A Simple Analysis of Reasons for Grotesques’Speechlessness in Winesburg,Ohio

A Simple Analysis of Reasons for Grotesques’Speechlessness in

Winesburg，Ohio

【Abstract】It could be found，by sight of the tragic fate of the characters in Winesburg，Ohio，that each story is actually a tragedy of speechlessness，and the discourse itself is responsible，whose failure eventually led to the failure of human communication.Sherwood Anderson，with the insight of a great artist，depicts a lonely and isolated world of “grotesques”. I endeavor to explore the abundant intention starting with the failure of discourse.

【Key words】Winesburg；Ohio failure of speech；Speechlessness

【摘要】透视《小镇畸人》中人物的悲剧命运，我们发现，每一个故事其实都是一出失语悲剧，其罪魁祸首是话语本身，话语的失败最终导致了人类沟通的失败。舍伍德·安德森凭借一个伟大艺术家的深刻洞察力，刻画出一个个孤立隔绝的“畸人”世界。本人从话语失败入手探析作品的丰富内涵。

【关键词】小镇畸人；话语失败；失语

Winesburg，Ohio，a well-known masterpiece by Sherwood Anderson，is a work in which he has well expressed the concern over human state in modem society. With a collection of twenty-five short stories，Anderson has depicted a group of grotesques who hunger for mutual understanding and communication but end up in loneliness and isolation.Loneliness，like an invisible wall，completely isolated the grotesques from the surrounding environment and the society，even from their own family，and due to the wall，they could enjoy neither understanding nor caring.

The most overwhelming desire and irresistible impulse of grotesques are to break these “walls” and to establish spiritual communication with the people around.Therefore，they had recourse to the discourse，whose chief function is to exchange information and communicate ideas-as it were，discourse is the major bridge between human minds. However，this is precisely where the problem arises，because discourse is broken，meaningless，and cannot convey feeling and ideas integrally. Even，to some degree，they express ideas and feelings for grotesques，but with no understanding of the audience，these attempts would end in misunderstanding.We cannot help but be shocked at the disastrous consequences human communication takes due to failure of discourse，touched by struggles the grotesques made，and sigh with regret when they encounter failure.

1.Meaninglessness of Discourse

Sherwood Anderson explains the meaninglessness of discourse through the

discourse language of the characters as well as their attitude toward discourse language.“The meaninglessness of discourse” is not absolute；it is not to say discourse thoroughly bears no meaning，but that discourse hasn’t any specific meaning to be publicly accepted. On one hand，some characters in Winesburg，Ohio eager to express themselves and knowing exactly what to express，couldn’t speak the right language. On the other hand，the discourse of characters is so disjointed that it neither was the inevitable result of the plot，nor made their voices heard under certain circumstances.After she got married，Louise spared no efforts to make her husband understand “the vague and intangible hunger that had led to the writing of the note and that was still unsatisfied”（64），but came to nothing once and twice and again.“Filled with his own notions of love between men and women”，John did not “listen but began to kiss her upon the lips”（64）. The affliction of Louise lied in the distortion of real intentions.

Discourse is deceptive. As Dunne points out，“any attemp t to do so would make it into all imitable formula that would make it susceptible to becoming either misunderstood，manipulated or appropriated as another means of passing judgment on others” （Robert Dunne，2005：106）. Both Louise Bentley and Louise Trunnion sacrificed their love for better understanding and sympathy from others. In a sense，they placed their love on the altar of discourse. The experiences of these two women could be regarded as the epitome of struggles between human and the destructiveness of discourse to establish communication and understanding.

3.Conclusion

Almost all the characters in Winesburg，Ohio attempted to approach George Willard with the same purpose-to warn this growing young man of incredibility of discourse. Among those，Kate Swift made it the plainest. She informed George straightforwardly，“If you are to become a writer you’ll have to stop fooling with words…… I don’t want to frighten you，but I would like to make you understand the import of what you think of attempting. You must not become a mere peddler of words. The thing to learn is to know what people are thinking about，not what they say.”（121）

Distinctly，there is an unbridgeable chasm between discourse and human mind. Discourse，if not completely pointless，at least is hard to reflect the real thought of people. “Words，” as the American writer Paula Fox has said，“are nets through which all truths escapes.” Grotesques in Winesburg are victims of what Dunne called “a betrayal of language’s failure to provide a sustain ed meaning for them” （Robert Dunne，2005：15）. Meanwhile，we should point out that there is the unbridgeable chasm between the discourse and human mind not because people frequently concealed own ideas and views for a variety of purposes and motivations in real life. The opposite is true in Winesburg，Ohio，the greatest wish and the most urgent need of grotesques was to make their own ideas and views understood. As Anderson stated