Abstract / Darwin’s Influence on Montgomery
Critical analysis of Anne of Green Gables and The Blue Castle provides evidence that L.M. Montgomery harnesses her knowledge and understanding of scientific theory, in particular Isaac Newton’s laws of inertial motion, which is the basis for Albert Einstein’s relativity theory. In a letter dated 29 September 1920, she queries her correspondent, “What do you think about Einstein’s astounding discovery of the real nature of light? Or do you think about it at all? It is a rather fatiguing subject for thought. It is said there are only two men in the world who understand it. It is a curious thing that this revolutionary discovery should come just when everything else that made up our old world is being upset or torn to pieces. In the long run the result will probably be a wonderful era of development in every realm of thought and activity.”1 Einstein was awarded the 1921 Nobel Prize in Physics for his discovery of the photoelectric effect, thus crossing the threshold from Newton’s gravitational laws in the cosmos of the solar system to subatomic particle physics. Likewise, Charles Darwin, also influenced by Newton, amassed scientific evidence to show that biological mechanisms of adaptation and survival govern propagation of species in the natural world. Montgomery validates her knowledge of these physical sciences in depicting ways that human society inflicts unfair discriminatory beliefs and practices on individuals based on their physical differences from either the perceived or statistically documented prevailing norms in their communities. While social scientists typically study the incidence of mental illness in victims of prejudice, textual evidence indicates that Montgomery obliquely implicates perpetrators of discriminatory behavior as sufferers of mental illness. According to Health Canada (2002), discrimination may be defined as “an action or a decision that treats a person or a group badly for reasons such as their race, age or disability” and also “marital status.” Public Safety Canada (2021) describes types of social bullying, which include “making up names, name-calling, excluding, and spreading fake rumors” and defines “bullying” as “acts of intentional harm repeated over time in a relationship where an imbalance of power exists”; moreover, “victims” of “verbal name-calling and insults” can “suffer degrees of harm” and “may become depressed or suicidal or at the very least hurt and unhappy.” In contradistinction to the norm for victims of discriminatory bullying, where “victims are likely to have low self-esteem,” textual analysis reveals that Montgomery portrays self-confident protagonists who outshine their detractors. Through depictions of Anne and Valancy undergoing communal discrimination and ostracization, prejudice emerges as a dominant theme in three major ways—physical descriptions, dialogues, and narratologically sophisticated techniques such as stream-of-consciousness, interior monologues, indirect discourse, and dramatic irony—that document the discriminatory attitudes of their communities. To rephrase in Darwinian terms, the societal environment may be viewed as predatory in its behaviour towards prey whose physical appearance labels them as unacceptably different, hence inferior and contemptible, thus deserving disparagement. Anne Shirley and Valancy Jane Stirling, are targets of discrimination. Both Anne and Valancy take advantage of opportunities to prove that they possess inner fortitude, mettle, imagination, and intellectual insight, which empower them to withstand, indeed to overcome, the obstacle of prejudice. They change its repulsive energy into a positive force which ultimately allows them to achieve excellence and recognition.
Mental Health and Adaptation
Montgomery is a broad-minded novelist whose subtextual delineation of prejudice as a form of mental distress also shows that she values unusual individuals who stand out in a crowd because of their differences in physical appearance. She is deft in underscoring the importance of conformity and solidarity, which help to create a positive foundation for harmonious social relationships. In both novels, she depicts protagonists who are social outcasts and she highlights the aesthetic prioritization of difference over sameness. Her artistic credo as a literary artist harmonizes with her implicit ethical advocacy of morally supporting protagonists who are vulnerable to being rejected in their societal milieu because of anomalous physical traits that exert an impact on the way they are perceived, which, in turn, forces them to develop adaptive defence mechanisms. Thus, the traditional romantic theme of the individual versus society underscores how discrimination of anomalous traits works as a dynamic energizing force in an open society. Instead of succumbing to mental illness, Anne and Valancy develop their uniqueness by using it as leverage to strengthen their character and personality. Both novels satirically criticize an ethnographically homologous majority for intolerant behavior toward persons who are different. The protagonists prove themselves to be capable of converting their perceived shortcomings into socially acceptable manifestations reflecting moral strength of character, which have tended to be disregarded and devalued by their communities. These targets of prejudice are challenged to find ways to prove themselves in a democratic society, which is by definition built on principles of conformity and sameness, where the building blocks intertwine individual freedom and variance with dissimilarity and divergence.
Mental Health and Adaptation
Montgomery is a broad-minded novelist whose subtextual delineation of prejudice as a form of mental distress also shows that she values unusual individuals who stand out in a crowd because of their differences in physical appearance. She is deft in underscoring the importance of conformity and solidarity, which help to create a positive foundation for harmonious social relationships. In both novels, she depicts protagonists who are social outcasts and she highlights the aesthetic prioritization of difference over sameness. Her artistic credo as a literary artist harmonizes with her implicit ethical advocacy of morally supporting protagonists who are vulnerable to being rejected in their societal milieu because of anomalous physical traits that exert an impact on the way they are perceived, which, in turn, forces them to develop adaptive defence mechanisms. Thus, the traditional romantic theme of the individual versus society underscores how discrimination of anomalous traits works as a dynamic energizing force in an open society. Instead of succumbing to mental illness, Anne and Valancy develop their uniqueness by using it as leverage to strengthen their character and personality. Both novels satirically criticize an ethnographically homologous majority for intolerant behavior toward persons who are different. The protagonists prove themselves to be capable of converting their perceived shortcomings into socially acceptable manifestations reflecting moral strength of character, which have tended to be disregarded and devalued by their communities. These targets of prejudice are challenged to find ways to prove themselves in a democratic society, which is by definition built on principles of conformity and sameness, where the building blocks intertwine individual freedom and variance with dissimilarity and divergence.