theoryofliteratu00inwell

270
Theory of Literature
but studying the texts and analyzing similarities and parallels.
Parallel-hunting has been widely discredited recently: especially
when attempted by an inexperienced student, it runs into obvi-
ous dangers. First of all, parallels must be real parallels, not
vague similarities assumed to turn, by mere multiplication, into
proof. Forty zeroes still make zero. Furthermore, parallels must
be exclusive parallels ; that is, there must be reasonable certainty
that they cannot be explained by a common source, a certainty
attainable only if the investigator has a wide knowledge of lit-
erature or if the parallel is a highly intricate pattern rather than
an isolated "motif" or word. Work violating these elementary
requirements is not only shockingly large in amount but is some-
times produced by distinguished scholars who should be able to
recognize the commonplaces of a period—cliches, stereotyped
metaphors, similarities induced by a common theme. 17
Whatever the abuses of the method, however, it is a legitimate
method and cannot be rejected in toto. By a judicious study
of sources it is possible to establish literary relationships. Among
those, quotations, plagiarisms, mere echoes are the least interest-
ing: they establish, at the most, the mere fact of the relationship,
though there are authors like Sterne and Burton who know
how to use quotations for their own artistic purposes. But most
questions of literary relationships are, obviously, far more complex
and require for their solution critical analysis, for which
the bringing together of parallels is merely a minor instrument.
The defects of many studies of this kind lie precisely in their
ignoring this truth: in their attempts to isolate one single trait,
they break the work of art into little pieces of mosaic. The rela-
tionships between two or more works of literature can be dis-
cussed profitably only when we see them in their proper place
within the scheme of literary development. Relationships between
works of art present a critical problem of comparing two
wholes, two configurations not to be broken into isolated com-
ponents except for preliminary study.
When the comparison is really focused on two totalities, we
shall be able to come to conclusions on a fundamental problem
of literary history, that of originality. Originality is usually mis-
conceived in our time as meaning a mere violation of tradition,
or it is sought for at the wrong place, in the mere material of