EVOLUTION OF THE WEREWOLF ARCHETYPE FROM OVID TO J. K. ROWLING A dissertation submitted to Kent State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy by Brent A. Stypczynski December 2008 Dissertation written by Brent A. Stypczynski B.A., The College of Wooster, 2000 M.A., Kent State University, 2004 Ph.D., Kent State University, 2008 Approved by D.M. Hassler Chair, Doctoral Dissertation Committee Susanna Fein Member, Doctoral Dissertation Committee Don-John Dugas Member, Doctoral Dissertation Committee Isolde Thyret Member, Doctoral Dissertation Committee Radd Ehrman Member, Doctoral Dissertation Committee Accepted by Ronald Corthell Chair, Department of English John R.D. Stalvey Associate Dean, College of Arts and Sciences ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements . iv Introduction . 1 Chapter 1: Theological Monster, Chivalric Exemplar . 26 Chapter 2: Monstrous Anti-Wolf . 84 Chapter 3: The Disc’s K-9 Unit . .135 Chapter 4: Wolf in Professor’s Clothing . .189 Afterword . .244 Bibliography . .252 iii Acknowledgements In no particular order, I’d like to thank the committee as a whole for their patience, commentary and assistance in this project. My thanks to Mack Hassler for agreeing to chair this whole thing and his morale support throughout. To Susanna Fein for deploying her editorial experience. To Don-John Dugas for his advice about future work and job hunting. To Isolde Thyret for bringing to bear the historian’s perspective that is necessary for a project of this scope. I’d also like to thank Sara, Mayuri, and Robert for providing therapeutic and relaxing socialization opportunities during the early stages of the process (especially for Kasimir Pulaski/St. Patrick’s Day), and for just being there to gripe with. Also Matt, Susie, Danny, and Elizabeth for being such excellent officemates throughout the past couple years and providing helpful insights and opportunities. Of course, every side of the family deserves credit for their support, interest (even if hearing a bit of babble about werewolves probably got old fast), and memory (of those who are no longer with us to see this). Special thanks to Loki and Hermione for the therapeutic purring, attempts to help type, and their contribution of fur to every draft (even if I should be writing about cats, not dumb wolves). And especially to my wife, Megan, without whose moral support, Classics experience, and extra pair of editing eyes, this project wouldn’t exist in its current form. iv INTRODUCTION Introduction Monsters serve both to mark the fault-lines but also, subversively, to signal the fragility of such boundaries. (Elaine Graham, 2002)1 One of the boundaries that a focus on monstrosity arguably disrupts is that between past and present. (Bettina Bildhauer and Robert Mills, 2003)2 Neomedieval Werewolves The study of neomedievalism3 has recently become important in literary and cultural studies. This approach opens common ground for medievalists, fantasists, and critics of children’s literature to study important images and effects. Thus far, the methodology is applied primarily to video games and movies, although some novels and short stories aimed at young audiences have been studied.4 A key characteristic of this 1 2 method is the tension between the old and the new: neomedievalism links two time periods separated by centuries, new technology to old themes and ideas, and modern society to its past (or at least an idealized version of its past). Critical attention has been focused on the modern use of medieval tropes for entertainment value, and familiar arguments have been made about the modern fascination with the idealized medieval. This phenomenon is related to eighteenth-century neo-classicism, since both look to an idealized past for themes and images to draw upon in order to evoke a response from the audience, and this response is one of tonal complexity that becomes increasingly important in my analysis of Terry Pratchett and J. K. Rowling later. Jonathan Swift was particularly skilled in the use of these tonal methods of comparison, and some resonance with such neo-classic effects has been noticed in our time with genre writers such as Pratchett and Rowling. I see examples that parallel some of my work here in recent commentary on the work of Frederik Pohl and Samuel R. Delany where their corpus has been searched for such “doubleness” of tonal effect.5 One important image in such discussions is the figure that lacks a stable form, the shape-shifter. If we look at key modern representations of shape-changing characters, we find that they retain strong ties to their medieval forebears and evoke similar responses in the modern audience. Such similarities imply shared social and human concerns, such as where the line between nature and nurture, or between humans and other animals, is drawn. These conclusions become stronger when we note that these figures stretch back at least as far as Ovid and Petronius and have strong associations with pre-historic, totemic beliefs. As Malcolm South notes regarding monsters, “if [a 3 monster] is to have a profound effect on us, it must reflect something meaningful about human experience and engage our emotions in a powerful way.”6 Moreover, Joyce Salisbury suggests that one reason shape-shifting figures are broadly popular and fascinating is that “[a]nimals do not abide by social expectations that bind humans. They do what they want, go where they want,”7 especially the wild ones. Werewolves, and shape-shifters in general, play an intriguing and complex role in the Western literary tradition, a role that has been sufficiently recognized and explored only with regard to the medieval period. Even so, much of the scholarly work on shape- shifting in literature has either focused on the historical, religious, psychological, and medical dimensions, or has been part of wider research regarding the role of monsters. Discussion of shape-changers as literary figures has been minimal, with most scholars more interested in the frames around these characters rather than the figures themselves and their fictive situations. To date, academic discussions of these figures in general, and of werewolves in particular, fall into one of five major positions: the shape-shifter as theological impossibility or monster; the “sympathetic werewolf” as a purely medieval phenomenon; the werewolf as political postcolonial allegory; shape-shifting as a sign or symptom of insanity; or the shape-shifter as social allegory. The shape-shifter warrants attention not only as part of studies in neomedievalism, but also because the representational role is so fundamentally important, even if its “screen time” in a given text is brief. Saint Augustine presents one of the best discussions of the shape-changer as religious impossibility or monster in City of God. In this work Augustine acts as a 4 commentator, elucidating passages from the Bible, other ancient sources, and current debates of his time regarding a variety of subjects. On the subject of the shape-shifter, he responds in 16.8 to contemporary and ancient Greek tales of “certain monstrous races of man.”8 Generally speaking, his position makes use of simple black-and-white categories based on defining man as both mortal (not an angel) and rational (not an animal). Anything displaying mortality and rational thought, according to Augustine, must be a man, no matter what its outer shape appears to be. This is one of the key passages to which Caroline Walker Bynum refers when she asserts a medieval preoccupation with creating clearly defined borders between species. The end result of this position is that, doctrinally, all stories of such creatures (notably those involving Circe, Lycaon, and the Arcadians) are false, the result of demonic illusion or trickery rather than actual physical change, since the essential nature of the person remains the same (although, in something of a paradox, Augustine does insist that all shape-shifted men retain their rational minds, implying that actual change takes place). The “sympathetic werewolf” as medieval, psychological phenomenon is best exemplified in Bynum’s work, most notably her speech “Metamorphosis, or Gerald and the Werewolf” (1998). Bynum argues that a surface reading of medieval metamorphosis tales leads to discovering a medieval “commitment to species immutability.”9 However, she notes that a more nuanced interpretation of this “fascination with spontaneous generation and hybridization”10 shows a concern with delimiting animal species-crossing. Many medieval authors wished to understand and control the rules and limits by which species-crossing could take place. Ultimately, Bynum maintains that the “sympathetic” 5 werewolf is different from modern and ancient ferocious beasts both literarily and figuratively, largely because the medieval versions tend to retain the rational mind, simultaneously glorifying and resisting the idea of metamorphosis (the outer shell changes, but the core humanity remains intact). Bynum’s treatment of the “sympathetic” werewolf provides a useful distinction for studies of modern literary shifters even though her exclusive focus on horror films and television limits her own brief foray into the modern era. Bynum also identifies two general types of change: replacement change, where the original form/individual is effectively lost (common in modern horror) and evolutionary change, where the core identity remains largely the same even though the individual undergoes some physical change (common in Ovid, medieval literature, and modern fantasy).11 Both of these are useful concepts for discussing modern werewolves and other shape-shifters. The werewolf as postcolonial or political allegory has recently been posited by both Catherine Karkov and S. J. Wiseman.12 Both scholars add to Bynum’s interpretation. Karkov claims that, while Bynum is correct in her discussion of “sympathetic” werewolves, she misses or ignores the political metaphors inherent in Gerald of Wales. Karkov argues that Gerald’s story acts as a metaphor for the conquest of Ireland and parallels the partitioning of Ireland.