Take a photo of a barcode or cover
mandysreadinglist 's review for:
The House of Mirth
by Edith Wharton
Names have been used for eons, though not always; there was a time in history when there was no linguistic need for personal names. In the modern world though, names are essential to to individual. While most people have a vague idea what their own name means, few give it much thought. Many parents will carefully select names with meaning for their children, either rooted in family tradition or bourne of carefully considered meaning. Authors treat their works similarly, putting much thought into choosing names of characters, in the hopes of expressing traits or habits of the character by deciding on a name that epitomizes that character themselves.
The study of names is called onomastics, a field which touches on linguistics, history, anthropology, psychology, sociology, philology and much more. When referring to the "meaning of a name" however, they are most likely referring to the etymology, which is the original literal meaning. The Oxford English Dictionary defines etymology as “the study of the origin of words and the way in which their meanings have changed throughout history”.
The development of character identity is essential to understanding individual motive; It has been suggested that, often, authors will select names for characters that will reflect actual traits of or decisions made by the character themselves. This not only adds meaning to the work of literature but adds an element of realism to the characters.
Names are universal in human language; according to Alego, proper names were the “original kind of word, due to an uncritical acceptance of a romantic view of the savage as a simple, uncomplex soul, given to concrete thinking [...]” (11, Alego). At one time anthropologists thought that certain peoples were so "primitive and unorganized” (Feldman) that they didn't even use names. However, as time passed and cultures evolved, language was created in order to prescribe meaning to the world around us. As names eventually became a standard way to identify ourselves and others, names have been passed down through family lineage as a form of respect for the individuals who have bore the name; but in writing there is no lineage to base characters on. In literature, it is the authors’ responsibility to craft a name worthy of the character they have brought to life. In literature, a name can mean everything.
The historical debate between naturalists, who see the name as revelatory of the thing named, and conventionalists, who believe the name as an arbitrary designation, has continued through the centuries and is still very much alive today. Alego has suggested names to be “without signification” (53, Alego), meaningless marks by which one thing is distinguished from another. On the other hand, Alego also purports that it would be “contrary to man’s nature to name the objects of his thoughts by sounds which conveyed no meaning to him or others” (58, Alego). In this regard, it can be maintained that, if only based on the meaning within man’s own mind, there is still meaning behind the selection of names, either for people or for things.
It has been suggested by Shook that “some names resulted from considerable thought, while others came about in a more casual fashion” (xi, Shook). While some names are chosen deliberately and with much fanfare, others come about almost by accident. In an essay written by Cather, she asserts that the writer “accepts, rather than chooses” the theme of material, suggesting that one will instinctively choose character names rather than purposefully. But, even when naming is in some sense “instinctual” (11, Alego), there is no reason to expect we can ever identify the “instinct” that underlies it. Feeling can be reason enough to capture and create valuable meaning.
It is implied that “names simply refer to their referents [...] indirectly, by specifying a condition which their referent uniquely satisfies.” (1, Hughes). For example, in Edith Wharton’s House of Mirth, character Lily Bart throughout the novel embodies a physical appearance comparable to the lily flower as well as a countenance that parallels the traditional meaning of the lily flower. The Lily flower has for centuries been a symbol of innocence, purity, and beauty, dating back to the Victorian language of flowers. In the novel, Lily is "naturally fitted to dominate any situation in which she [finds] herself" (Wharton, 69). This adaptability is a key part of her; Wharton writes that Lily is “a pliable substance [that] is less easy to break than a stiff one," and "inwardly as malleable as wax" (Wharton). Wharton is right to point out that Lily's floral adaptability can also be read as fickleness, which explains why she "works like a slave preparing the ground and sowing her seed; but the day she ought to be reaping the harvest she over-sleeps herself or goes off on a picnic" (Wharton). Like the character Percy's rare Americana, and like the flower, Lily, too, is a rare object to be collected, admired, and publicly displayed. Every man in the novel – even Selden – at one point or another views her as a nice decoration for his social mantelpiece. As early on as the first line, Lily realizes that she is "no more account among [her social circle] than an expensive toy in the hands of a spoiled child" (Wharton). Even at the end of the novel, when Simon has morphed into a likeable, kind man, he still offers to save Lily on account of her value as an object, akin to a delicate flower. Throughout the entire novel there are parallels to be drawn between the Lily flower and the character of Lily herself, indicating that Wharton purposefully chose such a name and deliberately wrote the character as an extension of the flower itself.
The study of names is called onomastics, a field which touches on linguistics, history, anthropology, psychology, sociology, philology and much more. When referring to the "meaning of a name" however, they are most likely referring to the etymology, which is the original literal meaning. The Oxford English Dictionary defines etymology as “the study of the origin of words and the way in which their meanings have changed throughout history”.
The development of character identity is essential to understanding individual motive; It has been suggested that, often, authors will select names for characters that will reflect actual traits of or decisions made by the character themselves. This not only adds meaning to the work of literature but adds an element of realism to the characters.
Names are universal in human language; according to Alego, proper names were the “original kind of word, due to an uncritical acceptance of a romantic view of the savage as a simple, uncomplex soul, given to concrete thinking [...]” (11, Alego). At one time anthropologists thought that certain peoples were so "primitive and unorganized” (Feldman) that they didn't even use names. However, as time passed and cultures evolved, language was created in order to prescribe meaning to the world around us. As names eventually became a standard way to identify ourselves and others, names have been passed down through family lineage as a form of respect for the individuals who have bore the name; but in writing there is no lineage to base characters on. In literature, it is the authors’ responsibility to craft a name worthy of the character they have brought to life. In literature, a name can mean everything.
The historical debate between naturalists, who see the name as revelatory of the thing named, and conventionalists, who believe the name as an arbitrary designation, has continued through the centuries and is still very much alive today. Alego has suggested names to be “without signification” (53, Alego), meaningless marks by which one thing is distinguished from another. On the other hand, Alego also purports that it would be “contrary to man’s nature to name the objects of his thoughts by sounds which conveyed no meaning to him or others” (58, Alego). In this regard, it can be maintained that, if only based on the meaning within man’s own mind, there is still meaning behind the selection of names, either for people or for things.
It has been suggested by Shook that “some names resulted from considerable thought, while others came about in a more casual fashion” (xi, Shook). While some names are chosen deliberately and with much fanfare, others come about almost by accident. In an essay written by Cather, she asserts that the writer “accepts, rather than chooses” the theme of material, suggesting that one will instinctively choose character names rather than purposefully. But, even when naming is in some sense “instinctual” (11, Alego), there is no reason to expect we can ever identify the “instinct” that underlies it. Feeling can be reason enough to capture and create valuable meaning.
It is implied that “names simply refer to their referents [...] indirectly, by specifying a condition which their referent uniquely satisfies.” (1, Hughes). For example, in Edith Wharton’s House of Mirth, character Lily Bart throughout the novel embodies a physical appearance comparable to the lily flower as well as a countenance that parallels the traditional meaning of the lily flower. The Lily flower has for centuries been a symbol of innocence, purity, and beauty, dating back to the Victorian language of flowers. In the novel, Lily is "naturally fitted to dominate any situation in which she [finds] herself" (Wharton, 69). This adaptability is a key part of her; Wharton writes that Lily is “a pliable substance [that] is less easy to break than a stiff one," and "inwardly as malleable as wax" (Wharton). Wharton is right to point out that Lily's floral adaptability can also be read as fickleness, which explains why she "works like a slave preparing the ground and sowing her seed; but the day she ought to be reaping the harvest she over-sleeps herself or goes off on a picnic" (Wharton). Like the character Percy's rare Americana, and like the flower, Lily, too, is a rare object to be collected, admired, and publicly displayed. Every man in the novel – even Selden – at one point or another views her as a nice decoration for his social mantelpiece. As early on as the first line, Lily realizes that she is "no more account among [her social circle] than an expensive toy in the hands of a spoiled child" (Wharton). Even at the end of the novel, when Simon has morphed into a likeable, kind man, he still offers to save Lily on account of her value as an object, akin to a delicate flower. Throughout the entire novel there are parallels to be drawn between the Lily flower and the character of Lily herself, indicating that Wharton purposefully chose such a name and deliberately wrote the character as an extension of the flower itself.