BASIC CONCEPTS

— When novelists claim they do not invent it, but hear voices and find stories in their head, they are neither joking nor crazy.

— When characters, narrators, or muses have minds of their own and occasionally take over, they are alternate personalities.

— Alternate personalities and memory gaps, but no significant distress or dysfunction, is a normal version of multiple personality.

— normal Multiple Personality Trait (MPT) (core of Multiple Identity Literary Theory), not clinical Multiple Personality Disorder (MPD)

— The normal version of multiple personality is an asset in fiction writing when some alternate personalities are storytellers.

— Multiple personality originates when imaginative children with normal brains have unassuaged trauma as victim or witness.

— Psychiatrists, whose standard mental status exam fails to ask about memory gaps, think they never see multiple personality.

— They need the clue of memory gaps, because alternate personalities don’t acknowledge their presence until their cover is blown.

— In novels, most multiple personality, per se, is unnoticed, unintentional, and reflects the author’s view of ordinary psychology.

— Multiple personality means one person who has more than one identity and memory bank, not psychosis or possession.

— Euphemisms for alternate personalities include parts, pseudonyms, alter egos, doubles, double consciousness, voice or voices.

— Multiple personality trait: 90% of fiction writers; possibly 30% of public.

— Each time you visit, search "name index" or "subject index," choose another name or subject, and search it.

— If you read only recent posts, you miss most of what this site has to offer.

— Share site with friends.

Tuesday, May 8, 2018


“Purity” by Jonathan Franzen (post 7): Novelists’ understanding of their characters is limited, because character creation is partially a mystery to them

In my last post, I said Franzen had provided his biographer a key to understanding that the character, Andreas Wolf, had multiple personality, but that his biographer had failed to use the key. I may have been unfair to the biographer, because Franzen himself probably did not understand the character in terms of multiple personality. 

How could a writer provide his character with the symptoms of multiple personality, but not understand that the character has multiple personality? Aside from whether or not the author knows the symptoms of multiple personality, the answer has to do with how characters are created.

Generally speaking, fiction writers do not mechanically construct their major characters. Characters may either come from the author’s repertory company of alternate personalities, or may be newly minted, starting with aspects of real people, a mood, an image, or a story situation. In any case, most major characters are created by the same psychological process that creates imaginary companions and alternate personalities, which is a process that most fiction writers can employ, because most fiction writers have a normal version of multiple personality.

Is it only the author’s host personality who may not understand that a character has multiple personality? What about the author’s alternate personalities, including muse and narrator personalities? Surely, you might think, alternate personalities must recognize the presence of multiple personality, since alternate personalities, per se, are an integral part of multiple personality. But it is in the nature of alternate personalities to see themselves as other people, not as alternate personalities (which is why, clinically, they often deny the diagnosis).

As a practical matter, when I see that a character in a novel has symptoms of multiple personality, but no narrator or other character acknowledges that fact, I infer that the author did not understand the character in those terms. And that is the case with Andreas Wolf in Purity.

Novelists know many things about their novels better than anyone else, but there are aspects that are a mystery to them.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Thank you for taking the time to comment (whether you agree or disagree) and ask questions (simple or expert). I appreciate your contribution.