Abstract
The thesis is based on the conviction that psychological processes, which develop as the result of childhood experiences, influence all forms of human creativity, including poetry. The central argument focuses on how knowledge of a writer’s personal psychological development, early attachments, and processes of identification, can be as enlightening in the field of literary criticism, as historical and political contexts. The methodology combines the close reading of individual poems and collections with the relevant biographical details and psychological theories, to give a comprehensive view of Heaney’s and Hartnett’s work. The study adds to knowledge in the area of Irish literary criticism as a psychoanalytical approach is rarely, if ever, taken by other critics, yet it can produce many fresh readings of poems which stand as testimony to earlier lives.In the cases of Heaney and Hartnett, the chosen methodology elucidates many of the differences between the two poets’ work. For example, it reveals how each poet’s sense of identity, stemming from his childhood attachments, influences his negotiation between the inner world of the individual psyche, and the outer world of experience and reality. Detailed analysis of poems dealing with parental figures, ancestry, self, community, and place is aided by reference to post-Freudian psychoanalytical theories, in particular, those of Carl Jung, Melanie Klein, John Bowlby and D.W. Winnicott. Key similarities are noted, for example in the two poets’ drive to identify with a female care-giver and their recognition and accommodation of differences between father and son. However, in general, Heaney’s more secure early attachments lead to poetry which strives for unity and catharsis, whilst Hartnett’s innate sense of detachment often leads to unconsoling images of solitude and a strong identification with outcasts from society.
| Date of Award | Sept 2008 |
|---|---|
| Original language | English |
| Supervisor | Frank Sewell (Supervisor) |
Cite this
- Standard