When assessing Samuel Fisher Dodson’s essay, “Frozen Hell: Edith Whatron’s Tragic Offering,” Edith Wharton’s novella, Ethan Frome, is characterized as a modern tragedy. Once Dodson gives the reader his view on the traits of a modern tragedy, he dissects Ethan’s persona and situation to define the novella as a modern tragedy.
Dodson defines modern tragedy through an understanding of the connection between tragedy as a genre and the real world. Dodson says in the article that, “The modern world contains only real people who make mistakes, suffer, and die or endure. The degree of suffering is not necessarily in just proportion to their mistakes and, from this discrepancy, tragedy arises” (309). Ethan Frome is a good man who does not deserve his fate, according to Dodson. This puts Ethan Frome’s story in a “real world” light. Dodson then connections this “real world” story to the genre of tragedy to consider it a modern tragedy.
Dodson uses the ideas of the ancient philosopher Aristotle and Marilyn Jones Lyde to deduce his own ideas on modern tragedy. At first, Dodson’s refutes Aristotle’s views on the workings of a tragedy by arguing that Greek civilizations, with their gods and rigid class structure, do not reflect modern day. Dodson says that modern democracy replaces Aristotle’s tragic hero with the “modern hero who is elevated internally instead of externally,” (309). Reading further into the article, Dodson then gives evidence that approves Aristotle’s ideas on tragedy and relates them to modern tragedy. Aristotle’s four main character traits and strong moral ethics of a protagonist pertain to Dodson’s modern tragic protagonist. Dodson and Aristotle also reach a consensus that the tragic character must have a hamartia, or tragic flaw, that is the cause of the disaster. For a work to be considered a modern tragedy, the two agree that there must be an emotional reaction due to the empathy that the reader or viewer experiences as a result of the disaster. The strength of the feelings produced by the disaster determines the modern tragedy’s quality.
Then Dodson introduces the three points that define a modern tragedy to Marilyn Jones. Her first point states that a modern tragedy must have a great force, alias fate. Dodson writes that this point strays from his idea of modern tragedy because he believes that the protagonist must have free will. As an example, Dodson refers to the Grecian tragedy’s protagonist, Oedipus, who was never forced to commit any act of murder, but chose to commit the acts himself. According to Dodson, Jones’ second point of a “universal significance” (qtd. in Dodson 310) follows suit with Aristotle’s ideas on tragedy. Her third point of absolute truthfulness suggests that a truthful character’s fate is credible. Upon reading this essay, it is apparent that Dodson uses the ideas from both sources to form his definition of modern tragedy, but it is defendable to say that Dodson agrees more with Aristotle’s view.
Before fully introducing the novella into his writing, Dodson gives his final thoughts on what makes a tragedy and what that tragedy has to be in order to consider it a modern tragedy. Dodson defines tragedy:
“Tragedy as a genre goes beyond the stage to any from of literature that honestly depicts a morally good person suffering through the domination of internal passions, the behaviors of people, the whims of an indifferent universe, or the active alienation of the modern world… and through some mistake causes great pain or death,” (Dodson 310).
Then, Dodson describes the workings of a modern tragedy. An interesting conclusion that he makes is that a modern tragedy must have a lack of narration. By this he may mean that the presence of an omniscient narrator hurts the potential of the emotional response that was mentioned earlier as an important factor in a modern tragedy. Dodson writes that in a modern tragedy the hero must reveal a tragic flaw that causes disaster due his free will so that he takes blame. These tragic events cause the reader to reflect upon their own self and feel empathetic towards the hero thus producing an emotional response. This is Dodson’s view on modern tragedy.
Having established the workings of a modern tragedy, Dodson continues his essay to show how Ethan Frome can be classified as such. When defining modern tragedy, Dodson stressed the importance of a tragic flaw. Dodson writes how Ethan fits all the criteria for the tragedy’s hero. However, he finds Ethan’s tragic flaw and uses it as his main argument to prove that the novella is a modern tragedy. Dodson concludes that Ethan’s tragic flaw is his lack for the ability to communicate.
Ethan’s tragic flaw is very apparent when he is with Mattie and Zeena. His lack of communication leads his to loneliness, which is why he asks Zeena to marry him. Dodson writes that Zeena’s inability to help Ethan realize his dreams and “sickness” is a factor that crushes Ethan. Dodson observes “perhaps Zeena wouldn’t have been so ‘sick’ had Ethan confronted her early on and talked to her about their individual fears and dreams” (312). Throughout that novella Dodson noticed that Ethan is similarly unable to fully express his feeling to Mattie. Ethan’s self-sacrifice for both women is also a product of his lack of communication that sinks him deeper into tragedy according to Dodson. Ultimately, this tragic flaw leads Ethan more dead then alive without any glimmer of hope. Dodson writes that Ethan is a defeated hero who still has an admirable strength, but cannot reach his potential.
I felt that this essay was very well presented. Dodson backed up his opinions with other people’s ideas. He also filled his reasoning with valid examples from the novella. I agree that this novel is a modern tragedy.
