Information to Users
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
INFORMATION TO USERS This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer. The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely afiect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in reduced form at the back of the book. Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6” x 9” black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order. UMI A Bell & Howell Information Company 300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor MI 48106-1346 USA 313/761-4700 800/521-0600 CONVENTION, PROGRESSION, AND ROMANCE: HISTORY AND FORM IN THE STUDY OF THE AMERICAN ANTEBELLUM NOVEL DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Michael J. Davey, M.A. ***** The Ohio State University 1998 Dissertation Committee: Approved by Professor James Phelan, Adviser Professor Steven Fink /I , Professor Elizabeth Renker /j A dviser Department of English X7MI Number: 9900818 UMI Microform 9900818 Copyright 1998, by UMI Company. All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. UMI 300 North Zeeb Road Ann Arbor, MI 48103 Among the various conflicting modes of writing history, there would seem to be two grand partial distinctions, under which all the rest must subordinately range. By the one mode, all contemporaneous circumstances, facts, and events must be set down contemporaneously; by the other, they are only to be set down as the general stream of the narrative shall dictate; for matters which are kindred in time, may be very irrelative in themselves. I elect neither of these; I am careless of either; both are well enough in their way; I write precisely as I please {Pierre 244). ABSTRACT For most of the twentieth century, literary critics and scholars have labored under the assumption that historical approaches to literary study are incommensurable with the approaches of New Critics, structuralists, narrative theorists, and others interested in formal analysis. In the pages which follow, by employing a method that borrows from both recent rhetorical theories of narrative and historicist literary studies, I show that formal studies and historical studies are not incommensurable. Rather than approach this task abstractly, however, I address this larger focus in concrete terms by demonstrating the problematic character of the romance theory of the American antebellum novel. In the last fifteen to twenty years, literary scholars and critics have come to recognize the tenuous nature of the standard explanation of the development of the novel form in this country. Following the work of such critics as Michael Davitt Bell, Nina Baym, and others, I reexamine the work of three authors whose books have been integral to maintaining that theory—James Fenimore Cooper, Nathaniel Hawthorne and Herman Melville—arguing that the romance theory has not accurately described the diverse forms the novel took in this country, and that the traditional distinction between realism and romance as it is used to refer to the differences between British and American fiction in the antebellum period should be reconceived in light of this fact. As I do so, I stake a case for the integrated approach outlined below. ii In chapter one, I argue that a method combining both formal and historical methods must take as its proper object of knowledge the cultural work a literary text does in its specific historical moment. Such work is accomplished in the complex exchange between reader and text created by the narrative's progression. In other words, 1 argue that history and form have a dialectical relation and that it is a text's transformations of contemporary conventions which define its role in literary history. Because conventions have both a synchronic and a diachronic dimension—they are both codified ways of doing things as well as ways which change over time—a competent authorial reader must be prepared to encounter syntagmatic uses of convention which defy easy classification—uses which in effect transform the expectations associated with a particular genre. Accordingly, in the three middle chapters 1 let the specific details of each book's progression as well as the particular character of its horizon-of-expectations determine my focus, establishing thereby how the conventions each author adopted to shape the responses of his readers were the result of both the logic of history and the logic of each narrative's progression. The collective result will be to show that these writers employed conventions associated with a wide variety of narrative modes including the realistic novel, sentimental fiction, the Gothic novel, the historical romance, and French sensational fiction, and thus that the romance theory does not do justice to the full range of conventions antebellum American writers employed. Ill To my parents—all of them—with love. IV ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I wish to thank my adviser, James Phelan, whose intellectual guidance over the last six years has helped me to grow in more ways than I can name, and whose unwavering support was indispensable for me completing my program of study. I wish to thank my committee, Steven Fink and Elizabeth Renker, whose feedback and challenging questions helped me to refine my thinking and my prose throughout the course of this project. I wish also to thank Nils Samuels, whose emotional and intellectual camaraderie helped me to keep a healthy perspective on my work from virtually the first day of my graduate training. Finally, I wish to thank Lane M. Moon, whose unwavering support and caring understanding was more important to the completion of this project than she yet fully appreciates. I, for one, appreciate her. VITA April 13, 1967 Bom - Om aha, Nebraska 1989 B.A. English and Philosophy State University of New York at B ingham ton 1994 M.A. English, The Ohio State U niversity 1992 - present Graduate Teaching and Research Associate, The Ohio State U niversity FIELDS OF STUDY Major Field: English VI TABLE OF CONTENTS D edication.............................................................................................................................. iv Acknowledgments............................................................................................................. v Vita........................................................................................................................................ vi C hapters: 1. Introduction: History, Form and the Form of Romance ............................... 1 2. Making Ends Meet: The Progression of History in James Fenimore C ooper's The Last of the Mohicans............................................................................... 27 3. The Devil's Touch: Authorial Presence, Authorial Reading, and The Blithedale Romance.......................................................................................................... 88 4. An "Enthusiast to Duty": Melville and the Cost of Writing Both Ways at Once—The Example of Pierre....................................................................................... 143 5. Conclusions: Historical Study of the Antebellum Novel After the Romance............................................................................................................................ 199 Bibliography .................................................................................................................... 229 VII CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION: HISTORY, FORM AND THE FORM OF ROMANCE I For most of the twentieth century, literary critics and scholars have labored under the assumption that historical approaches to literary study are incommensurable with the approaches of New Critics, structuralists, narrative theorists, and others interested in formal analysis. Because the historical approaches of nineteenth century philologists were associated with methodologies which sacrificed a coherent theory of both form and literary value, the New Critics' focus on formal analysis would be deliberately ahistorical. The attacks on historical methods would reach their apex in the 1940's when, as Rene Wellek has described it: during the heyday of the New Criticism, historical scholarship was on the defensive [and] much was done to reassert the rights of criticism and literary theory and to minimize the former overwhelming emphasis on biography and historical background {Concepts 6). The eventual demise of New Criticism as brought about by the rise of post structuralism and post-modern theories generally