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

Yes, this is it. I'm an English Literature graduate and have known this since school but never really understood the name. Maybe it's pathetic because it's always a projection of the character's mood, rather than a truth - stormy weather isn't really reflecting a lovelorn character's undulating emotions; his pathetic, indulgent way just tells him it is.

I'm American. I first heard of it in the eighth grade (so age 13 or so).

This is taught in secondary schools from year 7. The weather mirroring the mood of the piece of writing.

Common literary term in USA and Canada. Eg: nature reflecting character's mood: "the rain wept" while a character felt sad. One of those terms which are good to know in analyzing a book for English class. Commonly taught in late grade school,middle school and high school--whenever you start analyzing literature.

This

OP, I was educated in both Australia and U.K. In my own experience, PF is a thing in the U.K. and it simply wasn’t in Au.

So I guess it’s a curriculum emphasis issue and it marks a difference between the two education systems.

Pathetic fallacy at a basic level is taught from Y6.

1. It is not personification - that would be personification.
2. It's often used to refer to the weather reflecting the mood especially of a character. So it's raining because they're sad or stormy because they're upset or angry.
3. However, it also refers to giving inanimate objects emotions such as a sad chair in a corner, or a happy doll.
4. It's only concerned with emotions - if the doll is dancing or the table jigs across the room, that's personification.
5. It's a fallacy because the weather cannot actually be a result of someone's mood nor can a chair actually feel sadness. Don't forget that fallacy comes from phallic and fake penises, so means that it's essentially something fake.
6. It's pathetic because to suggest the weather is caused by the mood of a character is a bit, well, pathetic. (Don't blame me, it's not my term).

I'd expect Y9 to know all of the above and definitely GCSE students. However I've met English teachers who don't understand it beyond the second point.

We learn about this in Year 3. I had no idea what it was ! I went all through my school years, taking English language o level a year early, and never once heard of this!

Pathetic — relates to pathos (feelings)
Fallacy — the rain isn’t really falling because a person is sad (a falsehood) but the author is making use of the weather to illustrate the person’s feelings.

we’ve been teaching this forever in schools

Degree aside, have you never read or heard anything at all in the field of literary commentary/criticism in the years since you graduated?

I’m afraid I disagree with one of your points. My understanding is that it is technically a subset of personification- in the same way that sibilance is a specific or particular instance of alliteration.

Nope scratch that: two of your points, sorry. Your point 6 is just wrong. You’re thinking of a much more modern usage of pathetic. This term takes the more traditional meaning from pathos ie; the element of literature that arouses emotion.

This is sympathetic background instead, surely?

Never heard of pathetic fallacy until today, OP. I'm fairly well-educated and in Scotland.

Yeah it's one of those things that secondary school English teachers seem to love but the rest of the world seem to get on quite happily never having heard of/worried about/needed to know about.

Ooh I did a presentation on the pathetic fallacy many many years ago.

Ah, bringing back memories of Wuthering Heights.

Yes, everyone in my (state) school was taught about pathetic fallacy and so was my young one who recently did English A level.

Missed that one and have an English Lit degree and studied King Lear at A level (which seems to be the textbook example for perfect fallacy). Will now have to check if the kids know it 🤔
They both seem to mention PEAZ more than anything now which seems to be about pointing and zooming and some such stuff…

I'm very careful to separate it from personification in order for students to use it correctly. The relationship is probably more akin to that between simile and metaphor.

And the "pathetic" is how you explain it to young students. It's root in pathos would be lost on a ten-year old. They "get" it's pathetic 😂

And the "pathetic" is how you explain it to young students. It's root in pathos would be lost on a ten-year old.

Then maybe they should learn a thing or two about etymology. Perhaps start with sympathetic?

Don't forget that fallacy comes from phallic and fake penises, so means that it's essentially something fake.

Do forget that, because it's bollocks. Fallacy comes from fallere - to deceive. Phallus comes from the Greek phallus via Latin, and means penis. There was also a god called Phallus, usually depicted with a very big one. But the two words are not related.

I once had a student spell it “phallusy” when writing about it in an essay 😁 so I’ve actually had the discussion more than once with a class about the separate etymology of the two words.

Yeah it's definitely a thing you learn in English Lit.

I know the term but not from school or university (England 1980s).

I’ve never heard of sympathetic background, but having looked it up I can see how they can be easily confused. I’ve managed to obtain a literature degree, masters and years of teaching English while possibly confusing the two and now I’m rethinking my whole life’s purpose… 😅

Thank you. That is a clear and concise explanation and probably all we need to know about it.

I've met English teachers who don't understand it beyond the second point.

I mean I don’t pretend to know everything and have learnt a thing or two myself from this thread, but are you sure you understand it beyond point 2?