Katherine Anne Porter's Ship of Fools: New Interpretations and Transatlantic Contexts
Katherine Anne Porter's Ship of Fools: New Interpretations and Transatlantic Contexts
eBook
Available on Compatible NOOK devices, the free NOOK App and in My Digital Library.
Related collections and offers
Overview
Product Details
| ISBN-13: | 9781574416060 |
|---|---|
| Publisher: | University of North Texas Press |
| Publication date: | 04/15/2015 |
| Sold by: | Barnes & Noble |
| Format: | eBook |
| File size: | 5 MB |
About the Author
Read an Excerpt
Katherine Anne Porter's Ship of Fools
New Interpretations and Transatlantic Contexts
By Thomas Austenfeld
University of North Texas Press
Copyright © 2015 University of North Texas PressAll rights reserved.
ISBN: 978-1-57441-606-0
CHAPTER 1
Fools and Folly in Erasmus and Porter
Jewel Spears Brooker
In the articulation of her literary ancestry, Katherine Anne Porter created a place of honor for Erasmus, and in her personal canon, she made room at the top for The Praise of Folly. She told her nephew that she had been formed by Erasmus "from her tenth year" (Letters 415). In 1932, she was reading him in Basel, and on June 19, 1941, she signed a contract with Doubleday to write his biography. After the publication of Ship of Fools, she reiterated her admiration, hinting that her representation of folly was inspired by his. Porter was drawn to Erasmus in large part because of his moral imagination. Both were keen observers of human nature and both considered folly to be endemic in the human condition. But they present strikingly different concepts of folly. For Erasmus, folly is foolishness, and although it is the butt of his satire, he generally finds it amusing. For Porter, on the other hand, folly is innate wickedness. When writing of ordinary human life in The Praise of Folly, he is tolerant and urbane; in contrast, in Ship of Fools, she is harsh and scornful. Unlike Porter, Erasmus actually likes his fools, and far more than she, he identifies with them in their folly.
My thesis is that although Porter was drawn to Erasmus because of his moral seriousness, she was unable to share his conclusions because she held an opposite view of human nature. The optimistic view of Erasmus, explicit in his educational treatises and his debates with Luther, is that folly can be alleviated by education. He based his life's work on the idea that, though fallen, humankind retains the capacity for moral improvement. The darker view of Porter, evident in Ship of Fools and her appreciation of Augustine, is that folly is far more intractable. On July 14, 1947, she wrote to Andrew Lytle that "man ... loves evil and cannot live without it." Porter's view is reflected in a remark by Frau Hutten in Ship of Fools: "there are many evil people in this world, many more evil than good ... evil by nature, by choice, by deepest inclination, evil all through" (SF 294). Dr. Schumann, similarly, maintains that even the best people, in their hearts, sympathize "with the criminal because he really commits the deeds we only dream of doing" (SF 294). The contrasting views of Porter and Erasmus can be seen in their different approaches to characterization. InThe Praise of Folly, Erasmus uses satire; in Ship of Fools, Porter uses caricature. In an excellent discussion of Porter's use of caricature, Thomas Walsh argues that although her occasional use of caricature in the short fiction is effective, it results in cardboard one-dimensional characters when extended to her long novel (212–13).
As a technique for criticizing character, caricature is often associated with satire, but they are not identical. Satire is normally directed towards intellectual or moral faults, or towards bad behavior. It points to things that can be corrected, and generally speaking, it is impersonal, directed at the sin, not the sinner, and directed at what is shared by many or most. The opposite is true of caricature. It is usually focused on physical characteristics, such as bow legs, a fat stomach, unruly hair, or a crooked nose. Caricature is directed towards the individual, emphasizing his difference, what makes him unique. These principles were noted by the dean of English satirists in "Verses on the Death of Dr. Swift," where he says of himself:
Yet, Malice never was his Aim;
He lash'd the vice, but spar'd the Name.
No Individual could resent,
Where Thousands equally were meant.
His Satyr points at no Defect,
But what all Mortals may correct; ...
He spar'd a Hump or crooked Nose,
Whose owners set not up for Beaux. (ll. 459–468)
Satire, as Swift points out, is not malicious. The purpose is to correct, to educate, to encourage moral improvement; the purpose of caricature, on the other hand, is to dehumanize, to humiliate and mock. Satire is associated with redemption, but caricature with rejection. Caricature is best suited for short pieces in which the emphasis is on the surface. As Walsh points out, it is not suited for in-depth probing of character (212–14). Stout makes a similar point, arguing that, unlike the characters in Porter's short stories, the characters in Ship of Fools are static, displaying little or no growth (213). Porter's reliance on caricature, furthermore, undercuts her ability to deal with her announced theme of human depravity, for caricature by definition strips characters of complexity. By reducing her characters to cartoonish versions of themselves, she greatly diminishes the possibility of probing the mystery of evil.
There can be no doubt that Porter understood the distinction between satire and caricature. In Ship of Fools, Jenny Brown, a character modeled on Porter herself, is an artist, and one of her specialties is caricature. She enjoys sketching her lover, David, in portraits that double not only his age, but also the size of his chin and stomach. As she adds "a roll of fat across the base of his skull," she exults in her handiwork, referring to her drawing as "the execution of a little murder." As she lingers over David's symbolic corpse, she wears an expression of "sweet serenity" (SF339). As Walsh points out, Porter uses caricature here and elsewhere as a means of conveying unexpressed hatred between the sexes (206-07).
The purpose of The Praise of Folly, in contrast, is not to tear down, but to mend. In a letter written in May 1515 to his friend Martin Dorp, Erasmus defended the Folly by insisting that a satirist should not only criticize faults, but also supply the moral reference point that can be used to correct them.
In whatever books I've published, I always aimed exclusively at the same single objective, to do some good by my efforts.... In the Enchiridion, I laid out very simply the pattern of a Christian life; in my little book on The Education of a Christian Prince, I declared directly the things that a prince ought to be taught.... And now Folly says, though jokingly, precisely the same thing as the Enchiridion. I wanted to mock, not to attack; to benefit, not to wound, to comment on men's manners, not to denounce them. (229, 231)
The Enchiridion (1504), which has the English title Handbook of the Christian Soldier, is Erasmus' most representative and perhaps greatest work. Intended as a spiritual guide for educated laymen, it presents his argument that the philosophia Christi, the philosophy of Christ, is the best guide to life. The goal of improving the mind and the quality of life by studying ancient texts was the essence of Renaissance humanism. In the words of Robert M. Adams:
Its basic concern is several potentials of the human mind—to learn and communicate approximate truths, to govern some part of itself and the world outside it, to reach agreement on the rudiments of civilized existence. (326)
Erasmus expanded this concept to include the study of the New Testament and the writings of early Christians. He wrote extensively about the use of Scriptures and classical texts in the education of young boys.
Northern humanists such as Erasmus and Brant were influenced primarily by classical and Biblical texts. Porter and her fellow modernists knew the classics, but they were also influenced by the study of (at least the awareness of) Darwin, Nietzsche, Freud, and Frazer, and by the death of liberal humanism associated with their work. In Ship of Fools, as shown in the work of Joan Givner, Janis Stout, and Thomas Austenfeld, she shows a simultaneous fascination with Renaissance humanism and twentieth-century violence. Although she was drawn to Erasmus' belief in grace, she could not make it her own. Her attraction to humanism stems from what Walsh refers to as the illusion of Eden. This longing for a simpler world pervades the Miranda stories, but even there, as Darlene Unrue suggests, it is undercut by awareness of twentieth-century history. This tug between humanism and modernism, between idealism and realism, results in a tension that is one of the strengths of such gems of fiction as "Flowering Judas," "Old Mortality," and "Pale Horse, Pale Rider." The diminution of this tension is one of the weaknesses of Ship of Fools.
The divergence in the concept of folly in Erasmus and Porter can be illustrated by looking at their views of childhood. Erasmus believed that the nature of a child could be re-formed through education. His passion for the classics was related to his conviction that ancient virtue could be a model for modern virtue. He published the first Greek edition of the New Testament and the first critical editions of several classical Greek texts, often printed on facing pages with Latin translations so that they could be read by his contemporaries. He also produced critical editions of the early church fathers—not only the Latin figures, but also the previously untranslated Greek fathers. These scholarly editions have been superseded, but appearing at the intersection of the medieval and modern worlds, they did much to re-shape the mind of Europe.
Erasmus wrote five influential treatises on educational theory, used by teachers throughout Europe in his own day and still read in colleges of education. The Cleanth Brooks and Robert Penn Warren of his day, he wrote textbooks in the humanities that were widely used for over a generation. He transformed university education by challenging the scholasticism that had dominated European universities for centuries. His treatise, Early Liberal Education for Children (1509), is a classic, and his books for adolescents, such as Good Manners for Boys (1530), are full of practical wisdom. His pedagogical passion is also reflected in his handbooks, including his guide for rulers, The Education of a Christian Prince, and his manual for the ordinary Christian, the Enchiridion. This commitment to education is the essential backdrop for The Praise of Folly (1511).
The Folly is a mock-encomium spoken by the goddess Folly. Despite the fact that she is universally adored, Folly feels that she has been insufficiently praised, so to right this wrong, she gives an elaborate speech praising herself. In the first part, where the satiric butt is primarily everyman, universal human nature, the tone is tolerant, evoking amusement, but not contempt or scorn. In the latter part, where the butt includes grammarians and theologians (intellectuals like himself), the tone deepens without sacrificing its humorous edge. In the letter to Dorp, Erasmus maintains that humor is essential in his pedagogy:
Horace reminds us ...: "Telling the truth in a joke–what's wrong with it?" ... Lucretius tells us that doctors rub a bit of honey on the rim of a cup from which a patient is to drink a bitter dose. (231)
He adds that his decision to don the mask of Folly was at bottom pedagogical: "I felt I had found a way to insinuate myself into diseased minds, and minister to them under the guise of pleasure" (231). Erasmus grants the Augustinian doctrine that children incline towards selfishness, but denies that this inclination is determinative. He argues forcefully that the nature of children can be re-shaped by having them read the classics and the New Testament under the supervision of a loving teacher.
Porter's view of human nature is directly stated in essays from the 1940s and 1950s and further illustrated in her portrayal of children in Ship of Fools. In one of her most revealing essays, "St. Augustine and the Bullfight" (1955), she recalls her first bullfight. She disliked violence and especially the idea of killing animals for sport. Much to her surprise, she found that she was thrilled at the danger and the violence of the kill. Her conclusion, confirmed by reading St. Augustine's Confessions, is that human beings are only superficially shaped by their environment. In certain circumstances, the facade of civility collapses and they experience an exhilaration that unmasks their true nature. In "Marriage Is Belonging" (1951), Porter claims, as Augustine does, that one can learn a great deal about human nature by observing children. Children "are human nature in essence, without conscience, without pity, without love, without a trace of consideration for others, just one seething cauldron of primitive appetites" (CE190). This view of children can be seen in two of the most striking characters in Ship of Fools, the six-year-old twins, Ric and Rac. These little ones do not reflect an Erasmian concept, but an extreme Augustinian one.
Ric and Rac, the twin children of the Spanish dancers Manolo and Lola, are portrayed as incarnations of evil. They have been subjected to vicious beatings by their parents, leaving them howling in pain (SF 360), but given Porter's doctrine of innate depravity, the evil pre-existed the abuse and would outlast it. Even before they are old enough to understand the difference between right and wrong, they are so depraved that neither love nor education can touch them. Their wickedness is discussed by the other passengers and by many Porter critics. As remarked by the most perceptive person on board the Vera, Dr. Schumann, these six-year-olds are "little monsters," having "evil ... in the egg of their souls" (SF 198). When La Condesa smiles at them, they stare at her "with utter malignance" (SF 198). They steal her pearl necklace, not because they have any use for it, but out of sheer malice, and they throw it overboard. They deliberately pour ink on the carpet in the writing room; they toss Frau Rittersdorf's pillow overboard, and try to do the same with the ship's cat. When Dr. Schumann steps in to save the cat, he finds himself looking with "dismay at their blind, unwinking malignance, their cold slyness" (SF 112). Father Garza refers to them as "devil-possessed," and Dr. Schumann responds with a question, "are they real devils who can take any shape, or [do they] make themselves invisible for their deeds of darkness?" (SF 318). Undeterred by their failure to kill the cat, Ric and Rac throw the Huttens' bulldog Bébé overboard.
But it is not just what they do that is reprehensible; it is what they are. When La Condesa expresses hope that the "little criminals" might grow out of it, Dr. Schumann observes that "Nothing of the sort will happen with these" children (SF 198). To her protest that "they are only children," the good doctor remarks that Ric and Rac are possessed by the devil. Father Garza suggests that perhaps it is best not to exaggerate their wickedness, but instead to give them a good whipping, and Dr. Schumann responds, "I wish it might be so simple" (SF 319). Porter is relentless in portraying the little ones as malignant through and through. The other passengers secretly wish that Ric and Rac would fall overboard, and Porter's narrator piles on by describing them as "outside the human race" (SF 330). They are unredeemable because in Porter's caricature of childhood, they are static and one-dimensional, incapable of the development we see in the child Miranda in the Texas stories.
Another striking contrast with earlier concepts of childhood is the fact that these little demons are highly sexualized. The "fierce little faces" of the male Ric and the female Rac are "exactly alike except for the mysterious stigmata of sex" (SF 112). Porter repeatedly emphasizes their unity as twins. They are "of one mind and spirit," and they "lived twined together in a state of intense undeclared war with the adult world—or rather, with the whole world, for they did not like other children, or animals, either" (SF 71). They are often portrayed as entwined, entangled, as a single two-headed monster with four legs and four arms, an image that recalls Iago's dirty joke: "your daughter and the Moor are now making the beast with two backs" (Othello I.1.126). In the lifeboat, Ric and Rac are presented as "all tangled up giggling in the darkness.... [They] fought furiously, knees in ribs, claws in hair; the pain they inflicted on each other had a strong undertow of pleasure" (SF 195-96). After a beating by their parents, they crawl into bed and "lay there half naked, entangled like some afflicted misbegotten little monster in a cave, exhausted, mindless" (SF 360). As Walsh points out, Porter portrays these masochistic children as miniature adults. They ape the adults around them, demonstrating "the hostile, bestial, and incestuous character of ... sexuality as Porter sees it" (210).
The bright line separating the sixteenth-century Erasmus and the twentieth-century Porter can be partially illuminated by contrasting their respective intellectual milieus. For him, it was northern humanism and the Protestant reformation. For her, it was the collapse of liberal humanism, the birth of modernism, and two world wars. In the late nineteenth century, under the influence of Darwin, social scientists began using evolutionary models in accounting for human behavior. In regard to children, no one was more important than Freud. Until he published his Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality in 1905, children were regarded as innocent, as in Wordsworth's "Immortality Ode," and asexual, as in Coleridge's "Frost at Midnight." Because he was a physician, Freud focused on abnormal children, with emphasis on sexuality and violent emotions. While many of his theories, including the psycho-sexual development of children and the Oedipus complex, have been rejected, his insistence on the role played by sex and violence in childhood development permeated other fields, producing a shift in consciousness. Anthropologists, for example, suggested parallels between the development of individuals and of culture, thus associating childhood with primitive society and children with savagery. From one point of view, Porter's characterization of the evil twins is an extreme reflection of Augustine's theory of original sin; from another, it is like a composite snapshot of the dark views of childhood in the new social sciences.
(Continues...)
Excerpted from Katherine Anne Porter's Ship of Fools by Thomas Austenfeld. Copyright © 2015 University of North Texas Press. Excerpted by permission of University of North Texas Press.
All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.