Table Of ContentEVOLUTION OF THE WEREWOLF ARCHETYPE
FROM OVID TO J. K. ROWLING
A dissertation submitted
to Kent State University in partial
fulfillment of the requirements for the
degree of Doctor of Philosophy
by
Brent A. Stypczynski
December 2008
Dissertation written by
Brent A. Stypczynski
B.A., The College of Wooster, 2000
M.A., Kent State University, 2004
Ph.D., Kent State University, 2008
Approved by
D.M. Hassler Chair, Doctoral Dissertation Committee
Susanna Fein Member, Doctoral Dissertation Committee
Don-John Dugas Member, Doctoral Dissertation Committee
Isolde Thyret Member, Doctoral Dissertation Committee
Radd Ehrman Member, Doctoral Dissertation Committee
Accepted by
Ronald Corthell Chair, Department of English
John R.D. Stalvey Associate Dean, College of Arts and Sciences
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Chapter 1: Theological Monster, Chivalric Exemplar . . . . . 26
Chapter 2: Monstrous Anti-Wolf . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
Chapter 3: The Disc’s K-9 Unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .135
Chapter 4: Wolf in Professor’s Clothing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .189
Afterword . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .244
Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .252
iii
Acknowledgements
In no particular order, I’d like to thank the committee as a whole for their
patience, commentary and assistance in this project. My thanks to Mack Hassler for
agreeing to chair this whole thing and his morale support throughout. To Susanna Fein
for deploying her editorial experience. To Don-John Dugas for his advice about future
work and job hunting. To Isolde Thyret for bringing to bear the historian’s perspective
that is necessary for a project of this scope.
I’d also like to thank Sara, Mayuri, and Robert for providing therapeutic and
relaxing socialization opportunities during the early stages of the process (especially for
Kasimir Pulaski/St. Patrick’s Day), and for just being there to gripe with. Also Matt,
Susie, Danny, and Elizabeth for being such excellent officemates throughout the past
couple years and providing helpful insights and opportunities.
Of course, every side of the family deserves credit for their support, interest (even
if hearing a bit of babble about werewolves probably got old fast), and memory (of those
who are no longer with us to see this). Special thanks to Loki and Hermione for the
therapeutic purring, attempts to help type, and their contribution of fur to every draft
(even if I should be writing about cats, not dumb wolves).
And especially to my wife, Megan, without whose moral support, Classics
experience, and extra pair of editing eyes, this project wouldn’t exist in its current form.
iv
INTRODUCTION
Introduction
Monsters serve both to mark the fault-lines but also, subversively,
to signal the fragility of such boundaries. (Elaine Graham, 2002)1
One of the boundaries that a focus on monstrosity arguably disrupts
is that between past and present. (Bettina Bildhauer and Robert Mills, 2003)2
Neomedieval Werewolves
The study of neomedievalism3 has recently become important in literary and
cultural studies. This approach opens common ground for medievalists, fantasists, and
critics of children’s literature to study important images and effects. Thus far, the
methodology is applied primarily to video games and movies, although some novels and
short stories aimed at young audiences have been studied.4 A key characteristic of this
1
2
method is the tension between the old and the new: neomedievalism links two time
periods separated by centuries, new technology to old themes and ideas, and modern
society to its past (or at least an idealized version of its past). Critical attention has been
focused on the modern use of medieval tropes for entertainment value, and familiar
arguments have been made about the modern fascination with the idealized medieval.
This phenomenon is related to eighteenth-century neo-classicism, since both look to an
idealized past for themes and images to draw upon in order to evoke a response from the
audience, and this response is one of tonal complexity that becomes increasingly
important in my analysis of Terry Pratchett and J. K. Rowling later. Jonathan Swift was
particularly skilled in the use of these tonal methods of comparison, and some resonance
with such neo-classic effects has been noticed in our time with genre writers such as
Pratchett and Rowling. I see examples that parallel some of my work here in recent
commentary on the work of Frederik Pohl and Samuel R. Delany where their corpus has
been searched for such “doubleness” of tonal effect.5
One important image in such discussions is the figure that lacks a stable form, the
shape-shifter. If we look at key modern representations of shape-changing characters,
we find that they retain strong ties to their medieval forebears and evoke similar
responses in the modern audience. Such similarities imply shared social and human
concerns, such as where the line between nature and nurture, or between humans and
other animals, is drawn. These conclusions become stronger when we note that these
figures stretch back at least as far as Ovid and Petronius and have strong associations
with pre-historic, totemic beliefs. As Malcolm South notes regarding monsters, “if [a
3
monster] is to have a profound effect on us, it must reflect something meaningful about
human experience and engage our emotions in a powerful way.”6 Moreover, Joyce
Salisbury suggests that one reason shape-shifting figures are broadly popular and
fascinating is that “[a]nimals do not abide by social expectations that bind humans. They
do what they want, go where they want,”7 especially the wild ones.
Werewolves, and shape-shifters in general, play an intriguing and complex role in
the Western literary tradition, a role that has been sufficiently recognized and explored
only with regard to the medieval period. Even so, much of the scholarly work on shape-
shifting in literature has either focused on the historical, religious, psychological, and
medical dimensions, or has been part of wider research regarding the role of monsters.
Discussion of shape-changers as literary figures has been minimal, with most scholars
more interested in the frames around these characters rather than the figures themselves
and their fictive situations. To date, academic discussions of these figures in general, and
of werewolves in particular, fall into one of five major positions: the shape-shifter as
theological impossibility or monster; the “sympathetic werewolf” as a purely medieval
phenomenon; the werewolf as political postcolonial allegory; shape-shifting as a sign or
symptom of insanity; or the shape-shifter as social allegory. The shape-shifter warrants
attention not only as part of studies in neomedievalism, but also because the
representational role is so fundamentally important, even if its “screen time” in a given
text is brief.
Saint Augustine presents one of the best discussions of the shape-changer as
religious impossibility or monster in City of God. In this work Augustine acts as a
4
commentator, elucidating passages from the Bible, other ancient sources, and current
debates of his time regarding a variety of subjects. On the subject of the shape-shifter, he
responds in 16.8 to contemporary and ancient Greek tales of “certain monstrous races of
man.”8 Generally speaking, his position makes use of simple black-and-white categories
based on defining man as both mortal (not an angel) and rational (not an animal).
Anything displaying mortality and rational thought, according to Augustine, must be a
man, no matter what its outer shape appears to be. This is one of the key passages to
which Caroline Walker Bynum refers when she asserts a medieval preoccupation with
creating clearly defined borders between species. The end result of this position is that,
doctrinally, all stories of such creatures (notably those involving Circe, Lycaon, and the
Arcadians) are false, the result of demonic illusion or trickery rather than actual physical
change, since the essential nature of the person remains the same (although, in something
of a paradox, Augustine does insist that all shape-shifted men retain their rational minds,
implying that actual change takes place).
The “sympathetic werewolf” as medieval, psychological phenomenon is best
exemplified in Bynum’s work, most notably her speech “Metamorphosis, or Gerald and
the Werewolf” (1998). Bynum argues that a surface reading of medieval metamorphosis
tales leads to discovering a medieval “commitment to species immutability.”9 However,
she notes that a more nuanced interpretation of this “fascination with spontaneous
generation and hybridization”10 shows a concern with delimiting animal species-crossing.
Many medieval authors wished to understand and control the rules and limits by which
species-crossing could take place. Ultimately, Bynum maintains that the “sympathetic”
5
werewolf is different from modern and ancient ferocious beasts both literarily and
figuratively, largely because the medieval versions tend to retain the rational mind,
simultaneously glorifying and resisting the idea of metamorphosis (the outer shell
changes, but the core humanity remains intact). Bynum’s treatment of the “sympathetic”
werewolf provides a useful distinction for studies of modern literary shifters even though
her exclusive focus on horror films and television limits her own brief foray into the
modern era. Bynum also identifies two general types of change: replacement change,
where the original form/individual is effectively lost (common in modern horror) and
evolutionary change, where the core identity remains largely the same even though the
individual undergoes some physical change (common in Ovid, medieval literature, and
modern fantasy).11 Both of these are useful concepts for discussing modern werewolves
and other shape-shifters.
The werewolf as postcolonial or political allegory has recently been posited by
both Catherine Karkov and S. J. Wiseman.12 Both scholars add to Bynum’s
interpretation. Karkov claims that, while Bynum is correct in her discussion of
“sympathetic” werewolves, she misses or ignores the political metaphors inherent in
Gerald of Wales. Karkov argues that Gerald’s story acts as a metaphor for the conquest
of Ireland and parallels the partitioning of Ireland. The story and Gerald’s Topographica
Hibernica in general, she claims, make the Irish both attractive, redeemable humans and
bestial, monstrous animals, which is perfectly epitomized in the figure of the werewolf.
Wiseman works with early modern English texts about the German werewolf Stubbe
Peeter (a 1590 trial record) to resolve questions of the soul and politics. She associates
6
the werewolf with civic discontent by viewing werewolves within a period hierarchy of
species and the early modern use of the story in debates regarding civic hierarchies. The
werewolf then becomes an allegory for civic monstrosity, namely rebellion. Wisemen
notes that Stubbe Peeter has closer ties to Ovid’s Lycaon than to Marie de France’s
Bisclavret in that, like Lycaon, Peeter is characterized as violent, cannibalistic, and
deserving of punishment. The shift of influence present in Peeter, from the medieval to
the classical, marks a point where the transition between medieval and early modern
attitudes toward werewolves begins.
As the early modern period progressed, ideas of self-fashioning, of changing or
pretending to change one’s essential nature, flourished. This concept is linked to early
forays into psychology, which also affect the werewolf figure. Over time, the early
psychological view that shape-shifting figures are a sign or symptom of insanity is
carried into the twentieth century through psychoanalysis. Although Freud deals with
this issue in one of his famous case studies,13 one of the best discussions of the werewolf
as psychosis can be found in Sabine Baring-Gould’s The Book of Werewolves. Through a
mixture of historical overview and collections of folklore, Baring-Gould treats the
werewolf as an extinct or semi-extinct creature. He supports the idea that the
folkloric/literary phenomena are cases of true shifting, while the non-fictional
expressions are psychological illness. Non-fictional figures are, according to Baring-
Gould, closely connected to cannibalism, hallucinations, and other expressions of the
individual’s “natural cruelty”14; in other words, lycanthropy is a form of insanity.
Description:EVOLUTION OF THE WEREWOLF ARCHETYPE FROM OVID TO J. K. ROWLING A dissertation submitted to Kent State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the
