Vail Hall
Professor Hague
English 370
December 7, 2013
Book V: Accident or Intention
By: Vail Hall
Book V
of The Ring and Book, by Robert
Browning stands out amongst other
chapters of the book because it is the first time the “villain”, Guido
Franceschini, speaks recalling the accounts of several terrible murders he had carried
out. This chapter doesn’t stand out just because of its vitality to the plot
but also as another classic Robert Browning dramatic monologue. Browning’s
dramatic monologues have intrigued many scholars of Victorian literature but it
is what one of these scholars, Robert Langbaum wrote in his critical essay ”The
Dramatic Monologue: Sympathy vs. Judgment”
that I chose to reference. The idea Langbaum purposed in his essay I
believe is a much more accurate depiction of how Guido Franceschini relates to
his listeners and the reader than that which Michael Yetman suggests in his
essay about Book V “”Count Guido Franceschini”: The Villain as Artist in The Ring and the Book”. Yetman advocates his idea that it is Guido in
Book V who is the artist of his illusive and persuasive character and not
Browning, who was not conscious of how he created Guido’s character. Robert
Browning had written many dramatic monologues prior to writing and publishing The Ring and the Book. There are many
accounts in Browning’s other dramatic monologues that coincide with what
Langbaum purposed in his essay. Its these many other examples and Book V’s similarities
to those examples that leads me to believe Langbaum’s theory is correct and
that Yetman is in fact mistaken in his theory. I would argue that Book V is
another well-crafted dramatic monologue that applies the idea of sympathy
versus judgment that Langbaum discusses and that it is not as Yetman says, a
piece developed by Guido’s self-manifestation as an artist separate and hidden
from Browning.
Both
Yetman and Langbaum’s essays present an idea that some effect is being created
between speaker and audience including reader and fictitious listener
alike. Yetman and Langbaum seem to agree
on the fact that this effect has some persuasive manner to it. In Yetman’s
theory this persuasion is the heart of the argument, he claims that Guido and
not Browning is fully aware of the illusions he is trying to create in attempt
to persuade his audience to take his accounts of the murder as truth. Langbaum‘s theory also suggest the idea of
persuading the audience. The difference lies in Langbaum stating that Browning
is the mastermind behind the persuasiveness that the speaker has. Browning uses
this to develop the effect of conflict for the audience between sympathizing
and questioning the morals of the speaker. Although Yetman and Langbaum both
agree that the main purpose of the dramatic monologue of Book V is to persuade
the audience to coincide with the speakers ideology they disagree with how and
who creates persuasion.
“And it
is Guido as artist, as manipulator of words who creates a fiction, not as
Browning’s character but as his own controlled creation” (1094) and is Yetman’s
main point in his essay “”Count Guido Franceschini”: The Villain as Artist in
The Ring and the Book” is that Guido should be regarded as an artist and that
he is responsible for the effect of persuasion not Browning. Guido as seen by
Yetman is a master of illusion. He says Guido utilizes several different
resources to achieve his illusive persuasion. These resources include an
extensive knowledge of literature, the bible, and common marital issues. Yetman
sees Guido as having an understanding of the resources that will persuade his
audience and not Browning.
Guido, as
Yetman claims, “is positively fecund in his ability to suggest literary
analogues to the adulterous affair.” (1095) For these literary works “Guido invokes
the names of Plautus, Terence, and Boccaccio” (1095). The works of these
playwrights and poets often included comedies of spousal conflicts. The
conflicts centered on the idea of a love triangle that consists of an
adulterous wife, her lover, and the poor foolish husband. Yetman says Guido knowingly refers to these
authors and the current popularity of the comedies and the idea of a love
triangle. Sympathy of the commonly known struggle of the foolish husband in a
love triangle is what Guido wants, he attempts to portray himself as the poor
foolish husband. As Yetman said, Guido “…anticipated sympathy of his audience
coming from his assumption of the role of the wronged husband in the triangle.”
(1094)
Another
resource Yetman says Guido uses is the Bible. The person who has the power to choose
Guido’s sentence, the Pope, is of high priority to Guido to try and persuade.
Guido realizes this and makes many references to the bible, often comparing
himself to biblical characters. Yetman claims this is Guido’s attempt to
persuade the Pope. He said that Guido depicts himself in one case to be the
Good Shepherd of the bible and that he “at least tried to protect the lamb,
Pompilla, from the wolf, Caponsacchi.” (1095) Trying to create the illusion for
the pope that he is the protector of the lamp, Pompilla, by murdering her and
her lover. Murdering both Pompilla and Caponsacchi according to the illusion
that Guido tries to craft was the only way he could fulfill his duty as the
Good Shepherd and protect the lamb, Pompilla.
Yetman
argued that the illusive ideas of the love triangle, and Biblical references
used to create sympathy were not Browning’s. Instead they came from Guido Franceschini
the character that Browning created. According
to Yetman the reader should perceive Guido as an individual artist free of
control from his creator. I agree with Yetman that Guido should be perceived as
an artist but instead of being separate from Browning is actually an
intentional product of his. Langbaum’s idea as I said before I think is much
more fitting in the case of Book V. Browning is who is responsible for the
sympathy crafted amongst the audience.
Now I
would like to look closer at Robert Langbaum’s essay, The Dramatic Monologue: Sympathy vs. Judgment. The essay begins
with Langbaum saying that we must not, as the reader of a dramatic monologue, concern
ourselves so much with objective criteria but with the intended effects of a
speaker with a silent audience. When we focus on the objective criteria
Langbaum says “…we must abandon the exclusive concern with objective criteria…”
(525 RBP).The intended effect that the author, Robert Browning, is responsible
for is what Langbaum refers to as sympathy versus judgment. What Langbaum is
saying is that Browning creates the speaker to have a certain manner about them
that convinces the audience to sympathize despite the speaker’s immorality. Many
of Browning’s speakers are villains of some sort. They always present an
immoral act or thought to their audience as if it is clearly justifiable.
Throughout
his essay Langbaum continuously uses Browning’s dramatic monologue “My Last
Duchess” as an example of his ideas. In “My Last Duchess” a Duke is speaking to an envoy about his previous duchess who he
had put to death out of jealousy. Langbaum says that as the reader we find
“…that we even identify ourselves with him. (the duke)” (528 RBP). Browning,
according to Langbaum, utilizes both common feelings such as jealousy and an
artful creation of a confident and affable speaker to pull his reader’s into an
internal conflict. The Duke is a great example of a malevolent character that
somehow has a demeanor that is found agreeable to the reader. Langbaum says
that it is not the duke’s wickedness that is so intriguing to the reader but
rather “…his immense attractiveness.” (529 RBP) It is due to our admiration of
the duke’s power and superiority that we suspend temporarily judgment upon him
and indulge in sharing the feeling of superiority. The reader, Langbaum says, does eventually
recall the wicked accounts of the speaker and thus becomes involved in an
internal conflict of sympathy versus judgment. “Moral Judgment is in fact
important as the thing to be suspended, as a measure of the price we pay…” (529
RBP) to sympathize with the speaker.
Robert
Langbaum’s theory of sympathy versus judgment can be applied to many of Robert
Browning’s dramatic monologues. In ”Prophyria’s Lover” the speaker is overwhelmed by lust and strangles his lover with
her own hair. Here the feeling of lust is one that the reader can relate to and
thus sympathize with the speaker when he wishes to never let go of it. Power
also plays a role in creating sympathy because it is a common desire to try and
hold on to a feeling like lust as long as possible. Once again judgment of the
act of murder is at play and creates conflict. Another example would be “The
Laboratory” where the speaker wishes
to poison the other girls who have romantic relations with her lover. Jealousy
much like with the duke is emotion that drives the speaker and also pulls in
the reader to understanding why the speaker would want to commit murder. The
poison gives the speaker great feeling of power that the reader also feels as
they listen to the speaker speak of how easy she could kill her enemies. All
these examples fit well into Langbaum’s theory of sympathy versus judgment. I
believe that Book V is also fitting.
Guido
Franceschini in Book V is on trial in front of the Pope trying to appeal his
original sentence to death. Being convicted of the murder of his wife, her
lover, and her family. This immoral act was attempted to appear justifiable to
the Pope and others including the reader through an elusive account of the
murder and events leading to it. Browning’s character Guido, the speaker, like
many of Browning’s speakers is equipped with feelings such as jealousy, anger,
and a desire to control.
I am irremediably beaten here,--
The gross illiterate vulgar couple,--bah!
Why they have measured forces, mastered mine,
Made me their spoil and prey from first to last.
(1393-1396 pg. 285)
In these
lines Guido talks of his wife’s parents and how they used him for his wealth. The
emotions of jealousy and particularly anger are very apparent. These feelings
are what is used to attempt to create sympathy amongst the listeners and
reader. The reader and listener can sympathize with Guido because his wife was
unfaithful and her parents were greedy and only wanted his money. Feelings of
extreme jealousy and anger are well understood and expected for a husband in
that position. Does the terrible act of being unfaithful to your husband
justify murder? Most would say no like we discover the Pope does when he
sentences Guido to death again. Guido much like many of Browning’s speakers can
be very convincing due to his meticulous, obsessive, and seemingly insane
attempt to convince his audience otherwise. It is Browning’s expertise in
crafting characters who are so cunning, obsessive, and exceptionally persuasive
that can sway the reader. Browning is so talented at creating such a character
he can convince readers to sympathize with speakers who committed acts that are
clearly immoral. He did the same in Book V with his character, Count Guido, but
one difference is apparent. Browning made it so Guido was aware of his own
efforts to try and persuade his audience.
The speakers of all of Browning’s
other dramatic monologues that fall into the category of sympathy versus
judgment are not at all aware of their persuasive power. Guido is made by
Browning to be completely aware of his ability to try and persuade his
audience. I don’t believe that because Guido was aware of himself trying to
make his audience see eye to eye with him means that he is separate from
Browning as Yetman claims. I say this because overall the same effect of
sympathy versus judgment is presented to both the listener in the poem and the
reader. Even though it is known amongst the audience that Guido’s appeal is one
that he crafted to be exaggerated and illusive but sympathy for him is still
generated because his feelings of anger, and jealousy are very much relatable. Browning
intended this effect to take place in the dramatic monologue of Book V. Although
Count Guido is different from many of the other speakers in Browning’s dramatic
monologues he is still a product of Browning’s with the same purpose as the
speakers in the other pieces. That purpose is to rouse the reader with a
conflict between sympathy and judgment.
Book V can be interpreted more or less with
the perspective of either Michael Yetman or Robert Langbaum. I believe that as
the reader more can be understood about Robert Browning and his character Count
Guido through Langbaum’s viewpoint. According to Yetman Count Guido was not
deliberately designed by Browning as an artist of illusion and persuasion but
rather created by accident this way. Yetman recognizes that Guido is different
from Browning’s usual speaker in that he is aware of his sly ways. This
realization lead Yetman to believe that Browning did not strategically design
Guido as he is. Yetman may very well be correct. I however believe that
Langbaum’s theory that Browning deliberately designs his speakers to produce the
effect of sympathy versus judgment can be functional in Book V. Although Count Guido differs slightly from
other speakers of Browning’s work his character still has many of the main
qualities that are necessary to yield sympathy from the reader. These qualities
include Guido’s extreme jealousy of Caponsacchi, his wife’s lover, and anger
toward all his victims which were his wife, her parents, and Caponsacchi. These
emotions are key to the sympathy versus judgment effect because it is because
of how relatable these emotions are that sympathizing with the speaker is even
possible. The other important aspect to sympathy versus judgment is the
speaker’s power. This power can come in many forms such as superior class,
wealth, strength, or intelligence. Intelligence is the power that Guido holds
with his extensive knowledge of literature, religion, and people. Sympathy
toward Guido is achieved in Book V through Guido’s relatable emotions and his
desirable intellect. The judgment of course comes into the playing field when
the reader remembers the act that Count Guido is on trial for. By seeing Book V
through the lens of Langbaum’s sympathy versus judgment essay the reader can
understand in greater depth the ability of Robert Browning to incorporate the
reader into interactions with his characters in this case Count Guido
Franceschini.
Works Cited
Browning, Robert. “Book V.” The Ring and the Book. Ed. Thomas J.
Collins & Richard D. Altick. Ontario: Broadview Press Ltd., 2001. Print.
Langbaum, Robert. “The Dramatic
Monologue: Sympathy versus Judgment.” Robert
Browning’s Poetry (RBP). Ed. James Loucks and Andrew Stauffer. New York:
W.W. Nor & Company, Inc., 2007. Print.
Yetman, Michael. “Count Guido Franceschini: The
Villain as Artist in The Ring and the Book.” PMLA, Vol. 87, No. 5 (Oct., 1972),
pp 1093-1102. Print.
