I have been analyzing Hawthorne’s preface a lot and trying to figure out exactly what he is saying. Right now, to me, it seems like he is contradicting himself. He says he put parts of Brook Farm into his novel “in hope of giving a more lifelike tint to the fancy-sketch” (1). Thus, he implies that he wants his romance to seem realistic. However, he then says he does not want “too close a comparison with the actual events of real lives” to be made (1).
How can he have it both ways? How can he make a realistic romance based on “his actual reminiscences” (1) without comparisons being drawn between reality and his fiction?
He wants to be “allowed a license with regard to every-day Probability,” or in other words, to be able to create a completely fictitious story, but he wants to simultaneously prevent “the render[ing of] the paint and pasteboard of [his characters’] composition but too painfully discernible” (2). Essentially, he wants the freedom to create fake characters--that do not seem fake--by using his real life experiences as a basis—and not inspire any comparisons between these experiences and the novel.
Somehow Hawthorne thinks that, by using Brook Farm as a basis for his novel, he is preventing his characters from being compared with real living beings and, in result, from appearing fake. Obviously, this is impossible. Hawthorne cannot make his fictitious characters seem real by using his personal experiences while still maintaining their integrity as separate entities from real-life counterparts. Specifically, Hawthorne cannot base Coverdale on himself just to make him seem more real without the inevitable comparisons being drawn between the two.
So how does this relate to my research question (“How does Hawthorne relate to Coverdale?”)? Well, I’m trying to figure out exactly what all the similarities between Hawthorne and Coverdale that I’ve found mean. My analysis of the preface is one direction I can go, but I’m still trying to relate it back to my research meaningfully.
Maybe I can analyze how Hawthorne puts himself into Coverdale to give a “lifelike tint” to the romance, but illogically wants to prevent the inevitable comparisons from being drawn between the two. Perhaps I can look at Hawthorne’s obsession with how reality’s peeking through the veil of fiction makes the fiction seem even more unreal (as Zenobia suggests during Tablaux vivants on page 106). It seems Hawthorne’s hiding behind Coverdale makes his character ultimately seem more unreal.
I still can’t figure out exactly what can be revealed from my comparisons between Hawthorne and Coverdale! As of now, I don’t even have an argument to work with, just a bunch of similarities between Hawthorne and Coverdale; I hope I can come up with something.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Despite the many similarities between Hawthorne and Coverdale, there is one thing that I don't think the two are similar, which is their views on feminism.
Coverdale does not seem to be a feminist supporter because of his many assessments of women. Clearly this is not similar to Hawthorne in real life. Do you think Hawthorne is condemning Coverdale in some way in the novel? I am also curious why Coverdale is so lonely in the novel.
That preface analysis that you stated is what Don has also been working on - I read his paper for the peer review. This is indeed a big contradiction of Hawthorne, because it leaves the reader totally confused as to whether the novel is based off real events or not.
I think if you analyze the preface more, you could also show how Coverdale and Hawthorne are dissimilar and relate that to how some parts of Blithedale are fiction, while others are fact (based off of real events).
reply to Wendy's comments:
How did you determine Hawthorne was a feminist supporter? From the novel and his other works such as The Scarlet Letter it does not seem to me he supports feminist views. He does portray strong feminist characters in his works but they all are socially shunned and criticized.
back to Wesley's post:
I peer reviewed your paper and found a lot of interesting ideas. What I think is that Hawthorne uses the novel to comment on his experiences at Brook Farm and Coverdale is essentially Hawthorne. I see the preface as just merely a statement that should not really be taken seriously. I am sure anyone who read this novel who automatically assume that Coverdale is Hawthorne regardless of the little note in the preface. I think Hawthornre uses the novel and Coverdale in particular to examine his experiences at Brook Farm.
Reply to Tim:
I did not read other works by Hawthorne, but I did read a lot of criticism by recent critics (within the past 3 decades).
True, Hawthorne was generally accepted as an antifeminist in the past, but such criticism has been changed over time along with the progress of women's movements.
In Hawthorne's work, he not only portrays strong feminist characters, but also portrays misogynists such as Hollingsworth and arguably, Coverdale. They both fail miserably at the end of the novel. If you are saying that Blithedale is a criticism of feminists, you might have to consider the failure of misogynists in the novel (there are certainly other causes besides antifeminism, but you may need to take it into consideration as well).
Post a Comment