From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In literary criticism, the pathetic fallacy is the description of inanimate natural objects in a manner that endows them with human feelings, thoughts and sensations. Pathetic in this usage is related to empathy (capability of feeling), and not intended to be derogatory. The term was coined by John Ruskin in his 1856 work Modern Painters, in which Ruskin wrote that the aim of pathetic fallacy was “to signify any description of inanimate natural objects that ascribes to them human capabilities, sensations, and emotions." In the narrow sense intended by Ruskin, the pathetic fallacy is a scientific failing, since most of his definitive paper^[1] concerns art, which ought to be its truthful representation of the world as it appears to our senses, not as it appears in our imaginative and fanciful reflections upon it. However, in the field of natural sciences, a pathetic fallacy is a serious error in scientific reasoning if taken literally.

Contents 1 In literature 2 In sciences 3 References 3.1 Notes 3.2 Books 4 See also

Critics after Ruskin have generally not followed him in regarding the pathetic fallacy as an artistic mistake, instead assuming that attribution of sentient, humanising traits to nature is a centrally human way of understanding the world, and that it does have a useful and important role in art and literature. Indeed, to reject the use of pathetic fallacy would mean dismissing most Romantic poetry and many of Shakespeare's most memorable images. However, literary critics find it useful to have a specific term for describing anthropomorphic tendencies in art and literature and so the phrase is currently used in a neutral sense.

The pathetic fallacy is not a logical fallacy since it does not imply a mistake in reasoning. It is a rhetorical figure and a form of personification. In the strictest sense, delivering this fallacy should be done to render analogy. Other reasons to deliver this fallacy are mnemonic. This fallacy can also be said to apply to works such as Watership Down and Animal Farm (even though the animal characters are of course not "inanimate") because they are literally false. However, this says nothing of their figurative value—it is not particularly fallacious to use animals as characters.

Examples of the pathetic fallacy include:

• "The stars will awaken / Though the moon sleep a full hour later" (Percy Bysshe Shelley)
• "The fruitful field / Laughs with abundance" (William Cowper)
• "Lo, the most excellent sun so calm and haughty" (Walt Whitman)

In the comic book Jack of Fables the Pathetic Fallacy is an actual person with the ability to bring inanimate objects to life.

The pathetic fallacy is not confined to fiction, but was a generally accepted convention of pre-World War I prose. For example, the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica abounds in use of the pathetic fallacy even though it is ostensibly a purely factual work. For example, "Nature abhors a vacuum" (John Ruskin's translation of the well-known Medieval saying natura abhorret a vacuo, in Modern Painters) assigns nature feelings that enable it to "abhor" something.

The pathetic fallacy is often seen in teaching and in literature intended for the general public.

1. ^ Ruskin, John. "Of the Pathetic Fallacy", from Modern Painters, volume iii, pt. 4, 1856. Retrieved 13 March 2007.

• Abrams, M.H. A Glossary of Literary Terms, 6th edition. Fort Worth, Texas: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers, 1993. ISBN 0030549825.
• Crist, Eileen. Images of Animals: Anthropomorphism and Animal Mind. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1999. ISBN 1566396565.
• Groden, Michael, and Martin Kreiswirth (eds.). The Johns Hopkins Guide to Literary Theory and Criticism. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1994. ISBN 0801845602.

• Anthropopathy
• Figure of speech
• Literary device
• Personification
• Reification