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.

Thursday, April 1, 2021

“Vanity Fair” by W. M. Thackeray (post 1): Is narrator omniscient, but unreliable; inconsistent and protean, with limited awareness; or multiple personalities?


According to Wikipedia, “The novel is a satire of society as a whole, characterised by hypocrisy and opportunism, but it is not a reforming novel; there is no suggestion that social or political changes or greater piety and moral reformism could improve the nature of society. It thus paints a fairly bleak view of the human condition.


“This bleak portrait is continued with Thackeray's own role as an omniscient narrator, one of the writers best known for using the technique. He continually offers asides about his characters and compares them to actors and puppets…” However, “the narrator, despite being an authorial voice, is somewhat unreliable” (1).


In contrast, a book listed in Wikipedia’s own bibliography writes at length on the novel’s inconsistent narrator: “The most omnipresent and form-changing of narrators, he is a protean figure…The metamorphoses of the narrator…reflect his belief that one cannot see and understand the ambiguity of human life from a single, stable point of view…As a narrator he is overtly inconsistent…at one moment claiming omniscience, and at another acknowledging that he has only limited awareness…" (2, pp. 71-72).


My interpretation of the above controversy is that Vanity Fair probably has multiple, unacknowledged narrators. Some think they are omniscient and that the characters are mere puppets, but others acknowledge their limitations and realize that characters seem to have minds of their own (3).


1. Wikipedia. “Vanity Fair (novel).” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanity_Fair_(novel)

2. Edgar F. Harden. Vanity Fair [1848]. Masterwork Studies. New York, Twayne Publishers, 1995.

3. Taylor, Hodges, Kohanyi. “The Illusion of Independent Agency.” Imagination, Cognition and Personality, Vol. 22(4), 361-380, 2002-2003. https://cpb-us-e1.wpmucdn.com/blogs.uoregon.edu/dist/4/2521/files/2013/03/Taylor-Hodges-Kohanyi_2003-2b6wdel.pdf 

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.