Three Studies in Characterization

<p>THE WOMEN OF BEN JONSON IN <em>EPICOENE</em> AND <em>BARTHOLOMEW</em> <em>FAIR</em>.<em> </em>This paper compares and contrasts the method variations that cause the women of <em>Epicoene</em> to be less interesting and more stereotyped than those of <em>Bartholomew Fair.</em></p> <p>Basically, in the women of <em>Epicoene, </em>Jonson used character types exclusively. The women were all "masculine," and remained that type throughout the play. In <em>Bartholomew Fair,</em> Jonson created versatility in the characters by including more information on the women through rhetorical "places," particularly the <em>consilium</em> or reason behind their actions. The multiplied places in the women in Bartholomew Fair, the changes in the community women while they were at the fair, plus the looser roles as evidenced in the types of women, created more diversity in characters.</p> <p>HAWTHORNE'S FAIR MAIDENS. It is the object of this paper to reveal many of the seemingly ideal qualities the maidens share with Sophia Hawthorne, Nathaniel's much beloved wife, and then use the characters of the major fair maidens--Phoebe, Priscilla and Hilda-- to show how Hawthorne both individualized and humanized these maidens to bring them our [sic] of the realm of the stereotyped ideal into the world of humanity.</p> <p>Some of the characteristics the girls share are looks, sunniness, housewifeliness, birdlikeness, optimistic and naive philosophies, and the redemptive power of love.</p> <p>Hawthorne individualizes the maidens by varying their reactions to the responsibilities to love. Phoebe has an overwhelming love, able to bring joy and relief to overburdened hearts. Her only weakness in the story is her temporary loss of control to mesmerism. On the other hand, Priscilla's love is very weak. She helps no one. Hilda changes during her tale, from a girl too pure to help a friend to a wife able to bring back her husband to the "reality of life."</p> <p>RESPONSIBILITY AND CHARACTER IN FAULKNER'S FICTION. This paper classifies and evaluates several of Faulkner's main characters according to four specific types. "The first say, 'This is rotten, I'll have no part of it.' The second says 'This is rotten, I don't like it, I can't do anything about it, but at least I will not participate in it myself, I will go off into a cave....' The third says, 'This stinks and I'm going to do something about it, I'm going to change it.'" The fourth type is so devoid of good that he can't even see beyond his own situation to acknowledge evil, or responsibility.</p> <p>The examples examined are: Quentin, Dilsey, and Jason in <em>The Sound of the Fury</em>; Ike in <em>The Bear</em>, and Chuck in <em>Intruder in the Dust</em>; and Flem, Linda and Ratliff in the Snopes trilogy.</p> <p>While it is true that Faulkner's technique of emphasizing evil often left his works with an abundance of evil characters, yet in the works discussed, Faulkner was able to point out the evils that overcome man as well as the alternate choices to those evils.</p>

Name thesis:degree_name

Master of Arts (MA)

Level thesis:degree_level

Thesis

Discipline thesis:degree_discipline

English

Year

1973

Author dc:creator

• Kohler, Diana A.

Contributors dc:contributor

• Lawrence E. Mobley
• Delmer I. Davis
• Robert Dunn

• Dramatic Literature, Criticism and Theory
• English Language and Literature
• Fiction
• Jonson, Ben 1573?-1637; Hawthorne, Nathaniel, 1804-1864; Faulkner, William, 1897-1962.

Statement dc:rights

• This title appears here courtesy of the author, who has granted Loma Linda University a limited, non-exclusive right to make this publication available to the public. The author retains all other copyrights.

Language dc:language

English

Repository record dc:identifier

https://scholarsrepository.llu.edu/etd/1086

OAI identifier oai:identifier

oai:scholarsrepository.llu.edu:etd-1589