2.2 Character and Literature
Character and literature are two things that can’t be seperated. It is very impossible that a literature doesn’t have a characterization. Characterization is
very important. It serves functions in a story. In a literature, characters guide readers through their stories, helping them to understand plots, and ponder
themes. Quoted from Peck 1988: 105 says, “character. The people in a novel are
referred to as characters. We asses them on the basis of what the author tells us about them and on the basis of what they do and say. This is important: we must
avoid loose conjecture about a character and establish everything from the evidence of the text. Another point to remember is that the characters are part of a
broader pattern: they are members of society, and the author’s distinctive view of how people relate to society will be reflected in the presentation of every chapter.
Details are not included just for their own sake but relate to the overall pattern of the novel.”
Rene Wellek and Austin Warren have two approaches of literature. They are intrinsic and extrinsic approach. Intrinsic approach analyzes a literary work by
based on the text and structural points of literary work, such as: characters, plot, setting, style, point of view, theme., while extrinsic approach analyzes the relation
between the story of the work itself with psychology, religion, history, biography, etc. Hence, a characterization always present in a literature. it is in the literature
itself. While M.H. Abrams in his book The Mirror and The Lamp divided the
literary research in to four approach. They are expressive approach, objective
Universitas Sumatera Utara
approach, mimetic approach, pragmatic approach. Expressive approach views a work as an expression of the individuality of the author. Objective approach
focuses on the intrinsic qualities of literary work. Mimetic approach judges the literary work based in terms of the “truth” of its representation of the reality of the
world and human life and a character. While pragmatic approach focuses on a literary work as something designed to produce emotional or moral responses in
the reader, and on how those effects are produced. As quoted from http:www.beholdmyswarthyface.com200805notes.on-mh-abramss-essay-
orientation.html says that the first category of mimetic theories forms the oldest
and is, according to Abrams, the “most primitive” of the four categories. According to this theory, the artist is an imitator of aspects of the observable
universe. In The Republic, Plato divides his universe into three realms: the realm of ideas, the realm of particulars, and the realm of reflections of particulars i.e.,
art and other shadows. The realm of reflections of particulars is the furthest removed from the realm of ideas i.e., ultimate truth, and is therefore the lowest
ranking of the three realms. Consequently, its practice, namely, mimetic art, is held in low regard.
The second type of theories are pragmatic theories, which are concerned with the relation between text and audience. According to Abrams, these theories
have constituted the dominant mode of analysis from Horace to the early 19th century, and much of its terminology is borrowed from ancient rhetoric.
New “expressive view” of art, the primary duty of the artist was no longer to serve as a mirror reflecting outer things, but instead to externalize the internal,
and make ones “inner life” the primary subject of art. The external world, when it
Universitas Sumatera Utara
does happen to sneak into the work, is expressed only as heavily filtered noumena. It is around this time in the early 19th century that the “mirror,” which
had hitherto been the conventional symbol for the artist, becomes the “lamp.” Proponents of this theory trace its origins to the central section of
Aristotle’s Poetics, where tragedy is regarded as an object in itself, and where the works internal elements plot, character, thought, diction, melody and spectacle,
in order of importance are described as working together in perfect unison to produce in the audience a “catharsis” of pity and fear. The important point, the
objective theorists point out, is that these qualities are treated by Aristotle as inherent in the work itself, and that the work is praised to the extent that these
internal elements work together cohesively. Still, some might counter that Aristotle’s Poetics, with its careful attention paid to the effect produced upon the
audience, in fact more closely fits the criteria of the pragmatic theories than of the objective theories.
Analyzing this thesis, the writer uses objective approach. Objective approach focussing on the intrinsic qualities of literary work itself, it’s language,
form, and devices will help the writer in analyzing the transformation of Celie’s character as one of the aspect in intrinsic theory.
Grebstein in his book perspectives in contemporary criticism tells that the idea in a literary work is as important as the form of the work itself and the
writing technique, besides the form and the technique is defined by the idea itself. There is no great work created by the shallow idea. It means that the style of
writing in the novel The Color Purple has the relationship with the purpose of the writer to show us about the character inside.
Universitas Sumatera Utara
Grebstein theory helps the writer to understand the character described by the authour clearly by seeing how the style of writing of the author through hisher
work. Andrews 2001 : 414 states, “Written in epistolary form, Walkers third novel exposses the internal turmoil parenting the spiritual decay of African
American woman who, like the novel’s protagonist, silently endure abusive male- dominated relationships.” In the novel, Alice Walker as an author seems to
convey something to the reader about the characters inside by her style of writing.
2.3 Character and Society
Kategori