(Part two of three in a series of articles on Zelda, psychology and literary criticism)
In order to continue my study of A Link Between Worlds and Dark Triad, I would like to first explore what lead to the interaction between psychology and literature. After all, how can I examine the text without first finding an appropriate means of doing so?
It almost goes without saying that Sigmund Freud had a great impact on the world, both as a whole and within the discipline of psychology. I say great, but I really mean "large, far-reaching." A great deal of his ideas have since been shown to be faulty, sexist, or just plain weird.
One such concept is the Oedipus complex. To summarize, Oedipus, a young king, accidentally murders his father and marries his own mother. Freud extended this plot element into the explanation of a complex which could be applied to both real-life and literary instances. Freud maintained that, in real life, the complex was too far below the surface of consciousness to be actively recognized. Literature, then, presents our unconscious desires in a form we can actively examine.
In my experience, Freudian-Oedipal analysis reads too much detail into the text. Freud's approach was practically obsessed with sex and sex-related phenomena to the point that this element is all it's known for today. Even in the upper level psychology classes I took, the basic formula was Freud = sex.
Anyway, in my career as an English major, Freud came up primarily in classes taught by the head os the department, Dr. Little. The chief example of this occurred in the Shakespeare class, especially in regards to Hamlet. In fact, that is the most prevalent pairing I see, in terms of literary criticism. Besides the titular story of Oedipus, Hamlet is the second most common story I've seen addressed by Freudian criticism. Annoyingly so, actually. Hamlet's like a Elizabethan Oedipus, in that regard. (Not to mention I've seen Hamlet entirely too much, in all the intro lit classes I've taken... but that's just a personal complaint. Shakespeare wrote other good stuff, ya know!)
Another Freudian concept I've seen in literary criticism is the idea of the id-ego-superego. The id represents primal desires, the superego wants order and discipline, and the ego is left to maintain the balance between the two. I've written at least one paper talking about characters in terms of their roles as either id, ego or superego. As a simple tool, a hermeneutic, to talk about desires, id-ego-superego is a great concept for literary criticism. However, it borders on being too simplistic.
Thankfully, other forms of psychoanalytical criticism came about after Freud. Now the question is this: can concepts and ideas applied to real-life people be convincingly and appropriately applied to fictional characters? Unlike some Freudian critics, I am not seeking to analyze the author, but rather, a character within the text.
First, one must acknowledge the limits of media to depict human beings. No one character can comprehensively depict all of the subtle nuances of the human psyche. Nevertheless, good characters can still speak to readers and demonstrate the "human condition" quite nicely.
Second, using psychological analysis on a character is a one-way situation. One cannot actively ask a character why her or she did something, or why he or she thought a certain thought. Analyzing a character is more imprecise than doing so in real life.
That being said, psychological techniques still provide valuable information when applied to literary characters. Recently, psychologists have been studying the idea of the Dark Triad (DT). In many of the papers I've read or perused, the authors use fictional characters from pop culture to explain the concepts within the realm of the DT personality. Because of this, I feel that an examination of the character Hilda from A Link Between Worlds is possible, and will most likely yield interesting results.
Stay tuned for the exciting conclusion!
The Legend of Hilda: The Dark Triad
Or, go back and read the first part on my other blog, here:
The Dark Triad, or, Cool Jerks
----------------
References:
Hall, Vernon. A Short History of Literary Criticism. New York: New York University Press, 1963. Print.
Monday, June 16, 2014
Wednesday, May 28, 2014
Structuralism and the Internet
This recent semester, my last semester of undergraduate school, I finally took our Literary Criticism class. In addition to being required for my major, was also being taught by one of my favorite professors. I found it quite interesting. We talked about the very foundations of how literary scholars examine texts. I had a slight advantage, as I had already taken Biblical Criticism the year before, and some of the concepts were either similar, or the same ideas shared between the two fields. So, besides an academic review of classes I've taken, what does this mean to you, the reader?
Well, one school of literary criticism that we looked at was called "structuralism." This school looks at the little things, like character types, plot devices and location variants. For example, across many genres and eras, there is the idea of the mystical, powerful sword. The purpose of the sword varies across the works. In Arthurian legends, there is Excalibur. In Lord of the Rings, Andúril is wielded by Aragorn. The Legend of Zelda features the Master Sword wielded by Link. In these examples, the sword is often chosen by the weapon itself: Link and Arthur are specifically picked to wield the sword and bring stability to the realm. Arthur and Aragorn are kings, of England and Gondor, respectively. Sometimes, the connections drawn are more tenuous than this: the idea is not to straight-jacket different works together. Rather, structuralism seeks to find things, often cool things, that different stories share in common.
Where does the "Internet" of "Structuralism and the Internet" play into all of this? First of all, the internet is full of lists. Top 10 this, 35 things of that, 14 secret thoses. In addition to the risk of too much plot summary, structuralist criticism can also fall into the pitfall of over-listing. It would be interesting, but nearly meaningless in itself, to create a list of silent, brooding protagonists featured in movies and video games. It is not enough to merely list them. We must show why it's important, and if it means anything important.
The second point is that the internet often gets structural criticism right. The best website for this is TV Tropes. They feature any genre and media that could be though of, even including a category for "Real Life." Because of the extensive connections that each page features, it is quite easy to get stuck in a loop of read-click-read-click on the site. TV Tropes shows that despite the efforts of Post-structuralism and post-modernist criticism, structuralist ideas still live on, and thrive.
For me, structuralism is an enjoyable form of literary criticism. It is almost universal in its use: I can talk about TV shows, novels and video games, comparing various aspects of their plots and characters. Sometimes, I can even trace the origin and development of a particular trope, such as zombies that eat brains. The development of that type of "creature" actually had most of its development in the recent decades. But, that's another topic for another day. I actually got to do this form of criticism extensively, when I wrote a nifty structuralist paper on the JRPG, Final Fantasy VII. True, I may have gone over the upper limit by double, by I really enjoyed writing the paper.
Because this form of criticism is relatively easy to do, look forward to actual criticism at some point. Maybe. We'll see.
Anyway! Structuralist criticism is cool!
The End
Well, one school of literary criticism that we looked at was called "structuralism." This school looks at the little things, like character types, plot devices and location variants. For example, across many genres and eras, there is the idea of the mystical, powerful sword. The purpose of the sword varies across the works. In Arthurian legends, there is Excalibur. In Lord of the Rings, Andúril is wielded by Aragorn. The Legend of Zelda features the Master Sword wielded by Link. In these examples, the sword is often chosen by the weapon itself: Link and Arthur are specifically picked to wield the sword and bring stability to the realm. Arthur and Aragorn are kings, of England and Gondor, respectively. Sometimes, the connections drawn are more tenuous than this: the idea is not to straight-jacket different works together. Rather, structuralism seeks to find things, often cool things, that different stories share in common.
Where does the "Internet" of "Structuralism and the Internet" play into all of this? First of all, the internet is full of lists. Top 10 this, 35 things of that, 14 secret thoses. In addition to the risk of too much plot summary, structuralist criticism can also fall into the pitfall of over-listing. It would be interesting, but nearly meaningless in itself, to create a list of silent, brooding protagonists featured in movies and video games. It is not enough to merely list them. We must show why it's important, and if it means anything important.
The second point is that the internet often gets structural criticism right. The best website for this is TV Tropes. They feature any genre and media that could be though of, even including a category for "Real Life." Because of the extensive connections that each page features, it is quite easy to get stuck in a loop of read-click-read-click on the site. TV Tropes shows that despite the efforts of Post-structuralism and post-modernist criticism, structuralist ideas still live on, and thrive.
For me, structuralism is an enjoyable form of literary criticism. It is almost universal in its use: I can talk about TV shows, novels and video games, comparing various aspects of their plots and characters. Sometimes, I can even trace the origin and development of a particular trope, such as zombies that eat brains. The development of that type of "creature" actually had most of its development in the recent decades. But, that's another topic for another day. I actually got to do this form of criticism extensively, when I wrote a nifty structuralist paper on the JRPG, Final Fantasy VII. True, I may have gone over the upper limit by double, by I really enjoyed writing the paper.
Because this form of criticism is relatively easy to do, look forward to actual criticism at some point. Maybe. We'll see.
Anyway! Structuralist criticism is cool!
The End
Wednesday, June 26, 2013
Literature and the Library
I've seen an interesting, but obvious, connection in the academic world. That is, the connection between literature majors and the library. One reason could be that literature majors are often bookworms before even entering college. However, this is not always the case, and bookworms exist across all fields of study.
Nevertheless, in my experience, most consistent patrons of the library are literature majors. Recent reading into college libraries leads me to believe that only people who like to read and explore the library go in for additional instruction in use of the library.
I began thinking about my experiences in undergraduate college classes. Naturally, as an English major, I had more classes in that area. Most of them required the use of the library for some paper or assignment. (My experience in strictly science classes is limited to two non-major classes, so I can't make any judgments about the science department's use of the library. However, in my experience in reshelving materials, I never went to the science sections nearly as much as the rest of the library). I have also taken some upper-level classes in other fields. These consisted of several classes in psychology, music, and theatre, and one class in each bible and history. In most of the psychology classes, there was an assignment that required the resources of the library. In the history class, there were several. However, the music, theatre and bible classes did not, for several different reasons. The theatre classes were intended to be "practical," (Essentially, most of the class was just setting up the theatre for that semester's production) so not much research was required. In Bible, the major assignment was a so-called inductive paper, so the only resource allowed was the source text.
It is the music classes that pertain most to our topic, more specifically the history and analysis. There were assignments that required research. However, most material was provided. For listening, we had tracks available online. Most of us used the textbook for the paper at the end of the class. Possibly, more assignments using the library could have been assigned. We subscribe to several music journals.
However, in regards to English, I believe we're doing a good job. In my upper-class Shakespeare class, we had a meeting to discuss various search resources and materials available for our major research paper. Nonetheless, an increase in "bibliographic instruction" across the board would be a good investment. As an English major, I love the library and know many good resources that it offers the learning mind. I just wish everybody knew about them.
Nevertheless, in my experience, most consistent patrons of the library are literature majors. Recent reading into college libraries leads me to believe that only people who like to read and explore the library go in for additional instruction in use of the library.
I began thinking about my experiences in undergraduate college classes. Naturally, as an English major, I had more classes in that area. Most of them required the use of the library for some paper or assignment. (My experience in strictly science classes is limited to two non-major classes, so I can't make any judgments about the science department's use of the library. However, in my experience in reshelving materials, I never went to the science sections nearly as much as the rest of the library). I have also taken some upper-level classes in other fields. These consisted of several classes in psychology, music, and theatre, and one class in each bible and history. In most of the psychology classes, there was an assignment that required the resources of the library. In the history class, there were several. However, the music, theatre and bible classes did not, for several different reasons. The theatre classes were intended to be "practical," (Essentially, most of the class was just setting up the theatre for that semester's production) so not much research was required. In Bible, the major assignment was a so-called inductive paper, so the only resource allowed was the source text.
It is the music classes that pertain most to our topic, more specifically the history and analysis. There were assignments that required research. However, most material was provided. For listening, we had tracks available online. Most of us used the textbook for the paper at the end of the class. Possibly, more assignments using the library could have been assigned. We subscribe to several music journals.
However, in regards to English, I believe we're doing a good job. In my upper-class Shakespeare class, we had a meeting to discuss various search resources and materials available for our major research paper. Nonetheless, an increase in "bibliographic instruction" across the board would be a good investment. As an English major, I love the library and know many good resources that it offers the learning mind. I just wish everybody knew about them.
Sunday, June 16, 2013
Dawn: Aspects of the Self
Elie Wiesel is a Holocaust survivor best known
for the account of his experiences in Nazi German concentration camps, Night. However, he also wrote Dawn and Day, comprising a trilogy
of stories about Wiesel's thoughts on the Holocaust. Dawn and Day differ from Night is that the later
parts of the trilogy are fictional accounts, as contrasted to the
autobiographical Night.
Recently, I picked up a copy of Dawn from the "classics" sections of my local library. Remembering Night, I knew that it wouldn't be very light summer reading, but interesting nonetheless. Essentially, it is the ruminations of a Jewish Holocaust survivor turned para-militarist as he copes with having to execute a prisoner of the group. Early chapter cover the background, such as what lead the group to form, and what lead Elisha, the main character, to be there. However, it moves into an interesting section as he thinks about his task.
That interesting section is introduced, in what seems to be the fifth section, by the presence of "visitors." Specifically, these figures, unseen to all but himself, reflect aspects of his life that created him as a person. Reflecting their abstract nature, none of them have proper names: all are addressed by common nouns or simple titles. Starting with his inner circle, he sees "My father ... of course, and my mother, and the beggar. And the grizzled master." Further out socially, but no less important, are "The English soldiers of the convoy we had ambushed at Gedera... And around them friends and brothers and comrades..." many from different times in Elisha's life (Dawn 55). Later, we hear of a child with the father. First mentioned are key individuals in his past: the child, mother and father represent his earliest past, and earliest character formations. Later friends represent actions and choices held before and during the Holocaust. Finally, the English soldiers remind him of his recent past as a Jewish freedom fighter.
The key element of Dawn is the exploration of the formation of self. What creates you as a person? In Elisha's case, what leads you to commit the highest human crime, after almost being a victim of it himself?
------
Work Cited:
Wiesel, Elie. Dawn.
Toronto: Bantam Books, 1982. Print.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)