In Frank Norris’s novel McTeague the reader is exposed to a continuum of behaviors that range from the overly socialized and self-conscious attempts at sophistication by the characters to the brutish displays of hostility amongst men and beasts; but an interesting pattern that emerges from this display of “social instincts” is Norris’s investigation into the psyche of his characters. This investigation, in several ways, mirrors the trends of another prominent investigator of psychosocial tendencies of people: Sigmund Freud. Freud’s fully developed and most influential work was achieved early in the 20th century, just after the first World War--too late to have influenced this novel (published in 1899) but the earliest stages of Freud’s work, and the beginning of the “psychoanalytical” discussion, actually began much earlier in the 1890’s. Freud first used his term “psychoanalysis” in the year 1896 and had started a controversial and very public discussion of this psychological approach to understanding hysteria and other psychological conditions with the 1895 publication of Studies on Hysteria, in which Freud discusses hysteria in women as a treatable condition and one that results from, as Peter Gray puts it, “sexual malfunctioning.”1 I point to these dates to show that it is quite possible to think that perhaps Frank Norris was aware of this psychoanalytic discussion that was taking place during this time and to suggest that we can read its influence in his novel.
The first instance of the influence of Freud’s psychoanalytical theory that I was struck by was the way in which Norris describes his two main protagonists, McTeague and Trina. The syntax of his sentences when describing these characters' disposition and mental qualities struck me as very odd--as being almost diagnostic or list like: “McTeague’s mind was as his body, heavy, slow to act, sluggish […] Altogether he suggested the draft horse, immensely strong, stupid, docile, obedient” (Norris, 3). At first, I thought perhaps that this was simply Norris’s descriptive style, but as the book progresses we find that this list like categorization of qualities typically only appears in reference to McTeague and Trina, and that as we gather a better understanding of their mental qualities during the progression of the novel Norris eventually abandons this descriptive listing approach. For me the effect was as though he were categorizing these character’s dispositions and displaying them as background information preceding their “symptomatic” and precipitate actions-- a very Freudian approach to character explanation and description.
In these two characters Norris also exposes to us their mysterious “second selves,” who possess better or worse qualities than the ‘true selves’ that are on display for the social world to register--a pattern which hints directly at Freud’s eventual idea of the Id, Ego, and Super Ego. These Freudian drives were not published in his work until later in the 20th Century, but to what degree they were discussed prior to this publication or whether Norris preempted, in this rudimentary form, Freud’s definitive characterization of impulses I cannot say--certainly however, the resemblance is worth noting.
Other instances of this psychoanalytical influence in Norris’s novel comes in the character Maria Macapa, who’s hysteria (or possibly truthful childhood memories...) of the “Golden service” and her flying squirrel would have made for a very interesting case in Freud’s study of hysterical women--and is one that, interestingly enough, is resolved (if it is indeed a hysteria) by a restoration of her sexuality after her marriage to Zerkow.
These brief examples are all given to highlight the resemblance of Norris’s treatment of his character’s psyche to the contemporary psychoanalytical discussion that was being led by Sigmund Freud; and provides an interesting extra-dimension for the explanation of social instincts and actions that had been lacking or rudimentary in form in literature hitherto this influence.
*1. I reference here Peter Gray’s introduction to the Norton Standard Edition of Freud’s Civilization and Its Discontents
Note that this is Peter Gay, not Gray (a Victorianist). This is a very interesting discussion and would be worth a paper topic. Of course, the relationship between Darwin and Freud opens up a whole new can of worms, though you might find Jacques Barzun's old book on Darwin, Wagner, Freud interesting. Also--on pre-Freudian ideas of the self--the volume The Tender Passion in Peter Gay's series on The Bourgeois Experience. Might this be something you'd be interested in for the second paper? The Macapa observation is excellent.
ReplyDelete