Pathetic Fallacy - is this a "thing"

[marmia1234]

My sons English report came home ( disclaimers: not in UK and I have a degree in English Literature)
In one section of the test they had to match a quote to its corresponding technique. For example - simile, imagery, metaphor, personification etc. One of those techniques was "pathetic fallacy" . I am flummoxed. Is this a normal thing I just missed somehow? Once he had a stab at which one was the "pathetic fallacy he was stuffed and only got 4 right out of 7 as was a bit discombobulated. Is this a common term in the UK or US
I have googled and it appears to be a version of personification.
Why is it pathetic?
Trying to add poll but seem to be unable.
YABU - everybody knows the term "Pathetic fallacy"
YANBU - WTF nobody has heard of that

I did mine in the early 2000s, so in the age of easily-available, bullet point summaries.

I had to be strategic in my choice of modules, though.

The closest I got to engaging with the materials was reading the first act of Anthony and Cleopatra and going to see The Tempest in the theatre.

Edit: and, actually, I would read poetry, just not full novels/plays.

Hadn't heard that one but it seems very astute!

I don’t get it. Why would you do an English degree if you don’t like books/plays/poems!
Edit: when I did my degree bullet point summaries wouldn’t gave helped. At all.

Because everyone else was going to Uni and I didn't know what else to pick (I was usually top of my class, or thereabouts, for most subjects all through school, but didn't really enjoy anything).

I've had a later in life ADHD diagnosis, for which I'm now medicated, and I think that was a lot of the reason I struggled to apply myself.

My coursemates also didn't think I'd be able to get by with just reading short, summary-form analysis but you absolutely can (if any middling 2:1 will suffice, at least).

Hmm I sort of agree – at undergrad level I don’t think it’s necessary to read all the texts in full, depending on what kind of question you’re answering. Some modules I read every word, others I barely skimmed and I got a First (from a RG university). I read a lot of crit though, which I found more useful than trying to have an in depth knowledge of every text. I remember my dissertation supervisor telling me the quickest path to a First was finding a well-respected critic and disagreeing with them – so I did that a lot!

I suspect the wheels would have come off at post-grad level, though…

I also have an English degree, albeit back in the 90s.

I learnt about pathetic fallacies while doing my A-levels. It's not quite personification but it's more about inanimate objects and usually the weather being used to illustrate the tone or mood of the story or a character.

Most obvious example I can think of would be if an author wanted to convey sadness, they would make it rain in the story. Thunder for anger, sunny day for happiness etc.

I remember my dissertation supervisor telling me the quickest path to a First was finding a well-respected critic and disagreeing with them – so I did that a lot!
I never heard that but it makes a lot of sense. I was also at an RG uni and got 2:1-type grades in every English module I did. In the other half of my degree, I actually found some modules engaging and had unique thoughts, often in opposition to prominent critics, and those were where my grades were in 1st territory.

There's probably more game-playing yo undergrad degrees in the humanities than people realise.

There's probably more game-playing yo undergrad degrees in the humanities than people realise.

100%. I’ve just remembered that I would also read a text which quoted another critic, get the reference from that book’s bibliography, work both quotes in to my essay and therefore get to pad my bibliography out with two citations instead of just one. Playing the game is half the battle. In my case, I was also working full time hours as a bookseller (and therefore trying to keep up with contemporary releases) AND freelancing as a theatre critic at the time so it was a matter of cutting corners for time’s sake as much as I possibly could!

Wuthering heights is prolific with pathetic fallacy

Not when I went you couldn’t. And I don’t think it’s dumbed down that much since (source: my daughter’s joint honours English degree in 2017)

Well I don't know what to tell you; I got a 2:1 from a RG uni and that's how I got through my Eng lit modules (and informed me which modules to take - obviously there's a lot more analysis available for the likes of Shakespeare than something modern). SparkNotes usually provided most of what I needed.

You're not going to have any original thoughts without reading the texts, but you don't need original thoughts for a 2:1.

ChatGPT has lots of examples 😎

Here are examples of pathetic fallacy where emotions or human qualities are attributed to objects or natural phenomena:
1. Weather and Sky:
• “The angry storm lashed out at the helpless trees.”
(The storm reflects anger or chaos.)
• “The sun smiled warmly on the cheerful crowd.”
(The sun reflects happiness and warmth.)
2. Landscapes and Nature:
• “The forlorn trees stood naked in the biting wind.”
(The trees appear to share the sadness of the scene.)
• “The mountains loomed menacingly over the village.”
(The mountains are given a threatening demeanor.)
3. Water:
• “The river wept as it meandered through the desolate valley.”
(The river reflects sadness or loneliness.)
• “The ocean roared in fury, throwing waves against the cliffs.”
(The ocean mirrors anger or conflict.)
4. Objects:
• “The old clock grumbled as its hands crept reluctantly forward.”
(The clock reflects a sense of weariness or reluctance.)
• “The empty chair seemed to mourn its absent owner.”
(The chair symbolizes grief or loss.)

These examples show how objects and natural elements are used to echo emotions, enhancing the mood or meaning of a scene.

No way! Onomatopoeia!

I've never heard of it.

I'm in mensa, have a doctorate, was born in the UK, and have lived in the UK the majority of my life!

I’d agree with that. Undergraduate degrees don’t really require originality. I’d urge my own Dc to dig a little deeper into analytical material than Sparks notes! But it doesn’t need to be original. That really kicks in at Masters level. By doctoral level a high degree of originality is required, as well as significant contribution to the field. But undergrad degrees are just competent understanding of the main bits and of scholarship already out there.

I did say "one of" - but I'd agree that's another!

I think they start with sound devices. I remember all buzzing like bees and thinking up sibilant phrases etc : Six slimy snakes slithered silently.

I’d urge my own Dc to dig a little deeper into analytical material than Sparks notes!
I did, but it was my start point and my further digging was not much deeper! 😁

One of the things that helps with corner cutting, and perhaps isn't true of every English lit paper in every uni, is that you'd usually be invited to choose (say) 2 of 8 questions to answer, so you could theoretically (well, and sometimes in practice) be clueless on much of the course materials.

And me! Granted, I doubt every English speaker may know it.

lol fair enough! I appreciate the explanation 😅

I learned this in Stabdard Grade English 30 years ago. I still sometimes use it.

I was talking to my husband about pathetic fallacy just yesterday! It is a king of personification based on emotion. It is a confusing term. Ruskin coined the term to describe poets who used the sentimental device of projecting emotions onto the landscape/weather. Pathetic meaning of the emotions (pathos) and Fallacy meaning false (fallax). False emotions.

OP here. Didn't mean to cause such a debate! Good fun though. I did mention in my OP that I'm not in the UK , but I did go to a state selective primary as did my son and neither of us were taught that specific term. He is now at state selective secondary and that was the first time either of us had heard of it. My DH also state selective secondary but 30 years ago had also never heard of it,
I did look it up to those who asked, I said that in my OP , and obviously understand the concept. I was just wondering if this was a one off teacher who used the term or if it was commonly in use now. Thanks for all the responses. I'm going to try to wangle "pathetic fallacy" into conversations now, just to be annoying. 😁 Look at all us English grads mucking around on mumsnet instead of writing books!

TA in year 5 - we teach the kids this.

But an English Literature teacher or lecturer should be familiar with the term, surely? It's they who should be passing on the term, not students who should somehow know it without having being taught.