Lewis Carroll’s Alice in Wonderland: The White Rabbit as Modern Trickster

(1)

The White Rabbit as Modern Trickster

Master Thesis

Supervisor: Dr. Joyce Goggin

MA programme: Literary Studies – English Literature and Culture

University of Amsterdam

Student name: Léonore Fleur Sollie Student number: 10459391

(2)

Declaration

I declare that I wrote this Master’s Thesis on my own and used only the sources listed in the Works Cited. I have read and agree to the guidelines on plagiarism as set forth by the University of Amsterdam.

Léonore Fleur Sollie 30 June 2017, Amsterdam

(3)

Introduction

Since its first publication in 1865, Lewis Carroll’s Alice’s Adventures in

Wonderland, also known as Alice in Wonderland, has been amongst the most popular

books of all time. Characters like Alice, The Hatter and the Red Queen have inspired many works of arts and adaptations. Charles Lutwidge Dodgson, who used Lewis Carroll as a pen-name, was a mathematician who also enjoyed telling stories to the children of friends. Alice’ Adventures in Wonderland, commonly named Alice in Wonderland,

originally named Alice’s Adventures Underground, was one of those stories, told to Alice Lidell and her sister Edith on a boating trip. Alice in Wonderland inspired many artists with it's wonderful and fantastical tale, and much has been written about Alice’s

Adventures in Wonderland in the academic sphere as well. Critical essays such as William

Empson’s “The Child as Swain”, Robers Polhemus’s “The Comedy of Regression” and Michael Holquist’s “What Is a Boojum? Nonsense and Modernism” all explore Carroll’s

Alice in Wonderland in various ways.

The White Rabbit, a character of limited lines but significant importance, has been little discussed in scholarship on Alice in Wonderland, even though the White Rabbit is instrumental if not necessary for at least the beginning of Alice’s adventures. It is the White Rabbit who runs past Alice when the story begins and so leads her to the rabbit hole which turns out to be the passage into Wonderland. Therefore it is the White Rabbit who sets events in motion and leads the reader, alongside Alice, into the

wonderfully strange world of Wonderland.

Swift and shy as most rabbits are, the White Rabbit is hard to characterise or to compare to other, similar characters; he is not the protagonist, nor an aid to the

protagonist, yet he appears throughout the story, urging Alice and the story onwards. On the surface, there are little similarities between the White Rabbit and other rabbit-like

(5)

characters such as Bugs Bunny, Peter Rabbit en Brer Rabbit – characters from cartoons, children stories and folktales - who are all the protagonists of their own stories. Yet, a case could be made for the fact that they all share some degree of trickery and

mischievousness, as well as a quality of likeableness. Although it cannot be plainly stated that it was the White Rabbit’s intention to lead Alice to Wonderland, or that he meant Alice to grow and shrink at will by leaving his fan and gloves lying about, he cannot be treated as an innocent bystander. This behaviour is similar to that of the trickster figure, a character as old as time, who has tricked and deceived many for his own gain throughout the world. When looking up the term ‘trickster' in the dictionary, three definitions are given: 1) a dishonest person who defrauds others by trickery, 2) a person (such as a stage magician) skilled in the use of tricks and illusion, and 3) a cunning or deceptive character appearing in various forms in the folklore of many cultures (Merriam-Webster). In relation to the White Rabbit and the trickster figure, the third description is most applicable and will be referred to in this thesis when the term ‘trickster' will be used.

Although the trickster is cunning or deceptive, this character should not be understood as intentionally evil, as Lewis Hyde says in his book Trickster makes this

World: “the Devil is an agent of evil, but trickster is amoral, not immoral” (10). Hyde

stresses in the introduction of his book that the trickster does not deceive and trick out of wickedness or evil intent, but out of callousness. Some examples of traditional tricksters are the Native American Coyote, the Norse shapeshifter Loki, the Greek Hermes, the African Ananse (also written as Anansi), and arguably in more current form, characters like the Afro-American Brer Rabbit, Felix the Cat, Shin Chan, and Disney’s Wile E. Coyote and Bugs Bunny.

(6)

The traditional trickster is known for his cunning ways and can be characterised as walking between the lived world – also known as the real world - and the mythical world. Jesse Shipley describes the trickster figure as “a mediator who stands on the border between realms” (648). Hyde seconds this understanding of trickster as a mediator between worlds, and he says of the trickster that he is “the spirit of the

doorway leading out, and of the crossroads at the edge of the town” (6). Trickster flits in and out of worlds, but he belongs neither in the lived world nor in the mythical time. Shipley states that because the trickster is a mediator between human and animal, heaven and earth, and life and death, he “can never fully inhabit this world as he straddles the supernatural, the mythic, the archaic and the lived world” (651).

Characters like Coyote, Hermes and Loki, who walk among gods and humans, are often seen in the form of animals or, like the cunning Loki, who is known for his shapeshifting. Shapeshifting and disguises are common amongst tricksters and can be seen as another changing, in-between from. Tricksters from all over the world often share the same stories. The Native American Coyote has many stories in common with the Greek tricksters such as Orpheus and Hermes. They steal fire from the gods and bring this privilege to mankind. In Japan, it was a trickster that gave men the knowledge of

agriculture. Another basic necessity to mankind such as fire was stolen from the gods by a trickster when they were not willing to share their wisdom. Ellen Basso observes that the “trickster makes the world safe and habitable for humans but often not out of altruistic interest in humanity but rather through capricious, unthinking action” (Basso in Shipley, 650). These unthinking actions can be linked to Hyde’s believe that the trickster figure is “amoral not immoral” (10). Paul Radin makes a similar observation in his book The Trickster, namely that the trickster "knows neither good nor evil yet he is responsible for both. He possesses no values, moral or social, is at the mercy of his

(7)

passions and appetites, yet through his actions, all values come into being" (ix). Tricksters over the world share more stories than just the theft of fire or agriculture. Characters such as Coyote and Orpheus try to cheat death by stealing back their

deceased beloved ones from the underworld, but instead of adhering to the rules set by Death these tricksters have to lose their beloveds once more when they break Death's rules, and their prize is seized by Death once again. The stories featuring a trickster figure are of diverse nature, but often have wisdom to impart on it's audience,

explaining how the world as we know it came to be or why things are done in a certain way.

Because trickster figures can be found all over the world, the characteristics that make up this figure vary widely between tricksters, and some even argue that the term trickster itself is not sufficient to describe this character (Hyde, 10). Critics such as Carl Jung, Claude Lévi-Strauss, Sigmund Freud and Paul Radian all have different

understanding of the trickster figure, and in “Trickster Ethnography” Shipley even sums up the trickster as “greedy, arrogant, liars, selfish, destructive, devious” (656) and simultaneously as “productive, improvisational, unpredictable, creators of culture, heroes and antiheroes” ( 656). However, what most critics agree on is that the

traditional trickster is always connected to the spiritual world or mythical time. Because the modern world is not governed by mythical heroes, legends, and gods, but by reason and science, and a linear, historical understanding of time (Freeman), the traditional trickster does not thrive in a modern context. However, the trickster’s legacy is still alive in the traditional context. He is still present in the Native American storytelling, in Hinduism, and other, similar cultures and religions governed by multiple gods or divine beings. However, the question remains if there is such a thing as a modern trickster when his function in society is perhaps taken over by reason and science. Can the

(8)

trickster figure come to life without the complex terrain of polytheism? The modern world is less accommodating to the trickster’s usual habitat, but does that mean that there is no possibility for a modern trickster? Lewis Hyde argues that, at least in America “one likely candidate for the protagonist of a reborn trickster myth is the confidence man, especially as he appears in literature and film” (11) and observes that a trickster figure is unlikely to appear in the form of a real person because “most actual confidence men don’t have the range of the imaginary ones” (11). The traditional

trickster is not bound to time in the same way as living people are. Therefore it is almost impossible for a living person to be a true trickster, bound as he is in our linear,

historical construction of time and forced to grow older constantly. Therefore, if the modern trickster does occur, he will most likely do so in literature or film, since literature and film have the freedom to let go of our chronological understanding of time.

This leads us to the following questions: is it possible for the trickster figure to adapt to these changed times, with a completely different understanding of time itself, and if so, can the White Rabbit be considered a modern trickster? Is the novel Alice in

Wonderland a world in which the modern trickster could live, and if so, is the White

Rabbit the only trickster who lives there? If indeed the White Rabbit can be constructed as a trickster, how does that become apparent in the novel Alice in Wonderland? If the novel creates the possibility for a trickster, does that make the White Rabbit a trickster by default, or is it by the behaviour of the White Rabbit that he is the trickster in Alice in

Wonderland?

The aim of this thesis is to answer this question: What is the function of the White Rabbit as a trickster figure in Alice in Wonderland? In order to answer the research question, first several other questions must be answered. To begin with, it

(9)

must be made clear what exactly a traditional trickster entails so that there is a foundation for the possibility for a modern trickster. Then, it is prudent to establish if and in what form and under what conditions a modern trickster comes to life, in order to determine if the novel Alice in Wonderland can possibly contain a trickster figure. After having defined the modern trickster, the world of Alice in Wonderland must be examined to see if the novel accommodates for a modern trickster. Then a close reading of the White Rabbit will be performed, and a comparison with the characterisation of the modern trickster previously drawn up will be conducted to examine if the White Rabbit is, in fact, a modern trickster. Hereafter, all the information will give a thorough understanding of the White Rabbit and whether or not he is a modern trickster,

providing us with the information to answer the research question.

Chapter One will be devoted to the characterisation of the trickster figure. Section 1.1 will focus on the definition of the traditional trickster and the conditions necessary for this type of trickster to live and thrive, with the help of known and

generally accepted traditional tricksters. Section 1.2 will be focused on the possibility of a modern trickster. The conditions necessary for the modern trickster to appear will be discussed, as well as where he is most likely to appear and why. By examining possible modern tricksters and theories on modern tricksters, there will be a characterisation made of the modern trickster based on the findings in both Section 1.1 and Section 1.2. Chapter Two will be centered on the White Rabbit from Alice in Wonderland. The White Rabbit be will be assessed on the basis of the characterization of the modern trickster from Section 1.2. The White Rabbit's behaviour will be examined, and compared to the characteristics of the modern trickster. Furthermore, Section 2.3 will be devoted to the question whether there are more possible tricksters in Alice in Wonderland.

(10)

1. The Trickster

1.1 The Traditional Trickster

Michael Carroll mentions in his paper "The Trickster as Selfish-Buffoon and Culture Hero", that "more has probably been written about "tricksters" than about any other single category of character that appears in the myths and folktales of the world" (105). According to Carroll, this is caused by the extremely broad understanding of the trickster character; any character that uses wits and deceit can be labelled as a trickster, alongside clever heroes, selfish-buffoons and culture heroes (106). As mentioned in the

introduction, tricksters can be characterised as “greedy, arrogant, liars, selfish,

destructive, devious” and simultaneously as “productive, improvisational, unpredictable, creators of culture, heroes and antiheroes” (Shipley, 656). However, this is not a

description that helps to narrow down our understanding of the trickster figure, but perhaps this versatility is part of who the trickster is, and as Paul Radian mentions: the trickster figure “basically possesses no well-defined and fixed form” (x). As was

established in the introduction, tricksters are not inherently evil, they are merely amoral, and therefore are not a version of the Devil. The Devil, being tied to Christianity is not a trickster, although he often uses trickery and deceit, because he is inherently evil, according to Christianity. In most polytheistic beliefs, the gods are often not inherently good or bad, but much more human in nature. This is a better suit for the trickster figure, who, although he is usually not a god himself, visits both the gods in heaven and the people on earth. Mythologies such as the Greek and Norse mythologies are a well-known example of such a polytheistic society in which a trickster prospers, for example,

tricksters like the Norse Loki, or the Greek Prometheus, who both dwell amongst the gods and people. Amongst the Native American tribes, several tricksters can be identified, who can be divided into seven categories, amongst which Coyote, Raven and Hare are some of

(11)

the best-known characters. In Africa, multiple tricksters can be found, but Anansi is one of the best known African tricksters in the western world. Shipley describes Anansi in the following manner:

Anansi has human and animal characteristics and the stories he both tells and inhabits shift between mythic time, mundane social settings, and relations with Nyame the Supreme God. He is an eminently social being: his stories revolve around his attempts to dupe those around him into relinquishing wealth, food, sex and call. This usually involves word play and the complex formulation of tricky plots. While at times he succeeds, usually Ananse is foiled by his own desires and cleverness (653).

This description of the African trickster Ananse is similar to that of Radin of the Native American trickster: "Trickster is at one and the same time creator and destroyer, giver and negator, he who dupes others and who is always duped himself. He wills nothing consciously. At all times he is constrained to behave as he does from impulses over which he has no control" (ix). Although Radin's description is focused on the general trickster figure in Native American culture, and Shipley's description is specifically about the trickster Ananse, the similarities are striking; both these tricksters try to ‘dupe' others, often they become the victim of their own scheme's.

In the following sections 2.1.1, 2.1.2 and 2.1.3 several characteristics that most if not all traditional tricksters share will be discussed, in order to make a description that characterises the traditional trickster best, so it can serve as a starting point for the discussion on the possibility of a modern trickster.

(12)

1.1.1 The Physique of the Traditional Trickster

The first remarkable feature noticeable when reading different trickster myths is that the trickster figure is almost always a "highly gendered, masculine character" (Shipley, 648). However, not many critics refer to the reason why the trickster figure is generally a masculine character. Hyde discusses this very question, and gives three possible reasons: trickster figures always belong to patriarchal mythologies and

societies, causing all prime actors to be male, or the female trickster exists, but has been ignored by critics, or something inherent quality of the trickster figure makes him masculine, even if he would appear in a matriarchal setting (335). The first two possible explanations go hand in hand; there are plenty female characters who have used tricks and wit to deceive, however, often, there are no more than a few stories on these characters, whereas male tricksters such as Coyote and Loki have an extensive repertoire. However, this can also be because the female trickster stories have been simply ignored and left out of history. Yet, the use of trickery and deceit do not automatically make a trickster, as has been touched briefly before, and this will be discussed more thoroughly in the coming sections. As for the third explanation, that something about the trickster figure makes that the trickster has no other option than to be masculine, is perhaps the most likely. Being a male, it is not possible for the trickster to bear and suckle his offspring. Hyde mentions that "trickster's fabled sex drive rarely leads to any offspring" (341), this gives trickster the freedom to do as he pleases,

without being tied to his children, and being forced into the father role, a possibility that mothers often do not have. However, even though the trickster figure is most well-known as a masculine character, there are many instances where the trickster disguises himself as a woman, in order to get what he desires. Some critics think of the trickster not as male but androgynous and the anthropologist Victor Turner mentions in his

(13)

article "Myth and Symbol" that "most tricksters have an uncertain sexual status: on various mythical occasions Loki and Wakdjunkaga transformed themselves into women, while Hermes was often represented in statuary as a hermaphrodite" (580). An example of this is the story of the South American trickster Tawk'wax from the Chaco myths:

Tawk'wax is very smitten with a woman, but she rejects him and marries Woodpecker instead. One day, while the woman is bathing, Tawk'wax sneaks up and tries to rape her. The woman flees, leaving her clothes behind. Fearing Woodpecker's return, Tawk'wax puts on the woman's clothes and poses as Woodpecker's wife. Woodpecker is suspicious and sends an ant to inspect Tawk'wax's genitals. The ant bites Tawk'wax, the ruse is revealed, and Woodpecker kills Tawk'wax. (Levi-Strauss, 1973, 108-109)

This story demonstrates that tricksters are generally not scared to dress as a woman if this aids them in any way, shape or form. This story is also exemplary for the fact that tricksters often die in their stories, but these deaths do not halt the myths around the trickster figure since there are many stories about the same tricksters in which they die, but the story cycle about the trickster goes on and does not suffer from this.

Another remarkable feature, next to the fact that tricksters are almost always masculine, is that most tricksters have an animal shape. Out of the seven types of tricksters in Native American mythology, six usually appear in animal form, namely a coyote, raven, several hares or rabbits and spiders, resulting in four animal categories. One argument for the trickster in animal form is that animals do not have any sexual inhibitions; when they are in heat they do not have to conform to social standards of human society. This makes it easier for the trickster character to be led by his desires, but thereby also places him somewhat out of society, a place where most tricksters are situated. Carroll (1984) argues that this is closely linked to the animal shape the tricksters appear in: the quality the four kinds of animals have in common is that they

(14)

all live in solitary settings, and rarely socialise with their own kind. Ravens generally live alone, or in pairs, coyotes forage alone, like hares, and maybe the most solitary of all are the spiders, who only meet other spiders when they are born, or to mate (Carroll 115-116). The best-known African trickster Ananse, translated as spider, and although some stories speak of his family, he is inherently selfish and prefers to live alone, although his greed also leads him to marry a whole community of women (Rattray, 77). There are several other African tricksters, such as True, who are also envisaged to be spiders. An example of a South American trickster comes from the Indian tribes of the Chaco region, and the main trickster of the Toby and Mataco tribes, called either “Fox” or “Tawk’wax” (Steward, 752), who is a fox, a species that like the spider, only meets other adults to mate, and who lives otherwise a solitary live. A European example is Reynard the Fox, who, like the Toby trickster is also depicted as a fox. Lévi-Strauss is of the opinion that tricksters conform to his idea of “carrion-eater” (1963). He observed that all the tricksters he encountered were carrion-eaters. Carrion-eaters are a group of animals who do not kill their prey themselves but do eat meat. In his article "Lévi-Strauss, Freud, and the Trickster: A New Perspective Upon an Old Problem" (1981), Carroll discusses Lévi-Strauss's theory and shows that although some tricksters, such as the Native American Coyote and Raven are known to sometimes eat off carrion, but this does not make up their whole food supply. Furthermore, even if the Lévi-Strauss theory was solely base upon Native American tricksters, the theory does not stand, because the hare and spider tricksters are certainly not carrion-eaters, and there are several tricksters, such as the Native American trickster figure known as “Nanabush” who is not “directly associated with an animal category at all; more often that not, he is simply portrayed as being vaguely human in appearance” (Carroll, 1981, p. 303). Although some tricksters adhere to Lévi-Strauss’s theory, they seem to be the exception.

(15)

At the same time, there are several high-profile tricksters who do not conform to an animal shape as natural state, tricksters such as Nanabush, already described as having a vaguely human appearance, and Loki, the Norse trickster. Although Loki is born from a giant and goddess and usually appears in human-like form, he is known to appear as "a bird, a flea, a horse, and a fire" (Hyde 53). Not only does he take on animal shapes, as mentioned before, he also disguises himself as a woman when it suits him. Consequently, it can be gathered that most tricksters often appear in the form of an animal known for his solitary habits, yet has anthropomorphic qualities, as he often behaves in a more human way than in an animal way. If the trickster is not naturally an animal, he is often only vaguely human, or he could be a shape-shifter.

1.1.2. The Traditional Trickster’s Behaviour

In their article “The Development of the Trickster in Children’s Narrative” David Abrams and Brian Sutton-Smith summarise the trickster’s common characteristics in the following way:

violation of taboo, impulsiveness, a lack of close, caring relationships, apparent disregard for the feeling of others, an inability to learn from past mistakes, lack of anxiety or remorse, an exhibitionistic narcissism, constant use of pretence and trickery, and a demeanour of childlike, innocent charm (30).

They even go as far as to compare the behaviour of the trickster figure to that of a psychopath “who is believed to have failed to assimilate the ethical standards of his social community” (30). Although tricksters often behave in a manner that could be seen as a non-adapted member of society, Abrams and Sutton-Smith ignore a large part of the trickster. The image that Abrams and Sutton-Smith paint is that of the “selfish-buffoon” (Carroll, 1981, 1984). However, they seem to ignore the part of trickster that is called

(16)

the "culture hero" (Carroll, 1981, 1984). An example where the trickster-figure plays the selfish-buffoon is the story of the Apache Rabbit:

Rabbit came to a field of watermelons. In the middle of the field, there was a stick figure made of gum. Rabbit hit it with his foot and got stuck. He got his other foot stuck, then one hand an then his other hand an finally his head. This is how Coyote found him “What are you doing like this?” asked Coyote.

“The farmer who owns this melon patch was mad at me because I would not eat melons with him. He stuck me on here and said that in a while he would make me eat chicken with him. I told him I wouldn’t do it.”

“You are foolish. I will take your place.”

Coyote pulled Rabbit free and stuck himself up in the gum trap. When the farmer who owned the melons came out and saw Coyote, he shot him full of holes. (Lopez, 73)

This story is an example of how Rabbit behaves cunningly and selfish, replacing Coyote with himself, which causes Coyote to be shot and himself free and able to steal the watermelons. In this story, Rabbit is not a culture-hero, even though one could argue that Rabbit teaches us a lesson in not listening to everything you hear. Merriam-Webster has two definitions for the term ‘culture-hero': "a legendary figure variously represented as a beast, bird, human, or demigod to whom a people attributes the factors that appear most essential to its existence and culture (such as important inventions, the

overcoming of major obstacles, the exercise of divine leadership, and the origin of itself, humankind, natural phenomena, or the world)" or "one that symbolises the ideal of a people or a group". The second definition is certainly not applicable to the trickster, who is opposite to the ideals of society. An example where the trickster figure is a culture-hero in the first sense of the word, without losing his trickster ways, is the story of Loki when he is on the run from the gods:

(17)

Loki has made the other gods so angry that he has to flee and go into hiding. In the mountains, he built himself a house with doors on all sides so he can watch the four horizons. To amuse himself by day, he changes into a salmon, swimming the mountain streams, leaping the waterfalls. Sitting by the fire one morning, trying to imagine how the others might possibly culture him, he takes linen string and twists it into a mesh in the way that fishnets have been made ever since. Just at that moment, the others

approach. Loki threw the net into the fire, changes into a salmon, and swims away. But the gods find the ashes of his net and from their pattern deduce the shape of the device the need to make in order to catch Loki. In this way, Loki is finally captured. (Hyde 18) Not only does this tale show how the first fishnet was made, but it also shows the trickster's ambiguous talent to get caught in his own traps. Although Loki actions are still not thought through in this instance, he can be considered to be a culture-hero, as he invented the first fishing net. Loki is not the only trickster who brings the art of fishing to the people, the Native American Coyote and Raven are also known to teach humans how to fish (Hyde 18).

As mentioned in the introduction, most if not all critics agree that the trickster is a character that moves, not only between heaven and earth, the dead and the living but also in the lived world: trickster is almost always on the move. The trickster is dual in everything that he does, he is often a selfish-buffoon and culture-hero at the same time, as demonstrated in the story about Loki and the first fishnet. This duality in trickster could also be explained by the dichotomy of chaos and order. The part of the trickster that is linked to the selfish-buffoon could be considered to cause chaos, and the culture-hero brings order to the universe. Carroll draws on Freud’s theory on the desires of all human beings (1918), when he states that:

(18)

1. All human beings desire BOTH the immediate gratification of their sexual impulses AND the development of civilisation (in the sense of “culture”), yet 2. the Freudian reality is that both desires cannot be fulfilled simultaneously

since the immediate gratification of our sexual impulses would lead to the destruction of culture. (Carroll, 1984, 114-115)

Although Freud’s theory can be disputed regarding humans, it seems that the two desires he speaks of are united within the trickster, a figure who can indulge in

immediate gratification of his sexual desires, because, being solitary in nature, he cannot destroy culture, because he is not part of culture. Yet trickster often brings order and culture, often without meaning to, and often this culture arises out of the chaos that is inherent to the trickster.

Tied to Freud's theory is the association between the trickster and the phallus symbol. Often the trickster's need for immediate gratification is symbolised as a phallus. This symbol is especially present when the trickster is behaving as a selfish-buffoon.

1.1.3 Trickster In-between

Tricksters are generally are characterised as an ‘in-between’ character. He can move between heaven and earth, the living and the dead, chaos and order, but in his own typical way. An example of his behaviour is illustrated in a story about Coyote from the Nez Percé, a Native American tribe that lives in what is now called north-eastern Idaho.

Coyote and the Shadow People.

Coyote had a wife he loves very much, but she became ill and died. Coyote became very lonely and only wept for his wife. One day the death spirit took pity on Coyote and told him that he would take Coyote to where is wife was, but only if Coyote listened to

everything that the spirit told him. Coyote said that he would. The spirit repeated his wish that Coyote would not disobey him. He took him along and talked about horses and food and a gathering,

(19)

but Coyote could not see them. The death spirit told Coyote to mimic his behaviour of eating, sitting and talking, and Coyote did so. When the night fell, Coyote suddenly saw his wife and all his friends that had long since died. He talked and was happy, and when the morning came they all disappeared, and the death spirit told him to wait for the next night. The following night the spirit told Coyote that he was to leave soon with his wife, but Coyote would rather stay with his friend. The spirit told Coyote that this was not yet his destiny, and that he could take his wife with him, but that he could not touch her for the first five days of the journey. The death spirit hoped that Coyote would listen to him. Coyote went away with his wife and did not touch her for several days, but on the fourth day he could not contain himself, and even though his wife tried to restrain him, embraced her. Then his wife returned to the shadowland. The death spirit was very angry, why hadn't Coyote listened to him. Coyote was very sad, and tried to go through the motions again as he had done with the death spirit, but whatever he did, he never saw his wife or the death spirit ever again. (Phinney 283-285)

This story is an example of the trickster not listening to the rules and thereby causes his own ruin. What this story also illustrates, is the way Coyote is able to enter the land of the dead, under specific circumstances, and how he is able to walk from one world to the other. However, once he has tried to trick the death spirit, by ignoring the rules, he dupes himself, because his wife once again is beyond his reach. This is not the only version of Coyote visiting shadowland. Within the same tribe, there is also the story of Coyote and his daughter: "Coyote's daughter has been killed, and Coyote follows her to the spirit world; he is allowed to try to carry her back to the world of the living,

provided that he not look behind him on the way" (Hyde, 83). Of course, Coyote does look behind him, and just like his wife, his daughter vanishes. Both these stories about Coyote are very similar to that of the Greek Orpheus who charms Hades into allowing

(20)

his wife to follow him to into the land of the living. The only restriction is that Orpheus cannot look back unto his wife until they have reached the light. Naturally, Orpheus almost reaches the light, and cannot contain himself to look back, and his wife is transported back to Hades.

All traditional tricksters live in polytheistic societies, societies that also could be described as traditional. In his book The Myth of the Eternal Return Mircea Eliade observes that "in studying these traditional societies, one characteristic has especially struck with us, it is their revolt against concrete, historical time, their nostalgia for a periodical return to the mythical time for the beginning of things, to the ‘Great Time'" (ix). The trickster is responsible for many events at the beginning of things; he made the world habitable for humans by stealing the knowledge of agriculture and fire and

bringing this to the humans, and is, therefore, part of this ‘Great Time'. Stephen Crates believes that this mythical time of which Eliade speaks is, in fact, a sanctuary for the people of these traditional societies and that stories about figures like the trickster form a strong bond with that sanctuary. He observes that "such stories and the symbolic world they project are not like monuments that men behold, but like dwelling places. People live in them. They are moving forms, at once musical and narrative, which informs people's sense of the story of which their own lives are a part, of the moving course of their own action and experience" (295). The concept of mythical time is often linked to polytheistic religions; it is the time in which the gods live for ever. The mythical time in which the trickster dwells, helps people understand their place in their world, and the trickster is alive because he lives in the stories that the people of these

traditional societies tell each other, and although the stories change over time, they are considered sacred. Mythical time, unlike our modern understanding of historical time, is not linear, but circular (Freeman). It is, therefore, possible for the trickster figure to die

(21)

multiple times without actually dying, and for the same trickster figure at times to have a wife, and sometimes not. Some trickster cycles have a defined ending and beginning, starting with the birth of the trickster, and ending with the capture of the trickster, such as Loki’s story, which ends with him being captured and punished by the other gods. However, often it does not matter in what precise order the trickster stories are told, because trickster is always alive in mythical time, as long as the beginning and ending are at the right place. The term mythical time can be considered in two ways; mythical time as a story world, and mythical time versus lived time. Mythical time in the sense of a dwelling place for the trickster, which is constructed by the telling and retelling of trickster stories, can also be considered a story world. Mythical time can also be understood in contrast to the lived world people dwell in, within the story world. Similar to the way the trickster can act like a selfish-buffoon and a culture-hero, the trickster can interact with animals and humans in the lived world, and interact with gods and divine creatures in mythical time. The trickster can be considered to cross boundaries, as mentioned before, but the trickster also creates this boundary between the divine and human, the living and the dead, and chaos and order.

1.1.4 The General Characteristics of the Traditional Trickster

Limited by the scope of this thesis, it is not possible to describe all trickster, and analysing all the different ways the trickster works.However, the above provides enough information to conclude some general characteristics of the traditional trickster. On the basis of the examples and critics discussed above, the following can be concluded:

• The trickster figure is generally of the male sex.

• Often the trickster is portrayed as an anthropomorphic animal known for his solitary habit.

(22)

• If the trickster is not portrayed as an animal, he is usually human, but often is also known as a shape-shifter, or when described as a human, has a vague appearance.

• The trickster is a wanderer; between worlds, and between roads. He is also a crosser of boundaries.

• Tricksters act either like a selfish-buffoon or as a culture-hero, and these two options are not mutually exclusive. As selfish-buffoon, the trickster is driven by his appetite and selfishness and is sometimes accompanied by or

represented as a phallus, as culture-hero trickster makes sense of the world. • Tricksters are closely tied to mythical time; they walk both in the lived world

and in mythical time.

• Tricksters are part of polytheistic mythologies.

1.2 The Modern Trickster

Based on the characteristics of the traditional, the possibility of a modern trickster is a complicated matter, because, in the current climate in the western world, several conditions are lacking. Firstly, although there are several religions in the western world, most of them are monotheistic. Without polytheism, it is difficult for the

traditional trickster, since the concept of mythical time is often closely linked to

polytheism and a different understanding of the world. Moreover, the trickster’s role as a culture-hero has become superfluous. The trickster as culture-hero was once used how the world and society came to be. Now, these stories do no longer serve a purpose, because in the modern world, the workings of the world are explained by science and history

(23)

One could argue that the traditional trickster still lives in traditional societies, who can be found in several Native American tribes in the USA and Canada, or among the native tribes in South America and so forth. Yet, this trickster is largely unchanged from when they were first recorded by anthropologists, and likely from the hundreds of years before that. Although these traditional societies have been forced to adapt to the modern world in many cases, their polytheistic heritage is still part of their lives. Therefore, the conditions that are necessary for trickster figures remain unchanged.

There are, however, many modern male characters that are shaped like an animal but act in a more human way, such as Dumbo the elephant, Donald Duck, and countless others. However, this does not automatically qualify these characters for the title of trickster. Abrams and Sutton-Smith devised an overview of what they believe to be a perfect modern trickster, on the basis of the work of several critics such as Radin, Jung, Lévi-Strauss and others, called the Trickster Inventory. They made a list of 29 qualities that they feel are a necessary part of the modern trickster figure, divided over five categories, namely; appearance, locale, behaviour, playfulness, dimensions and outcome. Although their list is a decent description of the trickster, they almost entirely leave out the trickster's link to mythical time. Although it cannot be presumed that the modern trickster is exactly like his predecessor and that adapting to the modern world is inevitable, I believe that the trickster's ties to mythical time and recurrence are a vital part of both the traditional and modern trickster.

In the following sections, the possibility of the modern trickster will be

discussed. First, the lack of polytheism and mythical time in the modern Western will be discussed. Then several characters that are generally argued to be modern trickster will be analysed. With this analysis, a characterisation of the modern trickster will be drawn up, together with the conditions that make the modern trickster possible.

(24)

1.2.1 Mythical Time and the Modern Trickster

As mentioned above, the main obstacles for a modern trickster are the lack of the idea of mythical time and the need for a culture-hero. The understanding of time has drastically changed compared to how traditional societies understood time. George Gusdorf argues that the occurrence of historical time and the emergence of the autobiographical subject go hand in hand. He states that:

The man who takes the trouble to tell of himself knows that the present differs from the past and that it will not be repeated in the future; he has become more aware of differences than of

similarities; given the constant change, given the uncertainty of events and of men, he believes it a useful and valuable thing to his own image so that he can be certain it will not disappear like all things in the world (30).

The individual, in other words, deems himself so important that he should not be

forgotten. Mark Freeman takes Gusdorf’s understanding of historical time and contrasts it to what came before: “in place of eternal recurrence and essential sameness there is change and difference; in place of certainty there is uncertainty and accident; in place of perpetual reappearance there is disappearance and death, the sense of an ending, final and irrevocable” (34). Helmuth Plessner writes in this context: “World and man become worthy of being remembered in tradition, monuments, and documents. Past, present, and future become distinct. The more deeply this temporal consciousness takes hold of a living community, the more it will be drawn into the individualisation of its members and feel death as a threat, whose gravity depends on the mode of measure of the individual’s delimitation against the world and the chain of the generations” (237). It seems that with the understanding of time in a linear and historical manner, the threat and fear of death become more prevalent. This is problematic for the trickster figure,

(25)

who in a traditional context, thrives on the eternal recurrence, and especially perpetual reappearance. The traditional trickster often dies in his stories, without this having complications for the continuation and reappearance of the trickster. Is there, then, a place where a modern trickster can live? In his book Trickster makes this world Lewis Hyde argues that he cannot be found in the real, lived world, because the confinements of historical time and metaphysical constrictions leave no room for the trickster to move(11). However, literature and art offer a potential habitat for the modern trickster. Hyde argues that the American confidence man is a prime example of a modern

trickster. “We enjoy it when he comes to town, even if a few people get their bank accounts drained, because he embodies things that are actually true about America but cannot be openly declared", such as "the degree to which capitalism lets us steal from our neighbours, or the degree to which institutions like the stock market require the same kind of confidence that criminal con men need" (11). These confidence men are usually travelling people, moving from place to place, woman to woman, and charm everybody in their way, while covertly showing the sore spots of American society.

If we look at the concept of mythical time as eternal recurrence, cartoons come to mind, such as duo's like Wile E. Coyote and Roadrunner, or Tom and Jerry, who

participate in a never ending chase. In this comic world, the laws of physics and time work differently. Gravity does not always work, which causes Coyote to hang in the air before plummeting to earth, or Road Runner to run back and forth in time. Although there are several stories of these duo's, often it does not matter in what order they are watched, and no character ever dies and remains dead. Just as the traditional trickster lives most vibrantly in stories told around the campfire, and not in the form of real people, the modern trickster is not embodied by living men. And although some living men may exhibit trickster-like behaviour, the tragedy is that all mortal men must die.

(26)

The modern trickster's habitat is the pages of books and moving pictures. The worlds within these media are not constricted by the laws that govern the real world: because, for example, cartoons are often meant for a younger audience, the audience is adept to go along with the world of the story, without questioning deviant environments

(Abrams and Sutton-Smith).

1.2.2 Examples of Modern Tricksters

The character that is perhaps the oldest modern trickster is Brer Rabbit, also known as Brother Rabbit, an African-American trickster who is thought to be brought over by the slaves to the Americas from West-Africa (Baker 149). Brer Rabbit, an antropomorphistic rabbit, is known for his cunning, dishonest ways and the way he always tries to cheat those who tower over him. Many stories of Brer Rabbit resemble that of West-African tricksters such as Ananse, but many are altered to fit the position of the slaves in America. Brer Rabbit was known to out-smart and stand up to those who dominated him - an act of defiance that the slaves dreamt of (Baker) - but could not safely do themselves. Margaret Baker states that “defiance of authority, foolishness, greed and other less than admirable but very human traits are part op the makeup” of Brer Rabbit. However, more than the traditional trickster, Brer Rabbit values his family, although he does not show this in a loving way. For example, in the story about a famine, Brer Rabbit and Brer Fox conspire to sell their families for food. However, Brer Rabbit has his own family escape from the vehicle and tells Brer Fox that his own wife must have eaten them. Brer Fox then sells his own wife for food, which he shares with Brer Rabbit, who continues to trick Brer Fox out of his food on the way home, and takes all the food home to feed his family. (Lester 40-43). Brer Rabbit complies with many of the characteristics of the traditional trickster in a number of ways. He is a male animal with

(27)

human traits, he often acts like a selfish-buffoon, but in the process often distributes kindness. He is a culture-hero amongst the communities in which his stories live,

because of his cunning and bravery to stand up to others. The stories that are told about Brer Rabbit often do not have a specific order. Finally, Brer Rabbit often gets himself hurt without dying, aiding the sense of mythical time.

Another example of a modern trickster is Felix the Cat. Making his debut as Master Tom in the 1919 film Feline Follie Felix has starred in more than a hundred animated shorts. In her article "Felix the Cat as Modern Trickster" Patricia Tom argues that Felix has all the makings of a modern trickster. Without even looking at the cat himself, the Felix shorts were transgressive in terms of narrative (Tom 74). Mixing a high-brow form of art such as film, with the low-brow humour of the Felix shorts is transgressive in itself. Felix is often separated from his head, electrocuted to the

skeleton and can detach his own tail when he needs to. Tom argues that "the character's long black tail is the defining element in the construction of Felix as a trickster, for his appendage acts in place of the phallus, which in trickster lore symbolises regeneration, or the body in a state of becoming" (79). Baker argues that modern trickster tales are often "aimed at children, and in modern society, overt sexuality is one of the remaining taboos in materials produced for young people” (154). Constrained, perhaps, by

censorship of the Motion Picture Producers, it would have never been accepted if Felix had carried an actual phallus. Not only can Felix detach his tale and use it as a tool or in his defence, but it can also shift shape entirely. In the 1923 film, Felix Wins Out Felix transforms his tail into a serpent, who can go off on his own in order to aid Felix. Tom observes that “much like it functions in other trickster figures, Felix’s detachable

appendage acts as an essential element of his identity” (79), especially because language plays a subsidiary role in the Felix shorts, and instead of using language, Felix expresses

(28)

his emotion mostly through his tail. Adding to Felix’s status as trickster is his overall behaviour: “Felix always trips over his antagonists; moreover, lust and hunger are two of his primary motivations. Although Felix can be physically brutalised, dismembered, crushed, or beheaded, his body is always intact by the end of each film” (81). Also, Felix’s “occasional role as saviour or group hero” (81) and his often necessary use of cunning to prevail add to Felix’s status as trickster.

If Brer Rabbit and Felix the Cat are perhaps modern tricksters that are closely related to the traditional trickster, the cartoon character "Bugs Bunny shows the popularisation and trivialisation of the form" (Baker 149). Although Bugs Bunny has entertained cartoon viewers since his first appearance around 1940, he is not

commonly associated with "traditional folklore or with its literary presentation" (Baker 150). Baker argues that although Bugs Bunny might be a popularised and trivialised version, he still is a modern trickster, fulfilling the same societal function of

transgression. Although several critics do not agree on whether Bugs Bunny is in fact a modern trickster (Carroll, Hyde), Baker and Abrams and Sutton-Smith argue that Bugs Bunny is a modern trickster. In their research on tricksters in Children's Narrative Abrams and Sutton-Smith analyse Bugs Bunny with the use of their Trickster Inventory, and Bugs Bunny adheres to almost all of their 29 characteristics. Furthermore, Baker argues that Bugs Bunny has several of the features of the traditional trickster. For example, the anthropomorphic element of the trickster; although “Bugs himself usually begins each cartoon without any clothes … many times and for various reasons, Bugs uses some type of clothing during the course of a cartoon sequence” (153). Not only is Bugs Bunny an animal who lives a mostly solitary live with many human aspects, but he also uses disguises to shift in shape. Moreover, when the situation calls for it, Bugs Bunny is known to dress as an attractive woman, to trick pursuers, and is known to give

(29)

his victims a big kiss. Furthermore, “sexual innuendo’s were definitely a feature of the character developed for Bugs Bunny, although they remain a very mild and relatively minor part of each cartoon” (154). Baker mentions that “one of the traditional trickster’s characteristics is the ability to create power, even through his own weakness”, and although rabbits are not powerful creatures, “the rabbit has maintained itself and in many cases gained in numbers, proving that its evident weaknesses have become a strength” (155). Although safety in numbers is mostly a technique real rabbits use, it is a good example of turning a weakness into strength. Baker states that “although Bugs Bunny’s tricks rarely benefit anyone but himself, they are a clear example of strength arising out of weakness. In many of the cartoons Bugs is depicted as being weak physically, particularly in contrast with other characters” (156). However, “despite the inequity of size and physical prowess, Bugs’s wiliness and sheer stamina triumph in the end” (156). Although Bugs Bunny is not a culture-hero in the traditional sense of the word, similar to other characters like Felix the Cat and cartoon character Shin Chan, he is a beloved cultural character.

A figure commonly described as a modern trickster is the politician (Asaah, Nicholls and McNally). However, this is a different understanding of the term trickster and relates more to the definition of "a dishonest person who defrauds other by trickery" (Merriam-Webster). As discussed in the previous sections, a character that merely uses tricks and deceit is not automatically a trickster. First and foremost,

tricksters are characters that stand on the periphery of society, and would the trickster ever gain power, he would stop being a trickster. For example: if Wile E. Coyote ever actually caught and ate Road Runner, he would lose his purpose in life. Politicians often stand at the centre of society. Hyde argues that politicians and other "shameless

(30)

disruptions are not subtle enough, or pitched at a high enough level. Trickster isn't a run-of-the-mill liar and thief" and that, furthermore, "the deceitful politician is a crook, not a culture hero" (13). Although politicians can be described as being a trickster, the terms trickster should be understood in the sense of "dishonest person who defrauds others by trickery" (Merriam-Webster).

1.2.3 The General Characteristics of the Modern Trickster

What these few examples of modern tricksters all show is that they all have many of the traits that are commonly associated with the traditional trickster, except for their connection to mythical time, and the culture-hero behaviour. However, as described in 2.2.1, perhaps mythical time in the modern world is only found in film and literature, where it is accepted to deviate from the laws of the real world. If the worlds created within film and literature are accepted as a variation on mythical time, there is no need for a link to polytheistic societies; because in the case of the traditional trickster, the polytheistic aspect of society is the bridge to mythical time.

As for nearly non-existent culture-hero part of the modern trickster, perhaps this quality is lacking in the modern world because there is no need for it in our modern western society. Arguably, the current main understanding of time, namely linear, historical time, supplies modern societies with the information that the traditional trickster brought traditional societies: understanding of the world we live in, the why and how of natural phenomena and cultural norms and standards. This eliminates the need for a trickster who also plays the part of a culture-hero, because we no longer need an explanation in the form of a culture-hero trickster, because this explanation is already given by either the Bible or science.

(31)

Although the examples of modern tricksters in 2.2.2 do not give an exhaustive overview of all the modern trickster, they serve as an illustration of what the modern trickster can look like. Critics such as Baker, Tom, and Abrams and Sutton-Smith agree on not only the existence of the modern trickster, but also on his close resemblance to the traditional trickster.

2. The White Rabbit in Alice in Wonderland

This chapter is devoted to the White Rabbit and Alice in Wonderland. Section 2.1 will focus on whether or not we can speak of mythical time in relation to the world of

(32)

will perform a close reading of the White Rabbit, and compare this character to the characteristics of the modern trickster compiled in Chapter One. In section 2.2.2 attention will be paid to other considerations concerning the White Rabbit. In section 2.3 other characters of Alice in Wonderland will be considered, and whether or not there are more possible tricksters characters in Alice in Wonderland.

2.1 Mythical Time in Alice in Wonderland

As outlined in Chapter One, one of the conditions for a trickster, whether a traditional or modern trickster, is the concept of mythical time. For the traditional trickster, this concept is usually linked to a polytheistic religion, and the understanding of time as a cyclical, returning entity. The modern trickster who is bound to a society with a different understanding of time, lives in a world that often constructed in

literature and film, and not in the lived world. The lived world is restricted by historical time and the knowledge that comes with it, such as the laws of physics and

chronological events, which makes it impossible for the trickster to live there. The novel Alice in Wonderland itself could be considered a construction of mythical time, such as all novels could, because it can be reread and the laws of physics from the real world do not have to apply the the world of the novel. However, within

Alice in Wonderland there are two distinctly different worlds as well. Firstly, there is the

lived world Alice lives in with her sister, cat and family, then there is the world of Wonderland, where everything is different and strange. The transition from the lived world to Wonderland is explicitly mentioned when she falls through the rabbit hole: "Either the well was very deep, or she fell very slowly, for she had plenty of time as she went down to look about her, and to wonder what was going to happen next" (8). This unnatural state of falling is emphasised when Alice notices a shelf with jars:

(33)

She took down a jar from one of the shelves as she passed: it was labeled “ORANGE MARMALADE,” but to here great

disappointment it was empty: she did not like to drop the jar, for fear of killing somebody underneath, so managed to put it into one of the cupboards as she fell past it. (8)

Martin Gardner observes in his The Annotated Alice, The Definitive Edition that “in a normal state of free fall Alice could neither drop the jar (it would remain in front of her) nor replace it on the shelf (her speed would be too great)” (13). This event stresses the difference between Wonderland and the lived world.

When Alice departs from Wonderland, she is under the impression that she has been gone from her world for a long time. However, when she wakes her sisters says: "Wake up, Alice dear! Why, what a long sleep you've had!" (98). At this moment, it is made apparent that Alice's adventure in Wonderland was in reality merely a dream. However, does this mean that Wonderland cannot be considered a manifestation of mythical time? I argue against this, firstly because Alice’s dream is much longer, and more intricate than the average dream, which lasts anywhere from a few seconds to 25 minutes (Hobson). And secondly, perhaps by the construction Wonderland as a dream, it was one of the only ways in the 1860’s, when Alice in Wonderland was first published, for things and beings to appear and behave out of the ordinary. I believe that these three reasons make justifiable to treat Wonderland as a possible manifestation of mythical time within the world of the novel. Also, the last paragraph of the novel touches upon an important feature of the trickster figure:

She pictured to herself how this same little sister of hers would, in the after-time, be herself a grown woman; and how she would keep, through all her riper years, the simple and loving heart of her childhood; and how she would gather about her other little

(34)

children, and make their eyes bright and eager with many a strange tale, perhaps even with the dream of Wonderland of Long ago. (99)

An oral tradition of trickster tales is especially prevalent in the traditional societies in which the traditional trickster lives, and Alice’s sister imagines the tale of her sister’s Adventure in Wonderland being told, and told again. In this way, the story would live on in the lived world of the novel. In addition to Wonderland living on in the imagined lived world in the novel, Alice’s adventures in Wonderland are still very much alive today, as Carroll’s invention is still a great inspiration for film, stories and art.

If we are willing to treat Wonderland as a possible manifestation of mythical time, there is more support for the claim that Wonderland is a manifestation of mythical time. Especially if we see mythical time return in the form of literature and film, as was discussed in section 1.2.1, where mythical time is considered in a modern context. For example, the way Alice changes in size, growing, shrinking and stretching at will, could not have happened in Alice's normal world, and she is astonished by her changing hight and cries her famous "curious and curiouser!" (13). Another marker of a different sort of time construction in Wonderland appears in Chapter 7, A Mad Tea Party, in which Alice meets the Hatter, the March Hare and a Dormouse. The Hatter tells Alice that “if you knew Time as well as I do, you wouldn’t talk about wasting it. It’s him” (56). Previous to that revelation, Alice marvels at the way Hatter’s watch shows him the day of the month, but not the time. Hatter reacts by asking Alice if her watch tells her the year it is, which Alice replies: “Of course not, but that’s because it stays the same year for such a long time together” (56). Hatter remarks: “Which is just the case with mine" (56), which almost suggests that he lives the same day over and over. The March Hare seems to understand what the Hatter implies when he responds to Hatter's explanation of how

(35)

Time moves when asked by saying "I only wish it was" (57). Later on in the chapter, the Hatter sighs "It's always tea-time"(58), which could be an explanation for the fact that his watch does not show the time, because, for him, the time never changes: it remains to be tea-time forever.

Taking all this into consideration, looking at both the novel Alice in Wonderland and Wonderland itself as a manifestation of mythical time in a modern sense is

reasonable and lays a solid foundation for the possibility that the White Rabbit could be a modern trickster.

2.2 The White Rabbit as Modern Trickster

The White Rabbit has his first appearance on the very first scene of the story. He is described in three separate ways, the first relating to his animal characteristics: "a White Rabbit with Pink eyes", then another layer is added to his character when the White Rabbit exclaims: "Oh dear! Oh dear! I shall be too late!". The image described thus far points to a white rabbit who speaks. However, when "the Rabbit actually took a

watch out of its waistcoat-pocket, and looked at it, and then hurried on” (7), Alice’s

curiosity is sparked. It must be noted that the reader not only has Carroll’s words and Alice’s exclamations, but also John Tenniel’s illustration of the White Rabbit to get an idea of what the White Rabbit looks like. On the first page of the story, it is immediately clear that the White Rabbit is a male rabbit, with anthropomorphic characteristics. He is male, which can partly be derived from the clothes he is wearing; although he is not wearing pants, he is certainly wearing a waist-coat with a pocket where he keeps his watch, as the text specifically mentions this. Also, the drawing from Tenniel’s illustration (see fig. 1) shows an overcoat as well. These two items of clothing, the waist-coat and

(36)

over-coat, together with the fact that Alice uses masculine personal pronouns to talk about the White Rabbit establish the White Rabbit as a male character.

Figure 1, The White Rabbit (7)

Another characteristic of the trickster figure as discussed in Chapter One is his solitary habits. Since the White Rabbit is a rabbit, and rabbits are known to live in burrows in herds, one wouldn’t say that he is a candidate for solitary habits. However, there are several known modern tricksters that are rabbits, such as Bugs Bunny and

Brer Rabbit, who are acknowledged tricksters (Baker, Abrams and Sutton-Smith) and who do live alone. Further evidence for the White Rabbit’s solitary habits can be found when Alice comes across the White Rabbit’s house in Chapter Four The Rabbit Sends in a

Little Bill. The White Rabbits mistakes Alice for his housemaid and says to her: “Why,

Mary Ann, what are you doing out here? Run home this moment, and fetch me a pair of gloves and a fan! Quick, now!" (27). Although the White Rabbit refers to his house as ‘home', presumably Mary Ann's home as well, he is outraged that she has left it, which suggests that Mary Ann is an employee and not a family member of some sort. When

(37)

Alice follows his direction to his house, the door has "a bright brass plate with the name "W. RABBIT" engraved upon it" (27). This name plate also gives no hint of other relatives or perhaps a wife who also lives in the house. However, this, of course, is no conclusive evidence for the claim that the White Rabbit lives on his own, or with employees, but not with family. Yet, there is no mention of any family members by Alice, the White Rabbit himself, other characters, or Tenniel's illustrations.

The trickster, be it modern or traditional, is often described as a character who is constantly moving, and especially the traditional trickster moves between the lived world and other worlds. As discussed in section 2.1, both the novel Alice in Wonderland and Wonderland itself can be considered as a manifestation of mythical time. When we consider Wonderland as a manifestation of mythical time, opposed to the lived world of the novel, namely the world Alice and her family live in, the White Rabbit is a perfect example of a character that is able to walk simultaneously in the lived world and in a different world. Apart from Alice herself, the White Rabbit is the only character in the novel who is able to exist in both worlds, as becomes clear in Chapter One, Down the

Rabbit-Hole.

However, a problem arises with constructing the White Rabbit a selfish-buffoon. Not only that, but tricksters are also generally the protagonist of a story, and the White Rabbit, although instrumental to the story, is not the protagonist of Alice in Wonderland. The latter is not a problem for the construction of the White Rabbit as a modern

trickster, because of the importance of his character to the development of the story. Without the White Rabbit, Alice would not have reached Wonderland at all, and his appearances in Chapter Eleven Who Stole the Tarts and Chapter Twelve Alice’s Evidence are instrumental to the development of the story because in those chapters the White Rabbit orchestrates the trial the King and Queen of Hearts are holding. As for the former

(38)

problem, whether or not the White Rabbit is a selfish-buffoon, a character that is often placed outside or on the fringes of society, this is a topic that needs further research. T Concerning the White Rabbit’s place in the society of Wonderland, it should be

wondered if there is a fringe to the society in Wonderland. Presumably, every character that is not accepted or rejected by the Queen of Hearts in her court at some point does not belong to the society at that specific moment. A character like the Duchess, for example, has a title that indicates that she is indeed connected to the court of the King and Queen of Hearts. After Alice’s first meeting with the Duchess at her house, where the Duchess was invited by the Queen herself to play croquet (45), the next time Alice hears of the Duchess, the White Rabbit tells Alice that “She’s under sentence of

execution” (65). Then, in a turn of events, the Duchess is summoned from prison to account for her Cheshire-Cat. However, the Cat is quickly forgotten, and the Duchess is free, and part of the court once more (71). Given how quickly presumed prominent members of society such as the Duchess can change in social status, there is no telling which characters are at the fringe of society at any given moment. The White Rabbit seems to be a servant to the court, in his function as herald at the trial in Chapter Eleven

Who Stole the Tarts?. Although this is not a position that gives great prestige, it is a

position that contributes to order, and not chaos. As was demonstrated and discussed in Chapter One of this thesis, tricksters are often the counterpart of order; they cause chaos, although sometimes in the process, in their capacity as culture-hero, they create order, but only by their transgressive behaviour. The White Rabbit’s conduct during the trial provides more order than anyone else’s behaviour, although a case could be made for the fact that his calling up Alice as a witness causes the most chaos in the story altogether. Together with the chaos caused by the White Rabbit during the trial, all the White Rabbit’s actions leading up to the trial can also be regarded as causing chaos and

(39)

disorder. In the following paragraphs, the White Rabbit's behaviour will be analysed in a close reading, comparing the White Rabbit's behaviour to that of the selfish-buffoon character traits of the modern trickster.

Firstly, it is the White Rabbit leading Alice into Wonderland through the rabbit-hole. Although we learn later on that this is not the White Rabbit's home, it is the White Rabbit's doing that leads Alice to follow him down the rabbit-hole and causes her to fall down the well. When Alice reaches the ground and finds herself at the beginning of a long passage, "the White Rabbit was still in sight, hurrying down it" (9). Up until this point in the story, the White Rabbit is the only character that Alice has met in

Wonderland. When she finds the key that fits a door, suddenly there is a little bottle on the glass table with a label that reads "DRINK ME" (10), "which certainly wasn't here before" (10). When Alice has shrunk and finds that she has forgotten the key on the table, she finds a cake “on which the words “EAT ME” were beautifully marked in currants” (11), which makes her grow again. It is at this point that the White Rabbit reappears, “splendidly dressed (14), indicating that he must have left and come back again. To the reader’s knowledge, there is no-one else in the passageway then Alice and the White Rabbit. Who else is to be blamed for the cakes and the bottle than the White Rabbit. Although there is no evidence in the text that the White Rabbit placed the bottle and cakes there for Alice to find, the same cannot be said for the fan and gloves. When the White Rabbit reappears in the passage, changed into different clothes, “with a pair of white kid-gloves in one hand and a large fan in the other” (14), which he promptly drops when he sees Alice. Alice is at this point in the story rather larger than she normally is, as can be observed in the illustration on the next page in the novel, and the White Rabbit runs away at the sight of her. Alice picks up the fan and gloves and starts fanning herself. She has a conversation with herself, trying to make sense of the situation she's in, and

(40)

finds that "she had put on one of the Rabbit's little white kid-gloves while she was talking" (17). She had shrunken so much that she now fitted the little gloves. "She soon found out that the cause of this was the fan she was holding, and she dropped it hastily, just in time to save herself from shrinking away altogether” (17). In this case, Alice’s shrinking is directly caused by an act by the White Rabbit.