Psychoanalytic Criticism of the Life and Works of Henry James. Mary Clark Yost Hallab Louisiana State University and Agricultural & Mechanical College
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses Graduate School 1971 Psychoanalytic Criticism of the Life and Works of Henry James. Mary Clark yost Hallab Louisiana State University and Agricultural & Mechanical College Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses Recommended Citation Hallab, Mary Clark yost, "Psychoanalytic Criticism of the Life and Works of Henry James." (1971). LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses. 1925. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses/1925 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses by an authorized administrator of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. 71- 20,597 HALLAB, Mary Clark Yost, 19H-0- PSYCHOANALYTIC CRITICISM OF THE LIFE AND WORKS OF HENRY JAMES. The Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College, Ph.D., 1971 Language and Literature, modern University Microfilms, A XEROX Company, Ann Arbor, Michigan THIS DISSERTATION HAS BEEN MICROFILMED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED PSYCHOANALYTIC CRITICISM OF THE LIFE AND WORKS OF HENRY JAMES A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in The Department of English by Mary Clark Yost Hallab B.A., Louisiana State University, 1961 M.A., Louisiana State University, 1965 January, 1971 ACKNOWLED GMENT S I wish to acknowledge my major professor Dr. Donald E. Stanford and the members of my committee, Drs. Fabian Gudas and Thomas A. Kirby for their invaluable assistance and guidance during the course of my graduate study and the preparation of my dissertation. I also wish to acknowledge the help of Mrs. Cara Lu Salam who assisted me in locating references. I am grateful to my parents, Mr. and Mrs. Charles 0. Yost, Jr., for their constant help and encourage ment. I am especially grateful to my husband for his con tinuous support during my graduate studies. TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE I. INTRODUCTION ................................. 1 II. EARLY PSYCHOANALYTIC CRITICISM OF HENRY J A M E S ............................. 26 III. PSYCHOANALYTIC CRITICISM OF HENRY JAMES FROM 1940 TO THE PRESENT: BIOGRAPHICAL ................. 89 IV. "THE TURN OF THE SCREW"....................... 144 V. OTHER WORKS BY JAMES: JAMES AS "CASE" ..................................... 209 VI. OTHER WORKS BY JAMES: JAMES AS PSYCHOLOGIST ............................... 253 CONCLUSION............................................ 297 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY................................. 314 iii ABSTRACT A survey of the psychoanalytic criticism of Henry James reveals the popularity of psychoanalytic theory among modern literary critics and the diversity in their approaches to it. Psychoanalytic criticism of James varies in response to changes in psychoanalytic theory and the popular accep tance of it. For example, critics of the 1920's and 1930's adopted the practice, then current, of using psychoanalysis to condemn Victorian sexual repressiveness and to condemn James as a typical Victorian. Later critics became more complex and cautious in their use of Freudian theory or departed from it to employ the modified theories put forth by the Neo-Freudians or the Jungians. To the Freudians it was significant that he was an inhibited Victorian gentleman whose writings are ambiguous, full of disguised sexual implications and suggestive symbolism. Neo-Freudians later found in his work evidence of an inferiority feeling and a need for self-fulfillment. Jungians noted a rebirth arche type which has a possible biographical significance. In their understanding of psychoanalysis, critics of James range from practicing psychoanalysts who adhere rigidly to the concepts of their respective schools, to laymen who are essentially ignorant of psychoanalysis but who apply those concepts which have been widely popularized or have been used previously by other critics, often mis interpreting them, as, for example, early critics misinter preted Freud's views on sexual freedom. Most are primarily students of literature who select and combine those psycho analytic principles which they feel best explain James or support their own critical theories. Most of the major themes running through Jamesian criticism are derived from the contributions of only a few critics, such as Van Wyck Brooks, who established the stereotype of James as expatriate, and Edmund Wilson, who stressed the "ambiguity" in his personality and writings. According to their preconceived opinion about James or about the nature of the artist, critics treat him as a psychologist or as a neurotic case. Peter Coveney and Robert Rogers, for example, analyze his works as unconscious revelations of his repressed desires and ignore their con scious and objective elements. Van Wyck Brooks and Maxwell Geismar call him neurotic because of their personal distaste for his politics or morals. In contrast, Edmund Wilson and Leon Edel treat the works as case studies by an intuitive psychologist, with an extraordinary insight into personality and motivation, derived partly from introspection. Despite little evidence to support such a view into the workings of his own mind, Oscar Cargill even suggests that James may have knowingly applied the theories of Freud v and his predecessors. In any case, James shared with his contemporaries the Romantic interest in exploring beneath the surface of human behavior which, according to Lionel Trilling, later culminated in the work of the psychoanalysis The psychoanalytic criticism of James reveals certain failures of psychoanalytic criticism in general— its reduc tiveness, its tendency to degenerate into wild, unfounded speculation, its inexactness, and ability to serve as "proof for differing interpretations. Nevertheless, psychoanalytic criticism has had a favorable effect on James’s reputation. It drew attention to him which he might otherwise never have received by destroying the early view of his works as merely cold and mechanical dissections of character and revealing them instead as the disguised expression of intense passion. It accounted for the ambiguity and uncovered under the abstractions and vague allusiveness a hidden meaning more acceptable to the modern reader than the more obvious tra ditional interpretations. It showed that James was a great psychologist, dealing with eternal human conflicts, whose works can not only survive, but benefit by reinterpretation in the light of modern theories of behavior. CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Psychoanalysis has had a tremendous influence on modern literary criticism. Many modern critics have adopted the psychological theories of Freud, Jung, or the Neo- Freudians as the basis for their analyses and evaluations of literature. Psychoanalysts themselves have written essays on various writers and their works. Some writers, like Shakespeare, Kafka, Poe, T. S. Eliot, and Henry James, have been the subject of hundreds of such studies. Frequently, psychoanalytic criticism has been responsible for completely revising critical attitudes toward certain writers. Such is the case with Henry James. It is the purpose of this study to survey the psychoanalytic criticism aimed at explaining and evaluating the life and work of Henry James in order to show the various types of criticism which result from the practical application of psychoanalytic theory to the works of one man and to show just how psychoanalysis has affected this man's reputation and has changed the popular concepts about the man and his works. I chose Henry James because the great quantity and variety of psychoanalytic criticism which has been applied to him provide almost a summary of the field of psychoanalytic criticism. Within this study, I hope to clarify some of the reasons for James's popularity with the psychoanalysts. I shall divide the psychoanalytic criticism of James into three major groups on a rough chronological basis in order to show the strong influence of certain of the early critiques on later developments in Jamesian criticism. With in each period, however, I have found it clearer and more instructive to group the critical essays discussed according to their theme, their method, or the particular aspect of James treated in the essay. The periods are: criticism of James to 1930, criticism of James from 1930 to 1940 (some minor criticism from this second period is included in the earlier section), and criticism of James from 1940 to the * present. The quantity of material produced in the last period is so much greater than that produced in the two earlier periods that I need four chapters in which to cover it all, but it is of such diversity that a chronological arrangement would result in confusion and would demonstrate nothing about the critics or their conclusions about James. Therefore, I have divided the critical essays of the third period according to whether they are biographical in intent or whether they represent analyses of the works. The bio graphical material, I have organized according to the critic's thesis to show the direction of influence from one critic to another. The criticism of the works, 1 have sub divided both according to the work criticized— with one lengthy chapter devoted to analyses of "The Turn of the Screw" and two briefer