INFORMATION TO USERS This reproduction was made from a copy of a document sent to us for microfilming. While the most advanced technology has been used to photograph and reproduce this document, the quality of the reproduction is heavily dependent upon the quality of the material submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help clarify markings or notations which may appear on this reproduction. 1.The sign or “target” for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is “Missing Page(s)”. If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting through an image and duplicating adjacent pages to assure complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a round black mark, it is an indication of cither blurred copy because of movement during exposure, duplicate copy, or copyrighted materials that should not have been filmed. For blurred pages, a good image of the page can be found in the adjacent frame. If copyrighted materials were deleted, a target note will appear listing the pages in the adjacent frame. 3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., is part of the material being photographed, a definite method of “sectioning” the material has been followed. It is customary to begin filming at the upper left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. If necessary, sectioning is continued again—beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete. 4. For illustrations that cannot be satisfactorily reproduced by xerographic means, photographic prints can be purchased at additional cost and inserted into your xerographic copy. These prints are available upon request from the Dissertations Customer Services Department. 5. Some pages in any document may have indistinct print. In all cases the best available copy has been filmed. University M o d in lm s International 300 N. Zeeb Road Ann Arbor, Ml 48106 7922539 Petrick, Joanne Lucklnd NATHANIEL HAWTHORNE, HENRY JAMES, AND "THE DEEPER PSYCHOLOGY" The Ohio State University Ph.D. 1979 University Microfiims International300 N. Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, Ml 48106 Copyright 1979 by Petrick, Joanne Luckind All Rights Reserved PLEASE NOTE: In all cases this material has been filmed in the best possible way from the available copy. Problems encountered with this document have been identified here with a checkV . mark 1. Glossy photographs or ______pages 2. Colored illustrations, paper or______ print 3. Photographs with dark background______ 4. Illustrations are poor copy______ 5. Pages with black marks, not original______ copy 6. Print shows through as there is text on both sides______ of page 7. Indistinct, broken or small print on several______ pages 8. Print exceeds margin requirements______ 9. Tightly bound copy with print lost______ in spine 10. Computer printout pages with indistinct______ print 11. Page(s) 91_______ lacking when material received, and not available from school or author. 12. Page(s)____________ seem to be missing in numbering only as text follows. 13. Two pages numbered___________ . Text follows. 14. Curling and wrinkled pag______ es 15. Other_________________________________________________________ _ University Microfilms International .NATHANIEL HAWTHORNE, HENRY JAMES, AND "THE DEEPER PSYCHOLOGY" DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Joanne Luckino Petrick, B. A,, M, A. # # # # The Ohio State University 1979 Reading Committee: Approved by Daniel R . Barnes John M , Muste Julian Markels Adviser Department of English For my family and friends, colleagues and advisors— with sincere appreciation VITA March 19» 1 9 ^ 1 ............ Born - Columbus, Ohio 1 9 6 3 ................... * • B.A. magna cum laude. Ohio Dominican College, Columbus, Ohio 1963-1964 ................ Educational Researcher, Battelle Memorial Institute, Columbus, Ohio 1965-1966 . ............ Occupational Information Writer, State Of Ohio, Columbus, Ohio 1966-1968 ................ Assistant Director of Orien­ tation, The Ohio State Uni­ versity, Columbus, Ohio 1969 ......................M. A., The Ohio State Uni­ versity, Columbus, Ohio 1968-197^ ................ Teaching Associate and Lecturer, Department of English, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 1975-1977 ................ Academic Counselor, College of the Arts and Sciences, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 1977-present Chairperson, Department of English, Ohio Dominicann College, Columbus, Ohio PUBLICATIONS Critical Skills Lab Workbook. Ohio Dominican College, 1978. "Irving as Lyricist." The Parers of the Bibliographical Society of America, No. 1, 1975* PP* 35-37* "Character Sketches: An Experiment in Classroom Communi­ cation." Moreover. Spring, 197^» PP* 17-19* FIELDS OF STUDY Major Field: American Literature Studies in Nineteenth Century American Literature. Professor Julian Markels Studies in Twentieth Century American Literature. Professors Daniel R Barnes and John M. Muste Studies in Romantic and Victorian Literature. Professor James Kincaid Studies in Psycholinguistics. Professor Harold Pepinsky TABLE OP CONTENTS Page VITA ......................................... iii Chapter I. INTRODUCTION ........................... 1 II. PURSUIT OF KNOWLEDGE IN THE DARK: "YOUNG GOODMAN BROWN" AND "THE JOLLY C O R N E R " ..................... 16 III. A QUESTION OF INNOCENCE: "RAPPACCINI'S DAUGHTER" AND DAISY MILLER ........................... 3^ IV. THE REJECTION OF EXPERIENCE: "WAKEFIELD" AND "THE BEAST IN THE J U N G L E " .............. 76 V. THE PROBLEM OF THE ARTIST: "THE ARTIST OF THE BEAUTIFUL" AND "THE AUTHOR OF BELTRAFFIO"................ 10^ VI. THE HAZARDS OF SOCIAL REFORM: THE BLITHEDALE ROMANCE AND THE BOSTONIANS............................ 133 BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................... 226 v "Criticism is the only gate of appreciation, just as appreciation is, in regard to a work of art, the only gate of enjoyment." — Henry James CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION T.S. Eliot's famous essay on "Henry James," which first appeared in the August, 1918* issue of The Little Review, succinctly explains the correspondence between James and his early nineteenth-century predecessor in American fiction, Nathaniel Hawthorne. Eliot states: The really vital thing, in finding any personal kinship between Hawthorne and James, is what James touches lightly when he says that 'the fine thing in Hawthorne is that he cared for the deeper psychology, and that, in his way, he tried to become familiar with it.' There are other points of resemblance, not directly inclu­ ded under this, but this one is of the first importance. It is, in fact, almost enough to ally the two novelists, in comparison with whom almost all others may be accused of either super­ ficiality or aridity.1 While Hawthorne and James individually have proved fruitful subjects for literary scholars, few scholars have pursued T.S. Eliot's assertions about the significant corres­ pondences between the two writers. F.O. Matthiessen devoted a few pages to their relationship in American Renaissance. In his chapter on Hawthorne, Matthiessen points out specific similarities in plot, setting, characters, romantic tendencies in style, and narrative and image-making techniques. He notes that James "took generously for granted all that he had learned from Hawthorne" and that his "technical development 1 2 was a direct response to his sense of Hawthorne*s limita­ tions. In 1952, Marius Bewley*s The Complex Fate examined Hawthorne's and James's common awareness of the complexities besetting a nineteenth-century American: "They established a strategy by which the American, cut off from his ante­ cedents and embarrassed by the burden of his 'commonplace prosperity' might develop a refined consciousness of that cultural and racial unit that underlies divisions of the English-speaking world.Bewley devotes two chapters to parallels among the characters, themes, and styles of The Blithedale Romance and The Bostonians, The Marble Faun and The Wings of the Dove. Bewley concludes that Hawthorne compulsively affirmed American values even though, as a writer, he regretted the thinness of American culture. James, however, had the personal security and technical expertise to explore positive European values. In a later chapter, Bewley discusses James's treatment of appearance and reality. He feels that, for James, there is no immu­ table reality behind appearances, but that ambiguity can always be twisted into new and convenient realities. Without elaborating on his position, Bewley maintains that Hawthorne could always resolve ambiguity "within the [comfortably real] framework of a social and political orthodoxy." Comparative studies during the 1950's and 1960's are limited to a handful of critical articles which investigate 3 plot similarities ("The Prophetic Pictures" and "The Liar"), character and stylistic similarities (The Marble Faun and Roderick Hudson), and thematic similarities (The Scarlet h. Letter and Madame de Mauves). More recently, Robert E. Long has examined Hawthorne's strong influence on James during the latter's apprenticeship years. Long believes that, in James's early stories, "there is...a consistent pattern of James's having looked back at Hawthorne for clues to American psychological experience." The critic also affirms that James's indebtedness essentially