哈代《三个陌生人》的原型批评研究与哈代思想在威塞克斯故事集中的体现

论文总字数：66748字

摘 要

在英国现实主义文学研究中，哈代的作品无疑是研究的重点领域。目前的哈代研究多关注哈代的代表性长篇小说，包括《德伯家的苔丝》《还乡》等。对它们的研究主要从女性视角、悲剧形象和象征意义等几个方面展开。相比之下，针对哈代同样富有价值的中短篇小说则研究十分有限。哈代将他的部分短篇小说收集进了《威塞克斯故事集》，这些小说普遍情节丰富，人物刻画丰满，具有很高的研究价值。故事集中，《三个陌生人》便在人物形象、环境设置、情节进展等方面独具一格。对它的研究不仅可以帮助对短篇小说本身的内涵理解更为到位，也能从小处出发，进而对哈代其他的相关作品、个人思想和时代特点有一个更为系统的了解。

原型批评的方法在哈代长篇小说的研究中得到了较为广泛的使用，但分析的角度却有一些局限。研究者多选取俄底浦斯、耶稣等最为常见的形象分析，而且分析的思路不是十分系统，主要表现为同一故事中的人物被赋予了在神话故事中并无明显联系的原型形象，使得哈代作品中人物的形象、特征等的分析出现了割裂。本文选取《三个陌生人》这一未被充分研究，却具有研究前景的短篇小说进行重点研究，运用原型批评方法，重点结合奥德修斯，特勒马科斯和安提诺奥斯等几个在神话情节中紧密联系的人物形象对《三个陌生人》中的主要人物做原型批评研究。同时，研究中将神话故事里的场景、情节等与《三个陌生人》的对应部分做详细探讨，以探究小说与神话的相似之处，哈代选取该原型的目的，于原型中传达的思想，以及对所处时代背景的反映和思考。

关键词：哈代；《三个陌生人》；原型批评

Table of Contents

Acknowledgements………………………………………………………….……......i

English Abstract…………………………………………………………….…...…...ii

摘要……………………………………………………………………………………………………….……….…iii

Introduction…………………………………………………………………….…….1

Hardy and “The Three Strangers”………………………………………….….…1

Literature Review on Hardy Studies……………………………………….….…1

The Research on Hardy’s Wessex, Short Stories and “The Three Strangers”………………………………………………………………………….......3

Archetypal Criticism and Northrop Frye……………………………....…….…...3

Thesis Structure…………………………………………………………..….…...4

Chapter One Archetypes of the Main Characters in “The Three Strangers”………………………………………………………………………….....6

1.1 The Characteristics and Archetype of the Hangman……………………........6

1.2 The Characteristics and Archetype of the Fugitive…………………….….....9

1.3 The Characteristics and Archetype of the Fugitive’s Brother………….…...10

1.4 The Relationship between Different Characters and Thoughts Expressed by Archetypes……………………………………………………………………….…...11

Chapter Two Archetypes of the Main Settings in “The Three Strangers”………………………………………………………………………..….14

2.1 The Features and Archetype of the Hills in the Agricultural Area of England………………………………………………………………………………14

2.2 The Features and Archetype of the Shepherd’s House……………….…….14

2.3 The Connection between Different Settings and the Meaning of Archetypes…………………………………………………………………………...15

Chapter Three Archetypes of Narrative Structure in “The Three Strangers”…………………………………………………………………….……..18

3.1 The Archetype of the First Stranger’s Arrival………………………..……..18

3.2 The Archetype of the Second Stranger’s Appearance and His Interaction with the First Stranger………………………………………………………………..……18

3.3 The Archetype of the Third Stranger’s Transient Appearance and Departure……………………………………………………………………………..19

3.4 The Connection in the Narrative Structure and Its Meaning…………….....20

Conclusion……………………………………………………………………….…..22

Works Cited…………………………………………………………………………25

Introduction

Thomas Hardy and “The Three Strangers”

Thomas Hardy is a world-famous British writer and poet. He creates many influential fictions in his life. Many novels of it, such as Tess of the d’Urbervilles, Jude the Obscure, not only stirred great response at that time, but also are studied by today’s researchers by using new research angles to discover the code of his era. Compared with other writers of his time, one of the greatest features of Hardy’s work is that it stresses on local culture and color, which is due to his era and atmosphere of his growing up. It provides even more practical meanings and research values to his work. His works are often categorized into fictions of characteristics and environment, fictions of romance and fantasy, and fictions of structure. In these works, he focuses on social reality and the living condition of normal people. From a small starting point to reflect the whole situation, he depicts characters’ personality and traits of destiny, to see the standard of value of the whole society and the problems waiting to be solved.

“The Three Strangers” is a short story written by Hardy in 1883, and is included in Wessex Tales in 1888. The short story is carefully designed in its plot. The three main characters in the story are all with significant personal features. The story is full of both fast and slow rhythms of development, and with tight logic from the beginning to the end. These features endow this short story with a complete narrative structure of a novel. The number of settings is not so much in the story, but each setting is described with great details, which makes it seem so real to the reader, and also creates enough atmosphere for the ongoing of the plot. The recent research is mainly focused on local flavor and folk culture in the story. This essay does more detailed research on the story itself, uses related eyesight to view characters, settings and other important elements, and probes into the psychological core and era features of the story.

Literature Review on Hardy Studies

Recently, the research on Hardy and his writing features are mainly focused on Hardy’s standard of value, Wessex characteristics, and language features.

From the point of the standard of value, in “Thomas Hardy’s Timing: Poems and Clocks in Late Nineteenth-Century England”, Jeffrey Blevins thinks that Hardy’s works expressed his understanding of time, and he showed personal emotion towards the design of time. He asserts that the characters in Hardy’s work are trapped in the past, think about the future, but neglect today, and “the negotiation of early and late, rather than saving the experience of time from immaterial inaccessibility, becomes the moment of error” (616). The use of time helps to express hardy’s attitude of melancholy. In “The Cosmic Consciousness in Thomas Hardy’s Novels”, Zhang Yiming holds that the consciousness of universe entered Hardy’s writing, and he combined human space and cosmos in his writing of human relationship and fiction perspective, which denoted a special pessimism. The author asserts that the consciousness of universe is the consciousness of life affected by universe, and Hardy’s knowledge of universe enabled characters to look up at cosmos, while narrator viewed human beings from the perspective of sky to reflect the distance between humans and the tininess of human beings.

From the point of Wessex features, in “The Idea of Wessex: Subject, Place, and Memory in Thomas Hardy’s Poetry”, Julian Wolfreys thinks that Hardy discovered the relationship between Wessex subject and environment through phenomenology, and environment is related to memory, people’s past and ego. The author asserts that Wessex plays a main part in Hardy’s psychological world. In “‘The Historian of Wessex’ Thomas Hardy’s Contribution to History”, Shannon L. Rogers holds that Hardy’s description has great contribution to the expression of the history of Wessex and England. She asserts that “history, for Hardy, represented knowledge” (219). In “Hardy amp; the Importance of Victorian Communications”, Annette R. Federico thinks that Hardy’s works reflected the types and importance of communication methods during Victorian period. She asserts that “for Hardy, the penny post, telegraph, and other new modes of communication offered new ways to think about human relationships” (267).

In the aspect of language features, in “‘The History of Error’: Hardy’s Critics and the Self Unseen”, Jill Richards thinks that Hardy’s language value was neglected and underrated in the past, but now people have started to realize that value. She asserts that “such purposeful moments of gracelessness are read as ‘authentic’, and thus closer to the speech of a rural working-class, one that sits opposed to a purely literary language” (118). In “Archetypal Patterns in Thomas Hardy’s Depiction of Women”, Shazia G. Mohammad and Abdus S. Khalis hold that Hardy was influenced by Freud and Jung to use some typical archetypes in the depiction of female characters. They assert that “Thomas Hardy’s female characters reflect those personality traits that can be better understood if they are put to Jungian analysis” (10). In the essay about the comparison of narrative patterns between Hardy and Wu Kejing, the author Li, Yin thinks that Hardy showed features of local culture and romanticism in his works. The author asserts that in his works, Hardy expressed psychological movement, conflict, peasant class, the invasion of capitalism and other elements.

The Research on Hardy’s Wessex, Short Stories and “The Three Strangers”

The research related to this topic is focused on culture, psychoanalysis, and human relations.

From the perspective of culture, in “Hardy’s Transatlantic Wessex: Constructing the Local in The Mayor of Casterbridge”, Genevieve Abravanel thinks that Hardy’s writings seem to be limited in Wessex, but it actually includes cultural interaction with outer environment. She asserts that Hardy’s description is related to North America, and it includes both British countryside and foreign culture. In “Abjection and degeneration in Thomas Hardy’s ‘Barbara of the House of Grebe’”, Jeanette R. Shumaker thinks that “Thomas Hardy’s Gothic tale, ‘Barbara of the House of Grebe’ (1891), dramatizes the horrid consequences of belief in the Victorian myth of degeneration” (1).

In psychoanalysis, in “The Deadly Misreading of Mythic Texts: Thomas Hardy’s Tess of the d’Urbervilles”, Felicia Bonaparte thinks that characters in Hardy’s works misunderstood their identity and the meaning of things, which led to tragic result. Lu Yanli in her essay about the tragic archetypes in The Mayor of Casterbridge holds that tragic heroes were presented in Hardy’s works. He asserts that some archetypes, such as Oedipus, appeared in Hardy’s works.

From the angle of human relations, in “Male Relations in Thomas Hardy’s Jude the Obscure”, Richard Dellamora thinks that same-sex friendships were shown in Hardy’s writings, and asserts that Hardy’s experience and friendship were expressed to some extent in his works. In “Imagination, Poetic Creation, and Gender: Hardy’s ‘Imaginative Woman’”, M.P. Ginsburg holds that “‘An Imaginative Woman’, rather than being a condemnation of feminine ‘propensity toward imaginativeness’, is a story about the relation between gender, the imagination, and literary creation, and, more precisely, a story that confronts two gendered ways of understanding the poetic imagination” (275).

Archetypal Criticism and Northrop Frye

Archetype is the key concept related to collective unconsciousness. According to Jung, the content of collective unconsciousness is called archetype image. Through his research on myth and medical experience, Jung tried to illustrate the relations between archetype, myth and art. The archetype was then extended from the area of psychology to the area of literature and art. In the practice of literature criticism, archetypal criticism attempts to find the reoccurred symbols and narrative structure in literary works. It tries to find common patterns from them, such as symbols from the Bible, and symbols from myths. These archetypes can then be used in the analysis of other works, to understand the meaning of literature and the ideas of the writers. It provides a new method to deal with the research on literature. In the essay about the ecological spirit in Jung’s theory of archetype, Chang Ruyu holds that archetypes are tightly related with literary materials, and there are ecological meanings in it.

Northrop Frye is an important figure in the theory of archetypal criticism. In his work Anatomy of Criticism, archetypal criticism was clearly and thoroughly introduced and explained. According to Frye, myth can be the archetype of literature. Myths include stories from ancient Greece and ancient Rome, and stories from the Bible. Travis Decook in “Northrop Frye and the Book as Metaphor and Material Artefact” states that “Edward Said characterizes Frye’s view of literature as a ‘textual utopia’, an ideal order which he contrasts to the actual entanglement of literary production with history and ideology” (38). In the essay about the relationship between metaphor and Frye’s literature criticism, Guo Lin holds that Frye’s study on the Bible and its metaphors was important to his theory of criticism, and was meaningful for today’s research. Liu Songyan in the essay about Frye’s historical view on literature thinks that archetypes can be used to consider literary works as a whole body. In the essay about Frye’s idea of relations between literature and myth, Ma Dakang says that archetypes are communicative units for humans, while myth provides a proper structure. Literature is constructed upon myths. Sara Toth in “What does literature say?: the problem of dogmatic closure--from romanticism to Northrop Frye” states that “a thorough study of his work reveals that he has never ceased to pay attention to the social and cultural aspects of literature, with a special focus on the relationship between literature and ideology or, in a broader sense, between literature and religion” (192).

Thesis Structure

The article has four chapters. The first three chapters are focused on archetypal criticism analysis of different elements, including characters, settings, and narrative structure in “The Three Strangers”. The last chapter mainly discusses Hardy’s thoughts and the features of the era expressed by Hardy. It also talks about the connection between “The Three Strangers” and Hardy’s other works, to research on the meaning and attitude conveyed by Hardy in his writing during that period.

The first chapter focuses on the archetypes of the three main characters, the hangman, the fugitive, and the fugitive’s brother in the story. It holds that Antinous, Odysseus, and Telemachus in Greek myth can be considered as archetypes of the above characters in the story. Characters’ features and archetypes would be discussed in detail. In the last part of this chapter, relations between characters and ideas conveyed by the archetypes are further discussed.

The second chapter aims to reveal the archetypes of the main settings in the story. The features and archetypes of the agricultural area of England and the shepherd’s house are studied and they are related to Ithaca and Odysseus’s house in Greek myth. In the last part of the chapter, relationship between different settings and the meaning of the setting’s archetypes are explained.

The third chapter works on the archetypes of the narrative structure of the story. The first stranger’s arrival, the second stranger’s arrival and his interaction with the first one, and the third stranger’s appearance and departure are discussed one by one, to show their corresponding archetypes in Greek myth. The connection in narrative structure and its meaning are further researched on in the last part of the chapter.

The conclusion part further discusses the use of archetypes in the story. Besides that, it talks about Hardy’s thoughts in the story, his reflection of the era in it, and the story’s connection with Hardy’s other works, to further understand Hardy’s ideas and attitudes at that time.

Chapter One Archetypes of the Main Characters in “The Three Strangers”

“The Three Strangers” is a short story included in Hardy’s Wessex Tales. Although it’s relatively short, its complicated plot and rich meaning makes its content become as charming as a novel. One important reason for its success is Hardy’s sufficient work in the depiction of characters. The number of characters in the story is not small. The shepherd couple, different residents, the hangman, the fugitive, and the fugitive’s brother all appeared in the story. Among them, the hangman, the fugitive, and the fugitive’s brother played the main part. The following content would do detailed analysis of these three characters by using archetypal criticism, in order to illustrate the archetypal meanings of them, the intention of setting these archetypes, and the relations between these archetypes. Bao Hongfang in her essay “Archetypal Analysis of the Protagonists in The Return of the Native from the Perspectives of the Theory of Archetypal Criticism” holds that archetypal criticism can be used to understand the meaning of characters and environment, and archetypes from the Bible and Greek myths are useful in the analysis of Hardy’s works such as The Return of the Native.

According to the theory of archetypal criticism, this paper holds that the characters in “The Three Strangers” are mainly corresponding to the roles in Greek myth. To put it more specifically, Antinous, Odysseus, and Telemachus in the story of Odysseus’s returning home can be considered as the three archetypes.

1.1The Characteristics and Archetype of the Hangman

In the story, the hangman appeared not so early, but his personality and customs enabled him to become an important figure in the shepherd’s house. He had a rough personality, didn’t care about details and manners, and even held an attitude of pride and arrogance. His bold and casual features denoted great similarities to Antinous in Odyssey. Shazia G. Mohammad and Abdus S. Khalis in their essay “Archetypal Patterns in Thomas Hardy’s Depiction of Women” state that “this paper builds on the aforementioned qualities, contending that the existence of archetypal pattern in Hardy’s art of characterization brings to limelight his affinity with psychologists, particularly Freud and Carl Jung” (9). In this way, it’s meaningful to understand the archetypes in Hardy’s writing and his thoughts related to it.

Antinous played a crucial role in the plot of Odysseus’ coming home. He had a willful character, tended to be at the center of crowd, and had a relatively noble identity different from the others. The following passage would discuss the reason of Antinous as the hangman’s archetype from the aspect of appearance and behaviors, essence and personality, and fate.

Firstly, the aspect of appearance and behaviors would be discussed. About appearance, the hangman held a joyful and free facial expression, which showed that he was free in his mood and had uncommon mental aura. In Greek myth, although there are not many direct descriptions on Antinous’s appearance, we can know from the background that Antinous was one of the suitors to Penelope at Odysseus’s house. He was the offspring of a noble man and quite prominent among the vast number of suitors. He stayed at Penelope’s house for a long time, and he dared to express his opinions frequently. These features are quite similar to the hangman, who felt at ease even in unfamiliar places. From the point of behaviors, the hangman shook off the raindrops on his coat when entering the shepherd’s house, and put his coat naturally on a nail. He didn’t feel uncomfortable at all when he had accidental body contact with others and devoured wine given by the shepherd. Instead, he talked with great interest and passion, just like he was indeed the host of the house. In Greek myth, Antinous’s condition was the same. He ate and played at Penelope’s house for a long time, and talked happily with his companions without any embarrassment or sense of guilt. Sometimes, he treated himself completely as the host of the house, for he wanted to get rid of Telemachus, and gave harsh order to the beggar disguised by Odysseus, who was also a guest. In language features, the hangman expressed his feelings directly to ask for more wine and reveal his occupation, even if it made other residents feel stressful. Antinous showed such features in his language, too. He talked directly with other suitors to deal with Telemachus, and gave rude and harsh words to Telemachus and Odysseus when he felt offended.

Secondly, in the aspect of essence and personality, there exist many common points between the hangman and Antinous. In “The Three Strangers”, the hangman cared little about his behaviors and social manners. His posture of sitting and clothing were too casual, and he even asked others to help with his singing without any invitation. In Greek myth, Antinous also behaved without enough grace. He played and relaxed willfully in other’s house, acted impolitely to other guests, and even attempted to stir up conflict between others. From the angle of personality, the hangman was superficially strong but weak inside. He was lack of necessary analyzing ability, relied on others, and spoke much but did little. He failed to sense the fugitive’s real identity even if he interacted frequently with him. When searching for the suspect, he merely ordered others to take action, while he himself continued joyful drinking inside the house. In fact, the hangman exerted almost no influence in the capture of the fugitive. In Greek myth, Antinous was also such kind of person. He showed complete weakness in the pursuit of marriage, the combat against the beggar, and the competition of ability. He only boasted himself, talked much nonsense, and didn’t express any real talent which was over the others. Jeffrey Blevins in “Thomas Hardy’s Timing: Poems and Clocks in Late Nineteenth-Century England” holds that characters in Hardy’s works often couldn’t do the right things at the right time, and “the negotiation of early and late, rather than saving the experience of time from immaterial inaccessibility, becomes the moment of error” (616). In this way, the hangman was exactly the kind of person who missed the right chance to take proper action. His failure was partly due to his ignorance of what he should do at present.

From the perspective of fate, the hangman and Antinous also shared some common features. They both came over-confidently or arrogantly to a comfortable place, feeling their completion of the mission was only the problem of time. However, they felt nothing when the opportunity and hint came. When suddenly aware of the danger and failure, they could do nothing but weakly listen to the voice of fate. In “The Three Strangers”, the hangman didn’t feel any pressure when drinking in the shepherd’s house. He didn’t get alert when thinking of his mission of executing hanging and the difficulty of looking for the real fugitive. He missed all the chances of figuring out the fugitive’s identity. As a result, the arranged execution was never made in his later life. In Greek myth, Antinous faced the similar situation. He enjoyed himself in Penelope’s house without considering his action may violate the norm, and the real host of the house could come back some day. Even when the disguised Odysseus appeared and Telemachus warned him of his wrongdoing, he remained arrogant without thinking about the inappropriateness of his behavior and the consequence of it. He was still numbly drinking when Odysseus revenged on him, so that his destiny was doomed. Felicia Bonaparte in “The Deadly Misreading of Mythic Texts: Thomas Hardy’s Tess of the d’Urbervilles” thinks that the misunderstanding of identity and the meaning of things may lead to the character’s tragic ending, and “both the characters and the story reenact, in modern dress, the classical myth of Persephone, but there are few in the modern world, Hardy appears to be suggesting, literal-minded as we are, capable of reading mythically” (415). The hangman’s failure in the story was also related to his numb towards identity and wrong judgment of incidents. His mistakes eventually led to the departure of the fugitive.

1.2The Characteristics and Archetype of the Fugitive

In “The Three Strangers”, the fugitive was the first stranger to come to the shepherd’s house. There are many descriptions on his personal traits and interaction with the others. From the perspective of appearance and behavior, personality, and destiny, he shared great similarity with Odysseus in Greek myth. The quick-witted and reasonable Odysseus can be considered as the archetype for the fugitive.

From the aspect of appearance, the fugitive has an outstanding facial feature. Although he kept his hat very low, people could see his big, faithful, and decisive eyes, which could show he was prominent and different, and denoted he had unique identity and personality. In Greek myth, Odysseus also disguised his identity by pretending to be a beggar, but his outstanding body and facial features can also be detected, which hinted that he was still the powerful figure like before. In behaviors, the fugitive hesitated for a long time before he entered the shepherd’s house. However, when he made sure that the atmosphere in the house was safe, he turned to be relaxed and natural in his actions and interaction with other people. It revealed that the fugitive was considerate in his thinking, and he also possessed strong adaptability and flexibility. In Greek myth, Odysseus also stayed cautious when returning home. He decided to be dressed as a beggar, and remained the same even when he was offended and prejudiced by the suitors. However, when the time for revenge came, Odysseus took action without any hesitation or delay, which showed as a man of calm consideration, he was also good at quick decision and flexible action. About language features, the fugitive used intimate and polite words to win the host’s trust, and spoke properly when facing the hangman, which created a harmonious environment and an ideal atmosphere for his safety. In Greek myth, Odysseus used proper and cautious words to communicate with others, too. In this way, he successfully got in touch with his family members one by one. When encountered with abuses from the suitors, Odysseus clearly stated his attitude, while kept his identity still in secret. It not only defended his honor, but also let him be aware of the recent situation in the house. It paved way for his final success.

From the angle of personality, the fugitive’s clear consideration of the house’s environment and his proper manner inside the house revealed that he was calm and reasonable. When talking with the host and the hangman, the fugitive behaved neither too nervous nor too casually, which showed he had a stable mind. When facing hazard like the situation of pursuing the runaway suspect, he didn’t show any clue to the hangman and residents, but chatted with the hangman without pressure. It expressed that he was especially strong in his wit. Li Lan, and Wang Haisong in “Thomas Hardy: The Pioneer of Spirit Analysis Novelists” hold that Hardy carefully depicted the characters’ mental movement and made deep psychoanalysis in his works. Through the description of the fugitive in the story, we can see that he was a figure with considerable psychological movements and considerate thoughts.

In Greek myth, we can find such traits on Odysseus, too. On the way home, he started to plan how he could explain to his family and deal with suitors, and he cling to his plan even if he faced great pressure both from suitors’ offense and family’s doubt. These things showed Odysseus was mature, calm when making decisions, reasonable and clear about the situation.

From the viewpoint of destiny, the fugitive and Odysseus had a strong connection. They both started their plan in a disadvantaged condition and faced even more challenges when things went on. Nevertheless, they both used wit and calmness to deal with problems mainly alone with ease. Through their hard work and continuous motive, they eventually held the destiny in their hands and realized their goal. The fugitive faced several hard situations, such as coming to an unfamiliar environment, encountering the hangman, and the accidental arrival of his brother. But he was always able to find a way to escape from the danger due to his intelligence, and succeeded eventually. For Odysseus, he showed outstanding cleverness and mental power when dealing with enemies and unfamiliar situation. Although it’s difficult to bear loneliness and the threat from suitors, he managed to solve those problems one by one. As a result, he reunited with family members and defeated the vast number of enemies at last.

1.3The Characteristics and Archetype of the Fugitive’s Brother

In “The Three Strangers”, the fugitive’s brother appeared relatively late, the related content was also limited. But considering the function of propelling the development of the story, his appearance was crucial. From the perspective of behavior, personal traits, and fate, the fugitive’s brother showed many similarities with Telemachus in Greek myth.

In behaviors, the fugitive’s brother was erect, decisive, and cared for family. In the story, he accidentally came to the shepherd’s house due to his care for the brother. In order to save his brother, he quickly left, not only to relieve the tension, but also to shift the attention from his brother to him, which helped his brother to escape in the end. Later, when sure about his brother’s safety, his telling the real condition expressed the erect side of him. In Greek myth, Telemachus cared much about his father Odysseus. He looked for Odysseus with full strength and helped him to carry out his plan. His integrity and sense of justice pushed him to act in the right way. His decisive action weakened the suitors’ force, paving way for the final success.

From the angle of personal traits, the fugitive’s brother was kind-hearted, and flexible. His willing to see his brother and the motive to protect him could testify his pure care for his family member. His quick decision to leave the house reflected his flexibility when understanding his brother’s danger, which helped him to escape. In Greek myth, Telemachus was good in mind, too. He tried all the way to find his father. When seeing Odysseus was bullied by suitors, he was angry and tried to protect him. At the same time, Telemachus was also full of calmness and wit, for he managed to keep Odysseus’s identity and helped him to finish his revenge.

剩余内容已隐藏，请支付后下载全文，论文总字数：66748字