MOTIVES—responsible for a person’s actions, they are the driving force behind why—and the justification for what—someone does. For that reason, it is hard to overstate the importance of the motive, especially when considering it in regards to perceivably peculiar events. Accordingly, it is with special attention that one should examine motive in regard to Nathaniel Hawthorne’s unusual Mr. Wakefield of his likewise titled, “Wakefield,” as well as the darkly eccentric narrator, Montresor, of Edgar Allen Poe’s short story, “The Cask of Amontillado.
Within the first paragraph, Hawthorne states neatly in one sentence the entire crux of his story. “The man, under pretence of going on a journey, took lodgings in the next street to his own house, and there, unheard of by his wife or friends, and without the shadow of a reason for such self-banishment, dwelt upwards of twenty years” (1298). Clearly, Hawthorne does not intend to propose a cause as to his character’s actions, but that does not necessarily mean he offers no assistance for those who wish to discern one themselves. According to Hawthorne, if one were to ask Mrs. Wakefield what type of man her husband was, she would aptly described him as someone with a “peculiar sort of vanity” that would keep “petty secrets, hardly worth revealing,” prone to what “she called a little strangeness” (1299). Obviously, there is some inherently curious quirk in the mind of Wakefield, and what society would see as outlandish (a 20-year self-banishment), Wakefield may arguably see as “par for the course.” Certainly, Hawthorne’s intentional description of the man lends credence to the assumption that it may be nothing more than an odd personality that is responsible for an even odder action.
In his first paragraph, Poe similarly reveals a crucial aspect concerning his following story. “The thousand injuries of Fortunato I had borne as I best could, but when he ventured upon insult I vowed revenge” (1612). After this brief introduction, Poe makes no further remarks on the supposed insults or injuries Fortunato has committed against the frightful narrator. The beginning is the first, only, and last mention of the motive behind the entire revenge plot. Unlike Hawthorne, Poe gives the reader no clues, insights, or evidence that help the one decide if what the narrator said was true, or what he did was justified. The basis for the story is completely the reader’s discretion. Supposing the narrator is merely insane or suspecting Fortunato truly committed a heinous crime are likewise viable explanations, since Poe’s lack of detail makes anything plausible.
What does such a purposefully ambiguous motive do for the story’s overall effect? Foremost, it makes it a stronger story with a more momentous impact. Hawthorne’s description of the lofty Mr. Wakefield supports the claim that his strange behavior was the result of a quirky personality flaw (an incredibly weak reason to give to his outlandish behavior). It is the equivalent of saying, “Oh don’t mind him, he’s just weird,”—an explanation which is never adequate. Conversely, Poe’s absolute absence of particulars concerning his narrator leaves no details with which to promote or deny an explanation of what drove that desire for revenge. By leaving the motive purposefully in question, the reader must inevitably formulate a reason they feel is most logical. Essentially, the story becomes more real to them since it is their theory which explains the man’s actions. Indeed, it leaves me to conclude that for the sake of the story’s effectiveness, the author must give substantial and complete reason to the character’s actions, or none at all—anything else just leaves you wondering “WHY?”
Hawthorne, Nathaniel. "Wakefield." The Norton Anthology of American Literature Vol. B. 7th ed. Ed. Nina Baym. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc., 2007. 1298-1303.
Poe, Edgar Allan. "The Cask of Amontillado." The Norton Anthology of American Literature Vol. B. 7th ed. Ed. Nina Baym. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc., 2007. 1612-1616.
4 comments:
With both stories, it seems as if the authors are trying to dispel any questionings concerning the "Why" of both subjects. While we quickly question the particulars and the motives to both of these characters actions (for good reason too), it seems as if Poe and Hawthorne take the reigns of "why" and shifts the focus to "how". "How did he decide to lure Fortunato into this crypt and how did he ultimately take his revenge," "how did Mr. Wakefield manage to spend 20 years secluded from society as a whole," etc. Motives and one's modus operanti are important parts of understanding, but it seems as if the authors want the audience to drop that step altogether, as awkward as it feels, and merely allow the actions to speak for themselves.
Why is what I have been asking myself especially after reading Wakefield. Why did he one day decide to leave his wife and just watch life pass him by for twenty years. If he really wanted be step out of his life why did he stay close? It is frustrating because the author leaves it open-ended.
In both cases, the authors are working from an ambiguously motivated "given." On the one hand, the short story genre demands an in media res , but at the same time, each author is purposely NOT supplying information that readers might want. Theis forces readers to develop their own conclusions, as Kristen and others have done, and seems to be clearly intended by the author. Is this an "innovation" in writing, or a continuation of what has always been "good" literature?
"What does such a purposefully ambiguous motive do for the story’s overall effect?"
You supply an intuitive question for other readers to consider. The mention of "effect," when analyzing Poe reminds me of Mary's presentation in class on the "Philosophy of Composition." She mentioned how Poe wrote with two things in mind: Effect and Tone. Poe hopes to evoke a desired effect through originality in his works. Therefore, Poe's lack of explicit motives in his stories provokes each individual reader to insert their own reasoning, which creates a unique effect for everyone. This process, as Poe said, satisfies the intellect - a true sign of great literature.
Post a Comment