Assess The Character Of The Editor

`With regard to the work itself, I dare not venture a judgement, for I do not understand it. ... [I]n this day, and with the present generation, it will not go down that a man should be daily tempted by the Devil, in the semblance of a fellow-creature; and at length lured to self-destruction`. Assess the character of the Editor in The Private Memoirs and Confessions of a Justified Sinner in light of his narrative and, in particular, his attempted conclusion to the work.

-

Evans describes Hogg`s Editor as a judging character, `concerned with presenting, assessing, and evaluating` . Her position suggests that the Editor portrays factual realism, establishing the historical context of the Sinner`s narrative from a distance of a century and a half. The Editor attempts to demythologise the Sinner`s gothic sensationalism, developing representations of reason to crush the Sinner`s religious dogma. However, neither Evans nor the Editor appreciate the dichotomy of the Editor`s character. Between his conscious and subconscious self is an inability to separate realist intentions from the gothic fears of superstition.

Converging with Evans`s descri ption of the Editor, Cuddon characterises the Enlightenment as having the clarity and balance of human reasoning . Textually, the Editor appears enlightened, his narrative founded on `all I can gather of the family from history` . He establishes his conscious-character as objective and empirically led; a call for authenticity concerned only with `history, justiciary records, and tradition` (p.78). His realist`s approach to research distinguishes him from the inherent supernatural tendencies within the Sinner`s narrative. Duncan refers to an estrangement from the `naturalized system, a moral ecology` that is formed by religious faith and the Sinner`s narrative. The Editor hopes, as Pykett suggests, to assist this estrangement by `reinscrib[ing] a commonsense view of things as they are` . The Sinner`s narrative is introduced in the context of `fanaticism` (p.78) to solidify the Editor`s apparently rational hindsight; a call for realism.

Cuddon discusses two concepts for the realist genre: correspondence and coherence . The former, referring to the accumulation of data so as to know the world by `scientific enquiry` , is said to be objective. The latter is understood as `intuitive perception` of the world, or subjectivity. The Editor`s conscious-character endeavours to represent the former, refering to his narrative`s numerous sources. Through them he attempts to raise rational, pre-emptive responses to the Sinner`s narrative. Asserting the perspective of a `man of science` (p.35) to visual phenomena of light and haze, he attempts to demythologise and, as Evans suggests, judge the responses of the `uninitiated and sordid` (p.35) Sinner.

The Sinner`s religious allusions and his narrative`s supernatural elements emerge as fundamental concerns to the Editor. His conscious-character wishes to allow `every one to judge [the Sinner`s narrative] for himself` (p.78), but, at the close, any realism and objectivity are fractured by previously repressed superstitious fears. The Editor wrestles with a `curse pronounced by the writer` (p.209) which he dares not gamble against.

Freud believed that `the dread of the evil eye` was a long established superstition. In his essay on the Uncanny, he explained the familiarity of fears and superstitions as having `been estranged only by the process of repression` . The Editor`s superstition appears to inform his decision to `dare not venture a judgement` (p.209) upon the text. He is irresolute to conclude the work. He may eventually resolve to question the text as allegory, reassuring himself that the temptation of devilry is not of concern to his generation (p.210), but his credibility is diffused by his subconscious-self. Having commented upon the curse and reiterated the Sinner`s `tempt[ation] by the devil` (p.210), it is the Editor who draws the gothic tones to the fore. His objective, realist dogma cannot contain the repressed fears of his superstitious character.

These fears can be traced from the opening. The Editor establishes his narrative from `some parish registers still extant` (p.3) having, it is inferred, discarded other registers and potential archives of importance. Consciously selective, he seems keen to support only his version of the available history. Docherty proposes that this was the aim of the Enlightenment, to emancipate humans from myth and superstition by employing `critical reason` . For the Editor, his selectivity reinforces the opposite ideal: an inability to release himself, and by extension the Victorian age, from superstition.

Key to the Editor`s attempt at realism then is his euphemistic rendering of the pre-existing mythology of `at least four counties of Scotland` (p.3) as tradition. This linguistic conversion is meant to symbiotically strengthen pre-existing myth and lend credence to the Editor`s claims: here those myths are set down in print. However, in veiling terms such as myth or folklore, whilst relying upon them as a foundation, the Editor reveals his weakness of character. He cannot rationalise the gothic, thus allowing it to bleed through his proposed reality.

This is no more apparent than in his refusal to engage with the Sinner`s character. Botting argues that the Editor`s narrative comprises one part of a psychological exploration into `mental deterioration` . Yet, in the Editor`s narrative the Sinner is as `an onlooker` (p.19) upon the lives of others. A mere cipher of antagonism whose thoughts and feelings remain masked. There can be no exploration because the Editor refuses to engage beyond guessed intentions, supposing only `seemed determin[ation]` (p.19). The Sinner`s habits, in hounding his brother, are restricted by the subjective viewpoints of those others. The `active disposition` (p.34) of George Colwan, for example, is unravelled by the Editor in terms of what `he perceived... beheld... [and] admire[d]` (pp.34-35). His feelings and intentions conjure sympathy and understanding. The Sinner is rendered only externally as `devilish-looking` (p.20) and prevented from developing beyond a `shadow` (p.20). Held at a distance the Sinner remains impossible to identify with, while other characters are explored internally.

Botting`s position fails to recognise that while the Editor distinguishes between religious fanaticism and the secular, his mystification of the Sinner is not an alternative view of the Sinner`s sanity. Rather than an attempt at empathic reasoning, the Editor dehumanises the Sinner, confounding realism and his own expectation of a definable truth. The Sinner is transformed into something supernatural, something mythical. In the Editor`s narrative he becomes a representation of the devil. This is problematic from a realist perspective and for the Editor`s conscious character.

The construction of the Editor`s antithetical leanings towards the Sinner and his ideology are ultimately revealed to be myths. The Editor relies upon multiple viewpoints to create an allegedly detached narrative, whilst relying upon dramatic scenes depicting in-depth character dialogue. The private, intricate details of the wedding night between the Laird and Rabina (pp.6-9), for example, are evoked dramatically. Neither historical nor gleaned from justiciary records, they should not, in light of the Editor`s century and a half`s distance, be extant. The judgement the Editor purports to `dare not venture` (p.209) is intricately weaved throughout as a subtle tool of propaganda, generating distrust and bad sentiment towards the `greatest fool... wretch... religious maniac... deluded creature` (p.210). Nowhere is this judgement concerned with the realist objectivity Evans prescribes to the Editor. This is not `presenting, assessing, and evaluating` , but rather subjective reasoning founded upon myth.

Vattimo reasons that through the revelation of truth as myth, `myth regains legitimacy` . Coupe expands this reversal in reference to euhemerism and the `deifying [of myths] as historical figures` . The Editor`s fear of the curse, his false notions of the power in the Sinner`s tale and the effect it has on the other characters are amplified by his understanding of its being an established myth in the consciousness of four counties. The Editor elevates the Sinner, validating him and his story as much as he denigrates the questionable doctrine to which the Sinner prescribes. Once myth, the Sinner, his story and the devil have become tradition.

The objectivity assured by the Editor`s original claims is merely an attempt to conceal the subjective construction of his narrative. It might represent his call for realism, which Coupe considers is a commitment `to the notion of an essential truth` , but for realism to work the fantastical must be eschewed. Rabkin theorises that the fantastic is the contradiction of perspectives, signalled by astonishment in a person or persons . Without that reaction of astonishment, the fantastic becomes commonplace, expected and familiar. This realises a reversal in the texts as, on this understanding, it is not the Sinner whose narrative is gothic, for he is not astonished by supposedly supernatural elements.

The Sinner accepts his ignorance of the language in Gil-Martin`s Bible without question (p.103), consenting to his friendship and acknowledging without fear or astonishment Gil-Martin`s predilection for transmogrification (p.108). His reactions to biblical veils beholding `golden weapons` (p.114) and ladies `robed in white` (p.130) are resolved in piety rather than shock and bewilderment. Finally, as the Sinner perceives both Gil-Martin and the authorities closing in on him, he depicts `persons at the door` (p.185), refers to a `darkling intruder` (p.186) and though `terror prevailing` (p.187) and how horrible their `monsterous shapes` (p.192), not once does he identify his assailants in any gothic terms as monsters or devils. They are grounded as `assailants` (p.192).

The Editor, by contrast, embraces the gothic. His subconscious-character never concludes the origins or purposes of the supernatural. Emotionally engaged with curses and the subject matter of myths, in spite of the Editor`s assertions of the scientific basis for the `terrestrial phenomenon... [of] "The little wee ghost of the rainbow"` (p.35), his rationality is very quickly scattered. Both George and the Editor engage with Rabkin`s theory of astonishment and the fantastic. They gaze upon the `horrible monster... [a] giant apparition` (p.36) conceiving, in the free indirect discourse they share, `some horrid demon` (p.36). Stirred up with the Editor`s bias and emotionally charged response to the curse and the Sinner`s version of events, the supernatural remains intangible and instinctively feared. Dehumanised by the Editor`s fears, the Sinner and the gothic are amplified.

Thomson reflects on the narratives` lasting impressions `of an expansive evil unleashed by a diseased soul` . Were the Editor unconflicted and concerned only with the realist`s perspective, this should not be the case. A dominant conscious-character would definitively conclude the allegorical nature of the Sinner`s narrative without fear of the curse. The Editor cannot assert the position of the truly enlightened man. His superstitious mind grants admission to the `extraordinary... [and] unprecedented` (p.198), which he deems `out of the common course of human events` (p.198). His complacency of character prevents sound judgement in favour of mythologised fear.