses” – and the way Ellen sees it – “the lovely light of a fair September morning was beautifying everything it shone upon” (16). In addition to such passages, what also consitutes a distinct pattern in the narration is the narrator’s constant focus on the heroine. Since the narrator, almost throughout the narrative,6 keeps Ellen under surveillance, s/he does not make use of the privileges of the extradiegetic-heterodiegetic level to its fullest. The narrator, in other words, remaining with Ellen, becomes subject to the restrictions Ellen “naturally” faces in terms of vision/knowledge. Tompkins, too, pinpoints “the enormous amount of attention Ellen receives”: “People are always talking about her when she isn’t present and can’t take their eyes off her when she is. Alice and Mr. John continually ask her to reveal her innermost thoughts, and seize upon every tremulous word” (597). Ellen, however, is not only surveilled by her “teachers” in the novel; she also remains under the perpetual surveillance carried out by the narrator. Chapter XVIII contains one remarkable example of this narratorial attention. Alice and Ellen visit a neighboring old woman, Mrs. Vawse, and soon, the two women begin to have a conversation but Ellen cannot hear them: Drawing their chairs together, a close conversation began. Ellen had been painfully interested and surprised by what went before, but the low tone of voice now seemed to be not meant for her ear, and turning away her attention, she amused herself with taking a general survey (189). 6 Throughout the novel, there are only five scenes in which Ellen is not observed by the narrator: The reader does not see Ellen in Chapter VI, while Mr. and Mrs. Montgomery are talking about Ellen’s departure in the morning (Warner 58-61). Similarly, she does not appear in Chapter VIII, while Timmins and the chambermaid, Miss Johns, on the boat, are having a chat, which is mostly about Ellen (Warner 86-87). In both instances, these scenes take place while Ellen is sleeping. In Chapter XXVIII, Ellen escapes out of the room at the Marshmans because she feels embarrassed about a trick she used while playing with other kids. Alice follows her, but the narrator remains in the room and tells/shows the reader what is being said about Ellen, who soon returns to the room (Warner 294- 295). The only chapter in which Ellen does not appear almost until the middle is Chapter XLII. It opens with a scene where Alice lies on her sickbed and has conversations both with her father and with Miss Sophia. The special attention Alice receives from the narrator in this chapter can be explained by her impending death (Warner 434-437). And, lastly, in Chapter XLVIII, Ellen does not appear throughout a short passage in which Mrs. Lindsay, Mr. Lindsay and Lady Keith discuss Ellen’s education (Warner 521-522). 831