• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

APPROVAL N,une: Henry "3.l.m i-Tubert Degree: Kaster of ^:rts Title of Ttlesi s: The r;cllncti-on of Symbol md Metaphor: k Study of Kafka's --The Tx*ir;l nnd 1-ZelvilLe1s -Pierre or2.-, Tile :mb?pities Exminin~Committee: ( J. Zaslovo ) Serrior SuporvSso::? ABSTRACT This study began originally out of an interest in th.e nature or Frmz 1';al"Sra's populari-by in America. I emphasized thematic rela%ionships hetween Kafkz, and American aut;i.mrs of both the nineteenth cmd twentieth centuries esrly in my research, bat then turned from an exmination of' suecifkc social thomas to problem of aesthetics as tml2. Poetic perception, early English Romantic theorists held, Ts a matter of investing r*n object with that quality af lV'e which arises ont of the perce-ivsy*'c sensibility. Perceptio!~is active, permitting-- indeed, demandin=--the si~bject' s unity with the object in his act of conceiving it. This concept provioes the hasis for the e~.trsmeserse of vulnerability uhfch Kafka 1 s prot ?.gonists reel In the presence of their environment. The nature of their >a17r,ept;ion forces %he world to confront arid reject t.nir?:n. The s~meis true 3-31 some of Melville Is works, especially in :405g-~!ick mid Pierr.& or, The !mbiy-rities. In %he lcitter, tho hero conceives 2 stranpr as his sister, a fzct which also laxls to h-is c.onceptio;q oi' the social environme~;t ss Snlso. Since the identi.3-ciition of' Pierrels corlcep-i;ion snd perception force him out of the given social stmcture, bjlt prov3 des no alternative mode of life, he perishes, jnst like mmy of Kaf'kaf s prot:?y.m ists, The basis of the azsthetjc stuc!y in tllis the~isLS poetic or metaphoric language also unites subject and object. Thus poetic perception leads olie into a unity with the object of perception. Met aphorlc thou~$t breaks thrcugh logical system, permitting one not only to find significcmce but also have -hate 6 memin,r: revealed. Xaf.lials strongth lies in revealing mecaning which ciefius systematization, as I attempt to sho;-r in a study of "A Country Doctor .'' Since I did not aclopt this approach to literature w-.ti1 I began my work on Kafka and lielville, tnis paper is more of' a1 attempt at c~1inteeration of these thoughts than primarily a comparison of Bafka and Melville or a definitive XJOP~on either, I do not concern myself with my specific relationships betwee;._ the two ~~uthorsin tems of mxb.t:.ral influanc:as, nor do I attempt to place then into a similar 7:!eltanshmim~ in tems of catcgori.es such as 'ie;G.stentialism.' or "alienction. Kevertheless, I think that the stvdy does sho~rbasic similc7.ri.t;i.e~regarc2ing attiluzes both toward soc'ety and "cwzrd literature, TABLE OF COl.'ITiTi.'i.'CS :T!l'l'ffCi~~iCTrO? . * , . * . Chgnter I. STOXED XE OHEl S IIOUSE: COUlTTRY DOCTOR" . , INTHODUC TION This study began originally out of an interest in the nat- ure of Franz Kafka's popularity. Next to Eertold Breclit, Kafka I is probably the most widely read German author of the twentieth century on this continent. My first concern was primarily them- atic and thus I read extensively in twentieth-century writers who dealt with the thetuesof naivete, guilt, and alienakion. Gradually, however, I turned from the study of specific social themes to more aesthetic problens, especially as they have been formulated by Romantic theory. In mt flrirror end the I?. H. Abrams presents a history of Iiomanticiem which explains the significance of the change from using the image of the mirror to the image of the lamp or fountaix Lo descriSc the nature of poetry. Poetic perceptio~?,the early Romantic theorists held, was a matter of investing the object with the quality of life which arose out of the perceiver's sensibility. Kence the ps~tic image became the congru'ence of outer object 2nd inner emtion. This concept aids the critic of Wafka'u works a great deal, for it stresses the active nature of perception, and points to the poet's uuity with the object. It also provides the bmis for the etc2weze~rse of vulnerability which Kafka's protagonists feel in the presence of objects of the exterms1 works of the herican 3omantics of the nineteenth century. In Melville especially I found a novelist in whose best work the division between outer activity and inner sensibility vanishes. I also fou.nd in Melville the themes of naivete, guilt, and alien- ation which I had found in Kafka. Since these appeared the slrong- est in LiS*re Or, Th3 hmbimxities, I decided to concentrate on a comparison of Kafka's T'rjal and Melville's Pierre. Mel- ville's novel was further suitable for my study because in this book Melville treats critically the basis of his whole art as it arises out of the Romantic insistence that the poet enters into relationship with the object of his perception. As a result of my interest in this area I began reading further. According to Susanne Langer in Yhiloso& a a @J m, the chief obstacle to understanding the phenonena of the mind is C 1, the conviction that the mind is passive in perceiving reali.l;y. In fact, she argues that the very opposite is true, for, as the nineteenth-century Romantic critics, both English an6 continental, had discovered, the mind is-. active in perceiving the world--for ---._-- _-_--^_ - .-. - . - mind does not only perceive the world, it also concei~the world. As the mind meets ww experiences, it objectifies them C L by naming them, and thereby it is able to retain them in its memory. In primitive cultures this naming activity goes on , ,/ constantly, as new experiences are added to the reservoir of man's knowledge. As culture and language evolve, however, this naming activity gives way gradiza3.l~to the use of words which, through constant use, gain those fzxed meanings which form the basis of ouz. 6iscursive language. ?'hc actiirj ty of naming becomes 0 3 weaker and weaker, until it seems to stand in direct contrast to simple discursive language, which has become the norm. Thus the difference between zhe "presentational" and the "discursive" symbol arises. Owen Barfield and Martin Foss also discuss these two dif- ferent aspects of language, applying their knowledge directly to thestudy of literature as they present their theories. Because of my interest.in this area of thought, I decided to adapt the thrust of my work on Kafka and Melville to these aspects of Romanticism in order to gain more freedom to examine the appli- cation of xhese theories to literature, I determined to make this study of the nature of langna~ethe hasis not of a coxpsrat- ive work, but of a mutual study of both autlmrs. Hence my ::tcdy will take the form of a mutual interpretation of Kafka and Melville, This format has also been used in Mark Spilka's study of =.%a and Dickens, for instance, or Teoffry Hartman's study of Words- worth, ~aldryand Bilke. Since this whole area of thought is still rather new to me, this paper is more of an attempt at an integration of what I have been studying than a definitive paper on either Rafka or Melville. Nevertheless, I am confident that for me this paper contains valuable insights into both Kafka and Melville, and that it can act as a base for 2 furthm study of both authors. The simple juxtaposition of the two authors has proved valuable in itself, for it has forced me to consider facets of their works which have received less siudy tkai? other aspects of their work. 4 In Kafka, for instance, it reveals the nature of his symboLic art, while in Melville, the juxtaposition leads to a closer study of the relationship of the a~stheticaspects and the social as- pects of the "poetic iz'ovel." Further, I think a study like this is valuable, because in pointing to the similarity of the two authors, it invites the transference of criticism from one to the other. Kafka's critics could learn, for instance, not to ask questions like, "What does the Castle represent?I1 for that type of question has been shown to lead nowhere in the study of Mobv-Dii. Thus the castle or the court is what it does, just *4.".."-' -a'-' -n -r--*uwr--* llllllllirrrXIM as the white whale is just what it docs. Just as Noby-Dick is not God or the devil, so the court is not heaven or hell. Melville's critics, on the other h.and, could learn to look far the social implications of the works, thereby finding Melville not only a consumate master in handling an open form but also a person of a very keen social conscience. In conclusion, I repeat that this is not primarily a compzrative study, nor is it a study of influences of one author on the other. It is doubtful that Kafka ever read any of Mel- ville's works, for Mobv-3ick was first translated into German in 1927. It is probable, however, that both Rafka and Melville weE influenced by Germmi Ronanticisrr?, but that is a problem which goes beyond the scope of this essay. Here I deal with the nature of metaphor and poetic thought as it applies to what has been termed symbolic or mythic literature, dealing eepecially with Kafkat s "A Country roctort' and The 5'ri%i and witL 14elville 's --*,--pie.t~($ QY, i.r,biat,i es .

Load more

  185

Copy Link