BiographyTimeline of Significant EventsWritings by FredericFrederic & Contemporaries: On Writing

Bibliographical Studies

Critical Reception

Bibliography of Criticism

Biographical InfluencesCultural ContextLiterary Influences & ComparisionsLiterary MovementsThe TitleReligion & the ClergyPragmatismThemeStructureGender IssuesCharacterizationThe TrioSister SoulsbyReader Response

Dissertations & Theses

Discussion Questions or Topics for Essays

Glossary

Links of Interest

My Bio

Home

Areas of Criticism - Reader Response
 

Becknell, Thomas. “Implication Through Reading The Damnation of Theron Ware.” American Literary Realism 24.1 (1991): 63-71.

Eggers, Paul. “By Whose Authority? Point of View in the First Chapter of Harold Frederic’s The Damnation of Theron Ware.” Style 31.1 (1997): 81-95.

Oehlschlaeger, Fritz. “Passion, Authority, and Faith in The Damnation of Theron Ware.” American Literature 58.2 (1986): 238-55.


Becknell, Thomas. “Implication Through Reading The Damnation of Theron Ware.” American Literary Realism 24.1 (1991): 63-71.

Becknell’s article is a reader-response essay based on an extension of Randall Craig’s theory of a “hermeneutical gap” between “intended and model readers” (63). Becknell contends that thematic and hermeneutic gaps exist “between the available authorities (which are discredited), and a valid authority which Theron lacks” and between the authority of the reader and the authority of the author (64). Borrowing a term from Wolfgang Iser’s The Act of Reading, Becknell argues that the “‘horizon’ against which we view Theron’s awakening” is a “vast no-man’s-land between authority and personal judgment”; as readers, we want Theron Ware to be more than he is (65-66). This desire is a result of the way we read and our inability to “embrace all perspectives at once”; thus a problem of “authority” confronts our judgment (68). The competing authorities of Father Forbes, Dr. Ledsmar, and Celia Madden cloud Theron Ware’s judgment. When Madden tells Ware, “We find that you are a bore,” the “we” she refers to includes the author (again referring to “author-ity”) (70). Becknell asserts that we, as readers, forget the authority of the author because we want to see The Damnation of Theron Ware as a drama of lost faith and Theron Ware as a victim of temptation. He claims that readers can be misguided because they want to read the novel as a romance when they should be keying in on the signals of realism. Like truth, concludes Becknell, assumptions about authority begin with absolutes and end in relativity.


Eggers, Paul. “By Whose Authority? Point of View in the First Chapter of Harold Frederic’s The Damnation of Theron Ware.” Style 31.1 (1997): 81-95.

Eggers’ article combines reader-response and structural criticism in an examination of Chapter 1 of The Damnation of Theron Ware. Eggers argues that other critics who have examined authority in this novel (Oehlschlaeger and Becknell) have begun in Chapter 2, where the narrative focus and main characters are established. He contends, however, “that the first chapter both initiates and encapsulates the novel’s exploration of authority through a perplexing usage of shifting points of view.” Identification of these shifting points of view alternates between clarity and ambiguity, not only implicating readers in “‘unauthoritative’ readings” of the text but also focusing on the “book’s concern with authority.” The opening three paragraphs are traditional omniscient narration, but one word in the third paragraph, “nay,” suggests an “internal debate” that should give careful readers pause. The narrator changes for paragraphs four through six to an unnamed “observer.” The point of view appears to shift again in paragraphs ten and eleven to the “venerable Fathers” of the Methodist clergy. Their “sincerity” is called into question if the judgments rendered are not the implied author’s (as reported by the omniscient narrator). Point of view clearly shifts back to the omniscient narrator in paragraphs twelve through fifteen, influencing the reader’s perceptions of Theron and Alice Ware in later paragraphs in contrast to the proud Tecumseh congregation. Eggers’ analysis continues along this line, scrutinizing each paragraph in turn. When Ware is finally introduced to the reader, it is through the “objective” tone of a limited-omniscient narrator who has just replaced the “vitriolic tone of the parishioner-controlled narrative.” Since the reader is predisposed to be sympathetic toward the seemingly stoic and pious Reverend Ware, this impression influences the reader well into the book. As Eggers demonstrates, “both text and reader are rendered ‘unauthoritative’ through the agency of point of view.” (Note: The above is from WilsonSelect, an electronic database that does not include Style’s page numbers.)


Oehlschlaeger, Fritz. “Passion, Authority, and Faith in The Damnation of Theron Ware.” American Literature 58.2 (1986): 238-55.

Oehlschlaeger’s article combines reader response, feminist, and psychological criticism in an analysis of authority in Frederic’s novel. According to Oehlschlaeger, Frederic “systematically discredits every authority figure in the novel while simultaneously revealing Theron’s own search for authority.” He argues that what Frederic’s novel presents “is not an innocent’s fall into corrupt sexuality but a critique of the way corrupt authority poisons sexuality,” a claim demonstrated in Theron Ware’s relationships with his wife Alice Ware and Celia Madden (239). Theron Ware becomes “progressively effeminized” by the novel’s “proscription of female sexuality by male authority” (244). All of the novel’s authority figures—the Methodist trustees; Father Forbes; Dr. Ledsmar; Sister Soulsby, perhaps the most complex authority figure; the Catholic Church; and even Jeremiah Madden, “the book’s most dignified figure”—are discredited by their words or actions (254). Oehlschlaeger acknowledges that critics have seen Sister Soulsby “either as a Satanic figure or as a voice for Frederic’s own supposed pragmatism” (246); however, he disagrees with both views. First, Sister Soulsby is neither all good nor all bad, and her pragmatism is “inadequate to deal with the highly irrational world that Frederic depicts,” which undercuts her validity as an authority figure (247). Second, Oehlschlaeger does not agree with critics who have pointed to Sister Soulsby’s pragmatism as an indication of Frederic’s personal views. In Oehlschlaeger’s opinion, Frederic’s views are evident in his respect for “certain religious values” represented by the venerable church elders and the Christian idea of repentance (253).

 




All information Copyright © 2003 Robin Taylor Rogers.
Contact the author at rrogers@helios.acomp.usf.edu