INFORMATION TO USERS This material was produced from a microfilm copy of the original document. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of die original submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or patterns 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 thru an image and duplicating adjacent pages to insure you complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a large round black mark, it is an indication that the photographer suspected that die copy may have moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred image. You will find a good image of die page in the adjacent frame. 3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., was part of the material being photographed the photographer followed a definite method in "sectioning" the material. It is customary to begin photoing at the upper left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue photoing from left to right in equal sections with a small overlap. If necessary, sectioning is continued again — beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete. 4. The majority of users indicate that the textual content is of greatest value, however, a somewhat higher quality reproduction could be made from "photographs" if essential to the understanding of the dissertation. Silver prints of "photographs" may be ordered at additional charge by writing the Order Department, giving the catalog number, title, author and specific pages you wish reproduced. 5. PLEASE NOTE: Some pages may have indistinct print. Filmed as received. Xerox University Microfilms 300 North Zeeb Road Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106 75 - 26,560 CONLEY, Brian Patrick, 1947- A FORHAL AND STRUCTURAL STUDY OF HAWTHORNE'S TALES. The Ohio State University, Ph.D., 1975 Language and Literature, modem Xerox University Microfilmst Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106 A POTMAL AND STRUCDJRAL STUDY OF HAWIHOKNE'S TALES DISSERTATION .Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University ' - By Brian Patrick Conley, A*B., M.A. * * * * The Ohio State University 1975 Reading Ocmnittee: Approved By Dr. Daniel R. Barnes Dr. Patrick B. Mullen Dr. Thcmas M. Woodson Adviser Department of English VITA October 2, 1947 ...................p o m - St. Louis, Missouri 1970 .......................... A.B., St. Louis University St. Louis, Missouri 1970-1973 ........................ N.D.E.A. Fellow The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 1971 ............................ M.A., The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio FIELDS OF STUDY Major Field: Nineteenth Century American Fiction Nathaniel Hawthorne: Associate Professor Daniel Barnes American Folklore: Associate Professor Patrick Millen ii TABIE OF CONTENTS Page VITA ................................................. ii CHAPTER I. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM............ 1 II. IHE CORPUS OF THE TALES: FORM AND STRUCTURE 22 III. LACK LIQUIDATED: THE HERO AND DONOR IN CONCERT ... 62 Section One Section Two Section Three Section Pour IV. LACK LIQUIDATED: THE SELF-SUFFICIENT H E R O 292 V. LACK NOT LIQUIDATED: THE REJECTED OR INSUFFICIENT H E R O ......... 322 VI. LACK NOT LIQUIDATED: THE ABSENCE OF A DO N O R 365 VII. CONCLUSION................................... 395 APPENDIX............................................ 405 BIBLIOGRAPHY.......................................... 410 CHAPTER 1 Statement of the Problem One may reasonably balk at the prospect of yet one more Hawthorne dissertation. In the last twenty years, Hawthorne ' • criticisn has experienced a population explosion that has prompted at least one prominent critic to advocate a form of critical 1 planned parenthood. Among ‘the offspring of this critical fecundity, there are many studies of folklore and myth in Hawthorne's works. In The American Novel and Its Tradition, Richard Chase refers to 2 Pearl as the eternal folk imagination. Richard Harter Fogle describes Robin of "My Kinsnan, Major Molineux" as a Yankee Theseus 3 or Hercules. Ray B. Browne states that Hawthorne catches the 4 quintessence of the folktale while, more specifically, Bernard Cohen 1 Roy R. Male in a rev. of Nathaniel Hawthorne; Identity and Knowledge, by Jac Thorpe, AL, 40 (1968), 239-40. 2 (Nfew York: Doubleday, 1957), pp. 75, 78-79. 3 Hawthorne's Fiction: The Light and the Dark, rev. ed. (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1964), p. 109. 4 "The Oft-Told Twice-Told Tales: Their Folklore Motifs," SFQ, 22 (1958), 74. - 1- 5 studies Hawthorne's debt to folk and popular legend. James J. Lynch 6 examines the folk idea of the devil in Hawthorne's tales and Grace 7 P. Wellborn investigates the use of plantlore. Antedating all of these studies is Constance Etourke's seninal book American Humor: A 8 Study of the National Character. But the two major works of folk­ lore and myth criticism are Daniel G. Hoffman's Form and Fable in 9 American Fiction and Hugo McPherson's Hawthorne as Myth-Maker: A 10 Study in Imagination. Both of these critics stress the affinity of Hawthorne's romance genre with fairytale and myth. Hoffman writes: "Their (i.e. romance writers'] uses of these cultural survivals and primitive or subconscious patterns of experience dramatize their preoccupation with the instinctual and passional farces of life, with pre-oonscious and pre-Christian values, with subrational and 11 of ton antirational formulation of meaning." McPherson echoes 5 "Hawthorne and Legend," Hoosier Folklore, 7 (1948), 94-95. 6 "The Devil in the Writings of Irving, Hawthorne, and Poe," NYFQ, 8 (1952), 11-31. 7 "Plant Lore and The Scarlet Letter," SFQ, 27 (1963), 160-67. 8 (New York: Har court Brace, 1931). 9 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1969). 10 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1969). 11 Hoffman, p. 3. Hoffman: "Unquestionably he was much concerned as moralist and thinker with problems of sin and salvation, the past, democracy, women's rights, the role of the artist, and the methods of art: but underlying these rational concerns is a deep current of drama and narrative allied to the patterns of fairytale, romance, and 12 13 myth," Even if one agrees with David J. Winslow and Neal Frank 14 Doubleday in their insistence on the primacy of written sources for Hawthorne's fiction, it seems difficult to refute Hoffman's and McPherson's assertion of the similarity between fairy-tale and Hawthorne’s work. Just as prolific as folklore and myth studies, have been 15 investigations of the structure or form of Hawthorne's works. 12 McPherson, p.3. 13 "Hawthorne's Folklore and the Folklorists' Hawthorne: A Re-Examination," SFQ, 34 (1970), 50. 14 , Hawthorne's Early Tales: A Critical study (Durban, N.C.: Duke University Press, 1972), p.192. 15 Marius Bewley, Hie Eccentric Design (New York: Columbia University Press, 1959); Seymour Lee Gross, "The Technique of Hawthorne's Short Stories," Diss. Illinois 1954; Q. D. Leavis, "Hawthorne as Poet," Sewanee Review, 59 (1951) 179-205, 426-58; Carol Bronston Schoen, "The Pattern of Meaning: Theme and Structure in the Fiction of Nathaniel Hawthorne," Diss. Columbia 1968; Joel Porte, The Rananoe in America: Studies in Cooper, Poe, Hawthorne, Melville, and JamesTTMiddleton, Conn.: Wesleyan University Press, 1969); Hermit Vanderbilt, "Hie Unity of Hawthorne's 'Ethan Brand,'" CE, 24 (1963), 453-56; Hyatt H. Waggoner, Hawthorne: A Critical Study, rev. ed. (Cambridge, Mass,: Harvard University Press, 1963). -4- Perhaps the most praninent of these studies is John Caldwell Stubbs' The Pursuit of Form: A Study of Hawthorne and the 16 Romance. Although Stubbs does not specifically ally the romance genre to myth and folktale, he does find it different from the pattern of the novel: "The romance, then, may be considered an approach to human experience, not a flight from it, yet an approach much more ordered, much more patterned, than the reader's chaotic 17 meeting with experience in his daily life, or even in the novel." Despite this interest in the form or structure— the two terms seem to be used rather loosely and interchangeably in criticism— and in the many studies of Hawthorne's affinity to folklore and myth, there has not been an attempt to systematically combine the structuralistic and the folkloristic approaches. This divorce between the two studies seems even more unusual when one considers the recent interest in studying folklore structures. In the United States, Alan Dundes has examined the morphology of American 18 Indian folktales, basing this structural typology on the work of 19 the linguist Kenneth Pike and on the formal analysis of folktale 16 (Urbana, Chicago, and London; University of Illinois Press, 1970). 17 Stubbs, p.6. 18 The Morphology of North American Indian Folktales, FF Oomnunicaticns, vol. 85, No. 195 (Helsinki: Suanalainen Tiedeakatemia, 1964). 19 "Beyond the Sentence,” College composition and Oonmunication, 15 (1964), 129-35. -5- 20 developed by the Russian Vladimir Propp. In literary criticism, 21 Daniel Barnes has analyzed Beowulf using Propp's morphology. Two 2T~ 23 folklorists, Kdngas and Maranda, have adapted the structural study 24 of the Errnch anthropologist and structuralist Claude LSvi-Strauss. Ldvi-Strauss and Reman Jakobson have collaborated in a structural 25 analysis of Baudelaire's Les Chats while mere recently in the United States Patricia Toibin has used Levi-Straussian structural isn 26 in an anlysis of Faulkner's Absalom! Absalom!' I propose to adapt these studies of folklore form and mythic structure in an anlysis of Hawthorne's tales [i.e. the prose 20 Morphology of the Folktale, trans. Laurence Scott and Louis A. Wagner, 2nd ed. "(Austin: University of Texas Press, 1968).