Analysis of creativity in an English language text

University Degree Linguistics, Classics and related subjects

E301THE ART OF ENGLISH: TUTOR MARKED ASSIGNMENT 05

The inspiration for the material used in this assignment arose from a service of thanksgiving for the local hospice that I attended a few weeks ago. The speaker used a passage from Mark’s Gospel to illustrate one of the healing miracles of Jesus, and to draw out aspects of plot and character from the text. This gave me the idea that it would be suitable for this assignment, so my purpose is to examine the characterisation and plot which are revealed in the text and how this might provide evidence of creativity.

The passage is from Mark chapter 5, verses 24 to 34, taken from the New International Version of the bible, and I have retained the verse numbering for reference. The text is included at appendix 1.

There are three different approaches that can be taken to creativity in language: an inherency model, a socio-cultural model and a cognitive model. (Carter, 1999, cited by Swann, 2006, p10.) In an inherency model of creativity, the concern is how the text is constructed, with the emphasis on the language used. A socio-cultural approach takes into consideration the background of the speaker and the writer, and the social, cultural and even historic contexts of the text. It is concerned with the effect that the effect that the language produces on the receiver. A cognitive approach to language examines links between language and mental processes, and the effect that the text has on the reader or listener.

As I am looking at characterisation and plot within this extract, I shall mainly use an inherency approach, but I will also look at some aspects using the socio-cultural and cognitive approaches. I will begin with a general overview of the narrative, and then use the work of Toolan, Greimas and Montgomery to illustrate further the creativity that I believe is to be found.

The story concerns a woman who has been ill for many years, and who has visited many doctors in futile attempts to be cured. She has apparently heard about Jesus, and makes her way to him, but for some reason, in her mind determines that she cannot ask him directly for healing, but thinks that she will be healed if she can touch his cloak. She does so, and is healed, but Jesus realises what has happened and asks who touched him. The woman comes forward and is told that it is her faith that has healed her.

The whole story is in the past tense and is presented as a narrative of events. It begins in verse 24 in the simple past tense. In verses 25 and 26, the narrative switches to the distant past to inform us about the woman’s condition and set the scene for why she wishes to receive healing. The simple statement of the woman’s presence, realised as a new sentence foregrounds the woman’s position apart from the crowd: “And a woman was there” The woman’s position is further foregrounded by the change of tense and by the description of the crowd jostling and pushing, compared to the simple statement of the woman’s presence, suggesting that she is not part of the crowd, that she is an outcast, and that she is rather a pathetic figure. We are told “a large crowd followed and pressed around him” and then “ a woman was there”. Also, immediately, I feel that we sense that this woman is central to the plot of the narrative.

In verse 25, we are told that the woman was “there” in the crowd, which seems to indicate that the narrator is separate from the crowd. This is further reinforced in verse 27 when the text states that she “came up” behind him. This seems to confirm that the narrator was close by Jesus, and gives his authority to write the narrative.

Verse 26 remains in the distant past to give some background to the woman’s condition, and contrasts the fact that she had spent all her money but still was not cured. The text states that she had “suffered” under the care of many doctors. The verb used is transitive so implies that things were done to her to cause the suffering. It is very powerful and again reinforces the impression that we had in the previous verse that she is rather a pathetic figure and maybe not in control of the events of her life. It may also indicate that she was, in fact, too ill to take charge. In the second clause we read that she had spent all her money, so I feel the distinct impression that she had been somewhat gullible in her search for a cure and had been taken advantage of by unscrupulous practitioners. The second part of the sentence gives the bald fact that she got worse. The contrast of the two statements, that she had got worse instead of better, and the further contrast that she had spent all her money but was still not better highlights her situation. We would normally expect that if you spend all your money in search of a cure, you would expect results, but this woman’s situation is even worse, in that not only did she not get better, but also she got worse. This is entirely unexpected and is an example of almost double deviation which foregrounds her situation powerfully. It also makes the reader understand the desperation of the woman and why she has come to be healed.

This is a preview of the whole essay

In verse 27, we are told that she came up behind Jesus “in the crowd”. This paints the picture that she was very afraid of coming for healing, understandable in the light of the experiences that we have just been told about. She was so afraid, in fact, that she used the presence of the crowd to hide and this sets up the scene for the plot that is to follow. We are told that her aim is to just touch the cloak of Jesus in order to be healed. A contemporary reader would also understand that this woman was ritually unclean under Jewish law because her disease involved bleeding (www.bible.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/GenevaStudyBible), and from a socio-cultural perspective would indicate that the woman was a social outcast, and may also explain why she hid in the crowd, and would only touch the cloak of Jesus.

The woman’s thoughts are presented as direct thought in quotation marks, and as Short (1996) says, this is often used to “represent imaginary conversations that characters have with themselves”. So this is the woman consciously thinking what her actions should be. This sets up a contrast against her previous passivity with the doctors, and we now see her beginning to take control of her situation. It also makes Jesus’ later remarks understandable. As a result of her actions, we are told that she was “immediately” cured. There is no room for dispute here, as this is stated as a matter of fact with no modality expressed; she “felt in her body that she was freed from her suffering”. The writer here has used the short passive form of the verb, so has avoided stating who freed her.

In verse 30, we have Jesus’ reaction to the event, which was immediate. We are told that “at once” he realised that power had gone out of him, and asked who had touched his clothes, so we can assume that he knew how this had happened. The reaction of the disciples to his question is disbelief that he should ask the question as the crowd was so intense and could not avoid but touching him. It is interesting that his question asks who touched his clothes, indicating that he knew exactly what had happened, but the reply of the disciples indicated that they thought he was asking in general terms who had touched him.

Verse 32 says that Jesus “kept looking around” to see who was responsible. The tense used here implies that the action continued for some time and suggests to me that he was determined to find out who was responsible, and to encourage that person to come forward. The woman’s reaction was one of fear: the text says that she “fell at his feet” and was “trembling with fear”, which creates tension and makes you wonder what will happen. However, this contrasts with Jesus’ instructions to her to “Go in peace” and this dissipates the tension. He also tells her that it is her faith that is responsible for her healing; it is interesting that he is not shown as claiming responsibility for it. I am sure that the account was originally written to convince readers of the divine nature if Jesus, and they may well have expected the story to go along the lines that Jesus touched the woman and she was healed. This would probably also explain the presence of the large crowd, who had come to be entertained. This account, then, falls into Cook’s “schema refreshment” argument, where we are asked to revise our beliefs. It could be that the writer is trying to tell us that Jesus is so powerful that we the woman can touch him and be healed, or it may be that the writer wanted his readers to understand that their own faith is important. Either way, it is probably not what they expected to read.

In the closing verses, Jesus calls the woman “daughter”, which indicates the relative positions that the two characters are placed in. Jesus is shown as assuming a caring but authoritative role by both the means by which he addresses her and by the statements which he makes that it is her faith that has healed her, and by the use of the imperative commanding her to go in peace and be freed from suffering.

In the reading In search of plot structure, Toolan asserts that in narrative accounts, “we expect main events to come in main verbs” (Toolan, 2001). The verbs used in their finite forms in the passage show that the woman “did” things more than anyone else. Following Toolan’s argument, these incidents are likely to be key to the plot of the narrative, and this is shown in the narrative here. For example, the following sentences seem to me to be central to the plot, and they are all shown as using finite verbs:

26 “she came up behind him in the crowd and (she) touched his cloak”.

By contrast, there are two examples of non-finite verbs used in verse 33, and these are used to describe the state of mind of the woman, rather than her actions.

33 Then the woman, knowing what had happened to her …trembling with fear”

Working in the 1980s, Algirdas Greimas proposed an analytical scheme that allows the characterisation of a narrative to be revealed. He devised a framework to allow the various relationships of communication, power and desire between the characters to be identified. The characters in Greimas’ scheme are termed “actants”, and they are described according to the relationships that exist between them.

A chart showing the relationships in this story is given below. In the relationship of power, the woman is shown in the role of subject. The helper in this is Jesus, who she hopes will be able to bring about the healing, and the opponent is the crowd, who by their very presence, and also maybe by their perceived attitude towards her, are likely to prevent her getting to Jesus.

In the relationship of desire, the object of desire is healing.

In the relationship of communication, the woman herself is both the sender and the receiver. This is very interesting, because it clearly shows that the motivation comes from the woman herself, and it is she alone who will benefit from the receipt of the object. It also emphasises the characterisation that had so intrigued me, where the woman is shown as struggling and alone.

1: Greimasian representation of the story

Relationship of communication

SENDER OBJECT RECEIVER

The woman Healing The woman

Relationship of

desire

HELPER SUBJECT OPPONENT

Jesus The woman The crowd

Relationship of power

Process types

In “understanding actants in a Hemingway short story”, Montgomery (2006) argues that analyses of character in narrative frequently omit the “doing” and focus on “who does what”. He suggests that a Hallidayan functional analysis of transitivity and verb process types adds a further dimension to characterisation and clarifies Greimasian analysis.

Transitivity and process type analysis focuses on the types of processes applicable to verbs used in a text. They fall into four main types, each process having a person or object that is “doing”, and a person or object that is being done to. Depending on the type of process, these terms vary. A process may also have a “thing” that is being experienced, etc.

A material process describes actions and events. The subject is known as the actor, and the object is the goal. Mental processes describe perceptions, emotions and thoughts. The subject of this type of process is known as the experiencer, and what he perceives or thinks about is the experience. A verbal process is concerned with speaking and writing. The participant in this type of process is a sayer. The participant on the receiving end is known as the receiver, and the object being spoken or thought about is verbiage. Relational processes describe existence, states of being and relationships. The participant in a relational process is known as a token, and the object is known as a value. Different writers give different names to the processes and participants. Some processes are intransitive, in which case there is no participant on the receiving end of the process. Below is my analysis of the processes occurring in this text.

2: Types of process in text

24 A large crowd (ACTOR) followed and pressed around him (CIRCUMSTANCE)

25 And a woman (TOKEN) was there (VALUE) who had been subject to bleeding for twelve years.

26 She (ACTOR) had suffered a great deal under the care of many doctors (CIRCUMSTANCE)

and (she – ACTOR) had spent* all she had (GOAL),

yet instead of getting better she (TOKEN) grew worse (VALUE).

27 When she (EXPERIENCER) heard about Jesus (EXPERIENCE), she (ACTOR) came up behind him in the crowd (CIRCUMSTANCE) and (she – ACTOR) touched* his cloak (GOAL),

28 because she (EXPERIENCER) thought,

"If I (ACTOR) just touch* his clothes (GOAL), I (GOAL) will be healed* (passive)." (EXPERIENCE)

29 Immediately her bleeding (ACTOR) stopped

and she (EXPERIENCER) felt in her body that she was freed from her suffering (EXPERIENCE).

30 At once Jesus (EXPERIENCER) realised that power had gone out from him (EXPERIENCE).

He (ACTOR) turned around in the crowd (CIRCUMSTANCE)

and (he – SAYER) asked,

"Who (ACTOR) touched* my clothes (GOAL)?" (VERBIAGE)

31 "You (EXPERIENCER) see the people crowding against you (EXPERIENCE)," (VERBIAGE)

his disciples (SAYER) answered,

"and yet you can ask, 'Who (AGENT) touched me (GOAL)?' " (VERBIAGE)

32 But Jesus (ACTOR) kept looking around to see who had done it (CIRCUMSTANCE) .

33 Then the woman (EXPERIENCER), knowing what had happened to her (EXPERIENCE),

(she – ACTOR) came and fell at his feet (CIRCUMSTANCE) and, trembling with fear

(CIRCUMSTANCE),

(she - SAYER) told him (RECEIVER) the whole truth. (VERBIAGE)

34 He (SAYER) said to her (RECEIVER),

"Daughter, your faith (ACTOR) has healed* you (GOAL). Go in peace (CIRCUMSTANCE)

and (you – ACTOR) be freed from your suffering (CIRCUMSTANCE)”. (VERBIAGE –

imperative)

Process types:

XXXX Material process * = transitive clause

XXXX Mental process

XXXX Verbal process

XXXX Relational process

An analysis of the pertinent process types is given below. I have only included those processes where either Jesus or the woman are participants. For example, I have not included the clause (24) “A large crowd followed and pressed around him.”

3: Analysis of process types

Jesus The woman

Material Agent 2 8

Affected 0 0

Verbal Sayer 2 1

Recipient 1 1

Mental Senser 1 4

Relational Token 2 4

This analysis clearly shows that it is the woman who is the instigator of the action in this text, and that she is not, in fact, affected by any of the material processes that occur between her and Jesus; for example,

27 “she came up behind him … and touched his cloak.”

Although, she has been on the receiving end of material processes with doctors, as stated previously.

Five of the material processes in which she is the actor are realised with the use of transitive verbs, which I feel is very significant for the narrative, as it shows that she is affecting the outcome of the situation.

Jesus is not shown as the actor in any material processes, but is shown as affected in two, for example:

31 “Who touched me?”

There are only three verbal processes in which Jesus and the woman participate, and two of those account for an exchange between the two of them.

There is quite a lot of thinking going on by the woman; she is the senser in four mental processes, for example:

28 “because she thought, "If I just touch his clothes, I will be healed." “

I have identified two relational processes in which the woman participates, indicating her state of being.

I have examined the plot of this narrative, which reveals a carefully constructed eyewitness account of the incident. A background picture has been painted of a woman, desperately alone, outcast and mistreated, who sees the presence of Jesus in the vicinity as an opportunity to be healed. The healing is afforded, not in the way that she, and maybe the original readers expected, as occurring as a result of her own action and beliefs.

An analysis of the characterisation using Greimas’ scheme and Toolan’s verb structure analysis reveals the relationships of power, desire and communication in the narrative.

The transitivity analysis proposed by Montgomery reveals further aspects of characterisation. It reveals that from being a passive character, she becomes active, and in doing so, obtains the healing she desires. The narrative is constructed to take us from her feelings, to her thoughts and then her actions. It also requires the reader to modify their own beliefs through “schema refreshment”.

Mear (1984), writing in What the Bible is all about, asserts that Mark’ gospel was written to show actions, and the woman’s actions are indeed revealed by the text. In doing so, it also reveals the character of a woman who moves from passivity to action.

Word count: 3080

Bibliography

Goodman, S. and O’Halloran, K. (eds) (2006) The Art of English: Literary Creativity, Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan/Milton Keynes, The Open University

O’Halloran, K.A. (ed) (2006) Getting inside English: Interpreting Texts, The Open University/Milton Keynes, The Open University

Mears, H. 1984 What the Bible is all about Ventura/Regal

Montogomery, M “Understanding actants in a Hemingway short story” in Goodman, S. and O’Halloran, K. (eds) (2006) The Art of English: Literary Creativity, Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan/Milton Keynes, The Open University

Short, M. (1966) Exploring the Language of Poems, Plays and Prose, Harlow, Longman

Toolan, M. (2001) “In search of plot structure” in Goodman, S. and O’Halloran, K. (eds) (2006) The Art of English: Literary Creativity, Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan/Milton Keynes, The Open University

www.biblegateway.com (Accessed 14th July 2008)

http://bible.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/GenevaStudyBible (Accessed 28th July 2008)

Appendix 1: Mark 5: 24 to 34 (The New International Version)

24 A large crowd followed and pressed around him. 25 And a woman was there who had been subject to bleeding for twelve years. 26 She had suffered a great deal under the care of many doctors and had spent all she had, yet instead of getting better she grew worse. 27 When she heard about Jesus, she came up behind him in the crowd and touched his cloak, 28 because she thought, "If I just touch his clothes, I will be healed." 29 Immediately her bleeding stopped and she felt in her body that she was freed from her suffering.

30 At once Jesus realised that power had gone out from him. He turned around in the crowd and asked, "Who touched my clothes?"

31 "You see the people crowding against you," his disciples answered, "and yet you can ask, 'Who touched me?' "

32 But Jesus kept looking around to see who had done it. 33 Then the woman, knowing what had happened to her, came and fell at his feet and, trembling with fear, told him the whole truth. 34 He said to her, "Daughter, your faith has healed you. Go in peace and be freed from your suffering."