Would you describe the narrator protagonist as a sociopath or a psycopat? Provide textual evidence for your answer.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Páginas de Interesse
- 19th Century American Literary Figures & Literary Texts Online
- Adventures of Huckleberry Finn in Gutenberg
- American Memory: Library of Congress
- American Transcendentalism Web
- Edgar Allan Poe Baltimore Society
- Faculdade de Letras da Universidade de Lisboa
- Mark Twain House and Museum
- Schomburg Center for Research in Black Culture
- Searchable Sea Literature
- The Nineteenth Century in Print
- University of Virginia's American Literary Texts Online
- Voices of the Shuttle: American Literature
Blog Archive
-
▼
2016
(61)
-
▼
November
(24)
- SOLITARY SOULS, POETIC MINDS: EMILY DICKINSON (183...
- Homework for December 5 . Mark Twain, Huckleberry ...
- Homework for November 30 - Translation
- Bartleby and Passive Resistance / Thoreau and Civi...
- Melville, an excerpt from Moby Dick (1851)
- Homework for November 28: commentary proposal
- Social tensions in Bartleby, the Scrivener (by Nad...
- Edward Hopper, "Office in a Small City" (1953)
- Walt Whitman: Preface and advice on the Greatest P...
- Homework for November 23 (Bartleby the Scrivener)
- Fragment of "Saudação a Walt Whitman" by Álvaro de...
- Edgar Allan Poe e representações de O Corvo (Joana...
- Messengers from the Stars (IV): 16-18 November
- Creative Writing Proposal - The Sleepers (for Nov 16)
- Homework for November 14 - Commentary Practice
- "The Black Cat" - the cat, the wife and the horrib...
- "The Black Cat" and "The Imp of the Perverse" (by ...
- Homework for November 9 - Edgar Allan Poe, "The Bl...
- Poe's review of Hawthorne - structure
- How to write a literary text review
- Homework for November 7, Poe's review of Hawthorne...
- Nathaniel Hawthorne, The Scarlet Letter (1850)
- What, to the Mexican, is the Fourth of July? (work...
- A Discussion on Anti-Transcendentalism: “The Minis...
-
▼
November
(24)
8 comments:
Consideraria o narrador the "The Black Cat" um sociopata, e não psicopata. O narrador demonstra, ao longo do conto, possuir todas as características gerais da sociopatia/psicopatia: comportamento anti-social ("The moodiness of my usual temper increased to hatred of all things and of all mankind", pág. 856), um défice de empatia ("I grew (...) more regardless of the feelings of others.", pág. 851), comportamento violento ("I even offered her personal violence.", pág.851), sentimentos sádicos ("a more than fiendish malevolence, gin-nurtured, THRILLED every fibre of my frame", pág. 851), uma capacidade de sangue-frio muito para além do normal ("I quivered not in a muscle. My heart beat calmly as that of one who slumbers in innocence.", pág. 858) e uma necessidade imperativa de se gabar das suas proezas cruéis ("I burned to say if but one word, by way of triumph, and to render doubly sure their assurance of my guiltness.", pág. 858). Sabe-se também que esta sua nova personalidade não é passageira, mas uma doença, uma -patia: "Have we not a perpetual inclination (...) to violate that which is Law" (pág. 852).
No entanto, sabe-se também que o narrador nem sempre foi assim, tendo sido uma criança "noted for the docility and humanity of [his] disposition", que passava a maior parte do seu tempo com os seus animais domésticos. O narrador é portanto alguém que foi profundamente mudado pelo seu ambiente e as suas circunstâncias, já depois de se casar: "my general temperament and character - through the instrumentality of the Fiend Intemperance - had (...) experienced a radical alteration for the worse." (pág. 851). Ao cometer actos de crueldade, o narrador está portanto a oferecer "violence to [his] own nature" (pág. 852). A única ligação entre a sua personalidade na infância e no período adulto é o comportamento anti-social ("him who has had frwuent occasion to test the paltry friendship and gossamer fidelity of mere Man", pág. 850), que por si só não parece ser suficiente para substanciar a teoria da psicopatia do narrador. Tendo o seu comportamento violento e falta de empatia sido então provocado por factores externos durante o curso da sua vida, e não algo com o qual o narrador nasceu, pode-se dizer que este é um sociopata e não um psicopata.
Vale também a pena acrescentar a peculiaridade deste sociopata, uma vez que, não só a mudança no seu carácter foi extraordinariamente radical (passando de uma criança dócil e amante de animais a um homem violento e sádico), como este também aparenta sentir remorso pelas suas acções, aparentando ter sido acordado, às portas da morte, de um longo transe de sociopatia: "I blush to confess it" (pág. 851), "I blush, I burn, I shudder, while I pen the damnable atrocity" (pág. 851).
In my opinion, the protagonist in The Black Cat by Poe is a sociopath, for numerous reasons.
Fist of all, it is important to understand what a sociopath is, and I'll explain; a sociopath is a mentally-ill person who commits violent crimes and after committing them feels remorse and guilt, however his/her violent outburst make him unable to control himself, and that it clearly the case in The Black Cat. The protagonist loved his pets, and felt relaxed petting them and taking care of them, especially his cat Pluto, however when his mood started to change and he got violent he could not control his anger and ended up hurting his cat, and I quote: "I fancied that the cat avoided my presence. I seized him; when, in his fright at my violence, he inflicted a light wound upon my hand with his teeth. The fury of a demon instantly possessed me. I knew myself no longer." (page 851), but then again he feels remorseful afterwards:" I blush, I burn, I shudder, while I pen the damnable atrocity(...)When reason returned with the morning(...) I experienced a sentiment half of horror, half of remorse, for the crime of which I had been guilty;" (page 851). Another aspect that really proves this theory is the fact that the protagonist cannot understand that somethings are just not to be done:" Have we not a perpetual inclination, in the teeth of our best judgment, to violate that which is Law, merely because we understand it to be such?" (page 852).Adding to these aspects we have the fact that the protagonist did not share the same feeling as a "normal" person should:" This circumstance, however, only endeared my wife, who, as I have already said, possessed, in high degree, that humanity of feeling which had once been my distinguishing trait, and the source of many of my simplest and purest pleasure."(page 855).Once again, I mention the fact that the protagonist could not control himself:" Goaded, by the interference, into a rage more than demonical, I withdrew my arm from her grasp and buried the axe in her brain,. She fell dead upon the spot, without a groan."(page 856), and he's also calculative, especially when he killed his wife and he is able to carefully think about what he should do to the body as if was a normal turn of events.
I think Poe’s main intention was to explore “the primitive impulses of the human heart”, how a normal man (and not a psychopath) deals with his perversity. This is expressed in the sentence: “perverseness is one of the primitive impulses of the human heart — one of the indivisible primary faculties, or sentiments, which give direction to the character of Man. Who has not, a hundred times, found himself committing a vile or a silly action, for no other reason than because he knows he should not? Have we not a perpetual inclination, in the teeth of our best judgment, to violate that which is Law, merely because we understand it to be such? This spirit of perverseness, I say, came to my final overthrow. It was this unfathomable longing of the soul to vex itself — to offer violence to its own nature — to do wrong for the wrong's sake only — that urged me to continue and finally to consummate the injury I had inflicted upon the unoffending brute.”
The main protagonist is not a psychopath. He felt remorse: “hung it with the tears streaming from my eyes, and with the bitterest remorse at my heart” and psychopaths don’t. He also felt terror and fear: “by absolute dread of the beast“ and psychopaths don’t. At the end he denounced himself. The policemen were satisfied and leaving but he started to talk about the wall and he knocked on the wall.
Maybe he unconsciously believed that the black cat was a witch and having a pretext, he let his perversity transformed him.
The protagonist of “The Black Cat” fits in the description of a sociopath. It is characterised by a weak conscience (psychopaths don’t have a conscience of what’s right or wrong) “(the spirit of PERVERSENESS. (…) Who has not, a hundred times, found himself committing a vile or silly action, for no other reason than because he knows he should not?”
The lack of empathy “I grew day by day, more moody, more irritable, more regardless of the feelings of others.” “(…) during this period, there came back into my spirit a half-sentiment that seemed, but was not, remorse.”
People with this pathology blame others, here the Cat, “I fancied the cat avoided my presence. I seized him; when, in his fright at my violence, he inflicted a slight wound upon my hand, with his teeth. The fury of a demon instantly possessed me.” And have excuses for their behaviour, here his alcoholism “But my disease grew upon me – for what disease is like Alcohol! (…)”.
They are “hot-headed”, opposed to the psychopaths who tend to be more cold-hearted, more calculating. It is visible throughout the text that all of the narrator’s violent actions are done by impulse, by anger and not calculated – hurting the cat, taking one of his eyes, strangulating the cat and the death of his wife by hitting her with an axe while trying to kill the cat. His lack of remorse is seen when he hides the body instead of going to the police, he is even proud for hiding her so well.
Finally, the most relevant sign of sociopathy is hurting animals intentionally.
Is the cat a representation of his possible remorse or is the cat simply part of his imagination?
I believe that the protagonist should not be considered a psychopath, but a sociopath. Despite being similar conditions, there are a lot of clues in the text that point the protagonist to be the latter.
It is very easy to mix the two terms as both of them share some characteristics: lack of respect for social norms and anti-social behaviour (“I spent most of my time, and never was so happy as when feeding and caressing them [animals]” – p.850), lack of respect towards others (“I grew, day by day, more moody, more irritable, more regardless of the feelings of others” – p.851), inability to feel guilt (“…there came back into my spirit a half-sentiment that seemed, but was not, remorse” – p.853”) and tendency to display violent behaviour (“I even offered her personal violence” – p.851).
But what truly identifies the protagonist as a sociopath is the fact that he was not always violent nor aggressive (“From my infancy I was noted for the docility and humanity of my disposition” – p.850; “…my general temperament and character (…) experienced a radical alteration for the worst” – p.851). This means that there was an external influence in his conduct that changed the way he behaved, which means he can not be a psychopath, since the latter is believed to be born with this mental disorder.
Another fact that shows that the protagonist is a sociopath is the way he faces his actions. A Psychopath acts with sobriety and calm; he plans every single detail of his crimes ahead and has no emotional response to his actions. On the other hand, a sociopath acts on impulse, doesn’t plan anything in advance and ignores all risks and consequences. We can see this trait represented when the protagonist hurts the cat for the first time in an impulse just because the cat wounded his hand: “The fury of a demon instantly possessed me. I knew myself no longer. (…) A more fiendish malevolence, gin-nurtured, thrilled every fibre of my frame” – p.851. He blames this action on the alcohol and even on the cat, but he doesn’t show any sign of true regret.
When he finally kills the cat, the protagonist says that he acted because of a “perverseness” that took over him and justified his acts trying to identify himself with the reader, sure that he is not the only one having this feeling: “…perverseness is one of the primitive impulses of the human heart” – p.852.
At last, we can clearly see this impulse taking over the protagonist once more when he tries to kill the new cat and, amid his rage, he found himself killing his own wife: “But this blow was arrested by the hand of my wife. Goaded, by the interference, into a rage more than demoniacal, I withdrew my arm from her gasp and buried the axe in her brain” – p.856. After killing his wife, the protagonist still did not feel any kind of real remorse and thought only about how to hide the corpse: “This hideous murder accomplished, I set myself forthwith, and with entire deliberation, to the task of concealing the body” – p.856.
To sum up, the protagonist never takes full blame of his acts, blaming either the cat or the alcohol, and shows a lack of empathy, allied with a violent behaviour and inability to feel real remorse or guilt. This clearly represents a sociopath behaviour from the protagonist.
Inês Rodrigues
KANSU EKİN TANCA
In the short story, “The Black Cat”, we can consider the protagonist as a psychopath when we analyse his language in the narrative. In the beginning, he already denies being mad, which makes us think that, he is possibly mad. (Yes, mad am I not) (p.849) When he is talking about his infancy, although he is talking about “his tenderness,” we can feel that these behaviours do not belong to a normal man (p. 850). After he identifies himself as an animal lover, he immediately admits what he does to his pets as he says “I not only neglected, but ill-used them”. (p.851). His short expressions can tell us that he is not considering what he has done, but he is just revealing the reality openly (p. 851). In addition to his direct explanations, he even uses some adjectives which do not fit with what he is talking about (““deliberately” cut one of its eyes”)(p.851). In a similar manner, his short but effective sentences proceed throughout the story. After he explains how he cuts one of the eyes of Pluto, he now uses plain sentences to describe his wife’s death. He says “She fell dead upon the spot, without a groan.” (p.867). However, the more interesting part is yet to come. He tells us his other plans in detail where he uses very negative and harsh words. Thus we read: “At one period I thought of cutting the corpse into minute fragments, and destroying them by fire (p.856). It is worth considering that he does not feel any ‘normal’ emotions about his bad actions. Moreover, when he hides the dead body of his wife in the wall, he even feels “satisfied” (p.857). In the very last sentence, he continues to tell everything as if they were his regular behaviours. He seems not to be frightened with what he has done, rather he appears to be shocked that he has finally found the cat (p.859) His actions as well as his language give us clues about his personality, and we can clearly see that he is not a normal person, and thus he can be called a psychopath.
Descreveria o narrador como um sociopata. O narrador do conto é caracterizado por um egocentrismo exacerbado, por comportamentos violentos ("I suffered myself to use intemperate language to my wife. At length, I even offered her personal violence", pág.851) , pelo desprezo das normas sociais ("to do wrong for the wrong's sake only - that urged me to continue", pág. 852), por uma falta de empatia em relação aos outros ("I grew, day by day, more moody, more irritable, more regardless of the feelings of others", pág 851) e uma impulsividade descontrolada - um "disregard" de tudo o que é tido como socialmente e eticamente correto.
Esta impulsividade leva-o ao descontrolo e a cometer crimes profundamente violentos e cruéis dos quais se gaba ("The glee at my heart was too strong to be restrained. I burned to say if but one word, by way of triumph, and to render doubly sure their assurance of my guiltness.", pág. 858) mas que são seguidos por um breve sentimento de culpa (remorsos), que o narrador expressa mesmo antes de narrar a história ("My immediate purpose is to place before the world, plainly, succinctly, and without comment, a series of household events. In their consequences, these events have terrified - have tortured - have destroyed me", pág. 849) e ao longo da narrativa ( I experienced a sentiment, half of horror, half of remorse, for the crime of which I had been guity;", pág.851).
Importante referir que o transtorno de personalidade antissocial (psicopatia) pode advir do isolamento e da negligencia durante o período de infância, algo pelo qual o narrador não passou ("From my infancy I was noted for the docility and humanity of my disposition. My tenderness of heart was even so conspicuous as to make me the jest of my companions", pág. 850).
Esta mudança drástica de comportamento surgiu gradualmente já em idade adulta "I grew, day by day, more moody, more, irritable, more regardless of the feelings of others." pág. 851) atingindo um estado de "despersonalização" (depersonalization) e "irreconhecimento" de si próprio ("I knew myself no longer", pág. 851).
Post a Comment