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.

Monday, January 4, 2021

“Tom Jones” by Henry Fielding (post 8): Multiple narrators conclude


“Thus, reader, we have at length brought our history to a conclusion, in which, to our great pleasure, though contrary, perhaps, to thy expectation, Mr Jones appears to be the happiest of all humankind: for what happiness this world affords equal to the possession of such a woman as Sofia, I sincerely own I have never yet discovered” (1, p. 868).


At the beginning of the passage, “we” and “our” initially prompt me to think that the narration is using the plural to promote a feeling of solidarity with the reader.


But since, immediately following, “contrary…to thy” promotes distance from the reader, I change my initial opinion to an inference that the narration had merely begun with plural self-reference.


And then the paragraph concludes with “I,” which is singular self-reference.


Thus, the above passage repeats what I have noted previously: the narration is inconsistent in its self-reference, as though there were at least two narrator personalities, one with a plural, and the other with a singular, self-image.


Another way of looking at the above paragraph is that a single narrator is trying to have it both ways: promoting solidarity with the reader, but seeing himself as only one person. That’s probably the majority view. But the other things I noted in my previous posts make me prefer my interpretation, or at least think it’s worth considering.


1. Henry Fielding. [The History of] Tom Jones [A Foundling] [1749]. Edited by John Bender and Simon Stern. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2008.

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.