Friday, May 6, 2011

Sympathy and Fitness in McTeague


            In his Descent of Man, Charles Darwin discusses the morality of man in his discussion of how man differs from the lower beings.  “Sympathy, though gained as an instinct, is also much strengthened by exercise or habit,” he writes.  In a significant way does this discussion relate to the relationship between McTeague and Trina in Norris’ McTeague.  Because McTeague seems incapable of sympathizing (as demonstrated by his initiation of a relationship with Trina despite his friendship with Marcus – for McTeague does realize Marcus’ attachment to Trina), his relationship with Trina cannot succeed. Darwin writes:
The moral nature of man has reached its present standard…especially from his sympathies having been rendered more tender and widely diffused through the effects of habit, example, instruction, and reflection…the first foundation or origin of the moral sense lies in the social instincts, including sympathy; and these instincts no doubt were primarily gained, as in the case of the lower animals, through natural selection…
Here, Darwin suggests that such moral instincts were developed as a way to control or to mediate human interaction and are passed from parent to child (Darwin).  Through this statement, then, McTeague’s general solitude at the beginning of McTeague can be understood.  McTeague is able to maintain his dental occupation; however, he has few close human relationships – even his friendship with Marcus cannot be described as intimate.  Consequently, when Trina first appears on his dental chair and McTeague puts her to sleep, he cannot resist the temptation to kiss her.   “No, by god!  No, by god!” he cries, knowing that his impulse is wrong – not because he knows kissing her to be an unsympathetic move but because “Dimly he seemed to realize that should he yield now, he would never be able to care for Trina again.  She would never be the same to him, never so radiant, so sweet, so adorable; her charm for him would vanish in an instant” (Norris 24).  McTeague is not one of the fittest of his species, but more fit for the animal world.  Thus, even if Trina had been a sympathetic character herself – for she ultimately submits to vice and to McTeague’s sensual advances – the McTeague’s marriage would probably not have been successful (in the natural sense, in that they would have reproduced).  

2 comments:

  1. So does Norris then imply that sympathy would get us out of the mess these characters (and by implication all of us) are in? What, then, about Trina's sympathy for Maria? And what about the novelist's sympathy (or lack thereof) for his characters?

    ReplyDelete
  2. no, norris doesn't believe in sympathy.. he really is poor, and therefore, it is a story about people who are also poor but maybe because of the social / private dynamic they are also richer but in the non-material sense.. it's a really good thing trina shows CARE AND RESPECT FOR MARIA bc otherwise how else could it be anything but love / hate.. also, frank norris disliked ALL HIS CHARACTERS. that's why he wrote about them

    ReplyDelete