ORIENTASI DAN PENDEKATAN BELAJAR BERBAHASA INGGRIS 25 READER-RESPONSE ANALYSIS IN GONE WITH THE WIND NOVEL BY MARGARET MITCHELL Putu Diah Kanserina6 ABSTRACT Penelitian ini adalah analisis mengenai kepribadian para tokoh utama yang diungkapkan di alam novel Gone With The Wind karya Margaret Mitchell, dengan rumusan masalah “Faktor apa sajakah yang mempengaruhi kepribadian para tokoh utama di dalam Gone With The Wind, berdasarkan pada analisis respon pembaca (reader-response)”. Objek studi ini merupakan pemenang dari Pulitzer Prize dan National Book Award di 1936. Data yang terkait dengan penelitian ini adalah berbentuk kata, kalimat, dan kutipan yang diambil dari novel tersebut. Data tersebut diambil dari pembacaan terhadap novel tersebut dengan menyeleksi data yang terkait dengan analisis. Untuk mendukung analisis, dua rekan penulis (Akhlis and Vivi) memberikan dukungan terhadap detail dari cerita. Penulis bertanya satu demi satu tentang para tokoh utama dan faktor-faktor yang memengaruhi kepribadian para tokoh utama. Analisis dilakukan menggunakan beberapa teknis yang meliputi pemilihan, mengutipan, penjelasan, dan pembuatan kesimpulan dan saran. Analisis menghasilkan beberapa temuan. Terdapat juga beberapa data yang merefleksikan kepribadian para tokoh utama. Pertama, ditemukan beberapa faktor seperti cinta, pernikahan, dan patriotisme. Kedua, penulis dan rekan tidak belajar tentang perang yang terjadi di abad kedelapan belas tetapi belajar tentang mengapresiasi orang lain. Kita juga seharusnya memiliki sikap “memberi dan menerima” terhadap pasangan kita. Berdasarkan hasil penelitian, disimpulkan bahwa kita harus menghargai institusi pernikahan. Kita harus mengapresiasi pasangan kita. Jika kita tidak menyintai pasangan kita, sebuah cinta yang sejati tidak akan terjalin. Kata Kunci: novel, kepribadian, kritis respon pembaca 1. Introduction Reading English novels is enjoyable. It is advantegous as well. Rees (1973: 11- 13), gives the opinion that people learn literature to help them understand another country and its people, especially to appear well-cultured, well-read, and well- educated, to pass examination or simply to enjoy. By studying literature people are exposed to many kinds of reasons and backgrounds which cause many happenings. Besides, studying literature also makes the readers aware of the problems of life. Literature, whether it is in the form of novel, short story, poetry or play, always serves real life values, such as health and comfort, ambitions, love, friendships, ethical or moral knowledge, technology and or imagination which include art and religion. Literature allows the readers to enjoy the vision and imagination of the writer. It can expand people‟s minds and sense of life. Because of its importance, they do not only need enjoyment but also understanding and they want literature to give 6 Penulis adalah staf pengajar di Universitas Ngurah Rai. 26 them something more pleasing. Rees states (1973: 13) by studying literature, people make themselves better people. On the other hand, Nuttal (1982: 3) states that we read because we want to get something from the writing such as facts, ideas, enjoyments, even feelings of family community (from a letter). Whatever writing is, we want to get the message that the writer has expressed. According to Collie and Slater (1992: 5), literature can help students master the vocabulary and grammar of the language as well as the four language skills: reading, writing, listening, and speaking. It means that by reading literature students can improve their reading skill automatically. In addition to it, students can make summary of the literature they read and write it. Numerous activities involving the students‟ application of these four skills can be developed around the reading of literary work. Having discussed literature, we should be keep in mind that the aim of studying literature is to provide the learners with literary works to respond so that they may have recourses for language activities such as analyzing literary works. Novel is a relatively long fictional prose narrative with a more or less complex plot or pattern of events, about human beings, their feelings, thought, actions, etc (Merriam Webster, 1976). On the other hand, novels are written fictional prose narratives of substantial length and complexity. Novels tell us about the events within the range of ordinary experience and avoid supernaturalism, and their stories are original, not traditional or mystique. Most novels use language close to that of the colloquialism of normal daily speech, frequently including jargon, slang and humorous expression. (Encyclopedia Americana: vol. 20, p. 458) The word novel itself is ultimately derived from the Latin novus, meaning “new”, via the Italian word for a short story, novella, which tends to mean not only “an original as opposed to a traditional” story, but also one that was, retendedly at least, of recent occurance”. (Encyclopedia Britannica, 1978: 551) By studying the novel, we can learn human experience e.g, especially the author itself. We cannot enjoy reading prose fiction or novel unless we comprehend what the author wants in transferring the idea, so we should have more imagination if we want to know the idea of the author. In this paper, the author interested in the novel of Margaret Mitchell “Gone With The Wind”. As one of her novels, it offers the readers, especially English learners, several new words which are mostly unfamiliar to the readers. Those unfamiliar words are due to the common use of the words in the Bible or ancient literary fictions. In the novel “Gone With The Wind”, the readers have more to think about what has happened and how to get the correctness about the story. So the reader can understand the whole of story. The study addresses the following problem is what are the factors which influence the main characters‟ personality in the Gone With The Wind, based on reader-response analysis? 2. Review of Related Literature 2.1. Definition of Personality The term “personality” is derived from the Latin word persona, which means “mask”. Among the Greeks, actors used masks to hide their identity on stage. This 27 dramatic technique was later adopted by the Romans to whom persona denoted “as one appears to others,” not as one actually is. (Elizabeth B. Hurlock, 1976: 6) Personality is the sum of the patterns of thinking, feeling, and behaving that are characteristic of a person. Within Psychology the emphasis in the field of personality is an individual difference and on the organization of psychological processes in the person. Personality is formed by the joint action of inherited qualities and learning. Personality psychologists differ, sometimes sharply, in the relative imperative importance that should be attached to these two factors. While inherited and environmental factors are often discussed as if they are separate, in fact both are always contributing to the development of every personality characteristic. The role of one or the other may be great in a particular case, but the influence of both is always present (Encyclopedia Americana: 757-758). According to Pervin (1996: 414), personality is the complex organization of cognition, affect, and behavior that give direction and pattern (coherence) to the person‟s life. Like the body, personality consists of both structures and processs, and reflects both nature (genes) and nurture (experience). In addition, personality includes the effect of the past, including memories of the past, as well as constructions of the present and future. Based on Gordon Allport (1937: 48), personality is the dynamic organization within the individual of those psychophysical systems that determine his unique adjustments to his environment. The phrase “dynamic organization” emphasizes the fact that personality is constantly developing and changing, although at the same time there is an organization or system that binds together and relates the various components of personality. The term “psychophysical” reminds the reader that personality is “neither exclusively mental or exclusively neural. The organization entails the operation of both body and mind, inextricably fused into personal unity. The word “determine” makes clear that personality is made up of determining tendencies that play an active role in the individual‟s behavior. Based on its derivation, the writer can conclude that personality refers to those external and visible aspects of a person that other people can see. Personality is unique to each person. Although there are similarities among people, still there are individuals possessed special properties or combinations of properties that distinguish them from one another. Thus, in everyday life, personality can be called as an enduring and unique cluster of characteristic. Sometimes, personality is often confused with character. Although the two are synonymous, they cannot be used interchangeably. Character implies a moral standard and involves a judgement of value. When used in connection with personality, character relates to behavior that is regulated by personal effort (Elzabeth B. Hurlock, 1976: 8). The terms personality and character have often been used interchangeably. Allport (1961: 32) shows that traditionally the word character has implied some code of behavior in terms of which individual acts are appraised. Therefore, in describing an individual‟s character the word “good” or “bad” is often employed. He suggests that character is an ethical concept and states that character as personality evaluated, and personality as character is devaluated. 28 2.2. Elements of the Personality Pattern According to Elizabeth (1976: 20), personality pattern is composed of a care or center of gravity, called the “concept of self”, and an integrated system of learned responses, called “traits”. 1. Concept of self In recent decades, people called this in more definite and specific terms. It has been referred to (1) an attitude toward self, (2) an organized configuration of perceptions of self, (3) those perceptions, beliefs, feelings, attitudes, and value which the individual views as part of characteristic of himself, (4) the organization of qualities the individual attributes to himself, and (5) a system of central meaning he has about himself and his relation to the world about him. The importance of the self-concept in the personality pattern is supported by the labels usually given to it. 2. Traits Traits are closely related to and influenced by the concept of self. The major function of traits is to integrate lesser habits, attitudes, and skill into larger thoughts, feelings, and action patterns. The concept of self, in turn, integrates the psychological capacities of the person and initiates action (Elizabeth B. Hurlock, 1976: 34). Hans Eysenck (1961, 1991) has extended the search for personality dimensions to the area of abnormal behavior, studying such traits as neurotism-emotional stability. He also has investigated introversion-extraversion as a dimensional trait. Eysenck emphasized that his dimension of introversion-extraversion is based entirely on research (Eysenck & Rachman, 1965: 19), the typical extrovert is sociable, likes parties, has many friends, needs to have people to talk to, and does not like reading or studying by himself. He craves excitement, takes chances, often sticks, his neck out, acts on the spur of the moment, and is generally an impulsive individual. He is fond of practical jokes, always has a ready answer, and generally likes change; he is carefree, easygoing, optimistic, and „likes to laugh and be merry‟. He prefers to keep moving and doing things, tends to be aggressive and loses his temper quickly; altogether his feelings are not kept under tight control, and he is not always a reliable person. The typical introvert is a quiet, retiring sort of person, introspective, fond of books rather than people; he is reserved and distant except to intimate friends. He tends to plan ahead, „looks before he leaps‟, and mistrusts the impulse of the moment. He does not like excitement, takes matters of everyday life with proper seriousness, and likes a well-ordered mode of life. He keeps his feelings under close control, seldom behaves in an aggressive manner, and does not lose his temper easily. He is reliable, somewhat pessimistic and places great value on ethical standards. 2.3. Reader-Response Criticism A collective term used to describe a number of critical theories that have emerged since the 1960s, all of which focus on some ways on the responses of the reader rather than on the text itself as the source of meanings in a literary work. In reader-response criticism, a work of literature, rather than being considered a fixed and stable entity with a single correct meaning, is viewed instead of an activity or process that goes on in readers‟ minds. This process evolves as readers experience 29 anticipation, frustration, retrospection, and reconstruction. In a sense, the literary work has its existence in the mind of the reader, not on the printed page, so that the reader participates in its creation (NTC‟s Dictionary, 1991: 181) Regardless of their particular perspectives, all reader-response criticism agree that since, in varying degrees, the individual reader creates or produces the meanings of a text, there is no one correct meaning for a text or for any of its linguistic parts. However, these criticisms offer different opinions regarding how readers read the fact, what the specific factors that influence readers‟ response, and what controls, if any, the exertion in shaping those responses. Jane P. Tompkins (1980: ix), in her introduction to reader-response criticism writes that: This criticism is not a conceptually unified critical position, but a term that has come to be associated with the works of critics who use the words reading, the reading process, and response to mark out an area for investigation. It is a new way of looking at literature as text by taking account of the reader who, in his reading process, has an active response to it. According to Jane P. Tompkins (1980: x), reader-response criticism could be said to have started with I.A. Richards discussion of emotional response in 1920s or with the work of D.W. Harding and Louis Rosenblatt in the 1930s. In 1950s, Walker Gibson writes about the “mock reader”. “Mock reader” is not a “real reader”, but his essay constitutes the first step in a series that gradually breaks through the boundaries that separate the text from its producer and readers. Gibson‟s mock reader forms an early realization of the role of reader in reading a text. His essay moves the focus of attention from the text toward the reader. The reader-response criticism uses the idea of the reader as a means of producing a new kind of textual analysis and it suggests that literary criticism be seen as part of larger, more fundamental processes such as the forming of an identity. Gerald Prince, with his conception of narratee, is similar to Gibson in a way of looking at the text and reader. For him, the narratee belongs to the text. Michael Riffaterre (1962: 5-21), based on his critique to Levi-Strauss-Jacobson writes that: Literary meaning is a function of the reader‟s response to a text and cannot be described accurately if that response is left out of account. The reader‟s response is evidence of the presence of poetic meaning at a given point in the text but is not constitutive of it. The subjective element in this response is screened out by ignoring the specific content of the readers‟ responses and focusing on the fact of response to a given locution. The new background brings to light new aspects of what we had committed to memory; conversely these, in turn, shed their light on the new background, thus arousing more complex anticipations. Thus, the reader, in establishing these inter- relations between past, present, and future, actually causes the text to reveal its potential multiplicity of connections. These connections are the product of the reader‟s mind working on the raw material of the text, though they are not the text itself, for this consists just of sentences, statements, information, etc. (Wolfgang Iser, 1971: 42) Wardhaugh (1969:90) states that at the very least the rules must characterize some sort of norm, the kind of semantic knowledge that an ideal speaker of the 30 language might be said to exhibit in an ideal set of circumstances which is semantic competence. In this way the rules would characterize just that set of facts about English semantics that all speakers of English have internalized and can draw upon in interpreting words in novel combinations. When one hears or reads a new sentence, make sense out of that sentence by drawing on both syntactic and semantic knowledge. The semantic knowledge enables us to know what the individual words mean and how to put these meanings together so that they are compatible. 3. Method of Investigation 3.1. Method of Analyzing the Data The author uses the reader-response analysis to analyze the data. Based on Stanley E. Fish as cited by Jane P. Tompkins (1980: 73), the analysis must be of the developing responses to distinguish it from the atomism of much stylistic criticism. A reader response to the fifth word in a line or sentence is to a large extent the product of his responses to words one, two, three, and four. The category of response includes some activities caused by a string of words. This category consists of syntactical or lexical words, the subsequent occurrence or non occurrence, and attitudes toward persons, things, and ideas that referred to the reversal or questioning of those attitudes. The category of response also includes transformational grammar. Some of the grammarians believe that comprehension is a function of deep structure perception, it would be allowed. The critic has the responsibility to inform the readers, each of whom will be identified by a matrix of political, cultural, and literary determinants. Stanley E. Fish, as cited by Jane P. Tompkins (1980: 89), there are three objections to the methods that should be considered. First, analyzing an effect without worrying about whether it was produced accidentally or on purpose. Second, taking the form of a question. It is only when readers become literary critics and the passing of judgment takes precedence over reading experience, that opinions begin to diverge. Third, practicing a lot. The point is the goal of criticism that believes in content, in extractable meaning, and in the utterance as a repository. In analyzing the main characters‟ personality in Gone With The Wind novel, I use the questions, based on Stanley E. Fish theory. My friends (Akhlis and Vivi) give supporting details of the story in my paper. I asked them one by one about the main characters, and the factors which influence the main characters‟ personality in Gone With The Wind novel. The factors themselves are love, marriage and patriotism. I hope that they can give something new in my paper. 4. Result of The Analysis 4.1. The Main Characters 1. Scarlett O’Hara Akhlis and Vivi gave different opinion. According to Akhlis, Scarlett was a beautiful young lady, smart and following whatever opinion was dominant. On the other opinion, Vivi said that, she was not beautiful, and also had bad temper. I agree with Akhlis that Scarlett was beautiful, and she had some boy friends besides her. There were a lot of boys that loved her. However, she only loved Ashley Wilkes. 31 Scarlet was not beautiful, but men seldom realized it when caught by her charm as the Tarleton twins were. In her face were too sharply blended the delicate features of her mother, a Coast aristrocat of French descent, and the heavy ones of her florid Irish father. But it was an arresting face, pointed of chin, square of jaw. Her eyes were pale green without a touch of hazel, starred with bristly black lashes and slightly tilted at the ends. Above them, her thick black brows slanted upward, cutting a startling oblique line in her magnolia-white skin, that skin so prized by Southern women and so carefully guarded with bonnets, veils and mittens against hot Georgia suns. (p. 3) Vivi gave her reason for Scarlett‟s bad temper. Vivi told me, when the women were whole hearted and sincere in their devotion to the Cause, but Scarlett could not feel enthusiastic. She must go on making a pretense of enthusiasm and pride in the Cause which she could not feel, acting out her part of the widow of a Confederate husband officer who bears her grief bravely, whose heart is in the grave, who feels that her husband‟s death meant nothing if it aided the Cause to triumph. (p.137, par. 2) Still according to Vivi, when Scarlett and Melanie went to the bazaar for the Cause, Melanie did not know that Scarlett was not thinking about Cause. However, when Rhett Butler came to the bazaar, he knew that she did not care about it or the hospital. He told her that she has an easy face to read. She only wanted to dance and enjoyed herself. I gave a different opinion, although she had a bad temper, she also had good temper. According to Cashdan as cited by Mischel, Walter, et al., (2003: 126), in time, individuals come to view themselves as good or bad depending on their earlier god-bad emotional experience. The sense of self-esteem that ultimately emerges characterizes how persons feel about themselves. The evidence is shown when Scarlett helped Melanie while she wanted to have birth. She tried to think of all the things Mammy and Ellen had done for her when Wade was born, but the merciful blurring of the childbirth pains of obscured almost everything in mist. (pg. 292 line 26-28) It was going to be difficult, telling Melanie that she and Prissy were to deliver her baby. (pg. 292 line 37-38) I added that Scarlett was a brave girl. When the War came to Atlanta, she decided to go home, Tara. She asked Prissy to look for Rhett Butler. Then, he came to her house with the horse. After that, they went to Tara. In the middle of the way, Rhett stopped. He told her that he wanted to help the Confederate army. Then, he asked her to go home without him. Akhlis gave his opinion that, the dreadful moment for her, when the sick horse balked and cavalry passed by in the dark, past where they sat breathlessly. He also 32 informed that she killed a man who was regarded as a Yankee in Tara. Scarlett did not realize that she loved Rhett very much. According to Stanley E. Fish, as cited by Jane P. Tompkins (1980:90), the belief that there is such a quality or attribute, which attaches the things which we rightly call beautiful, is probably inevitable for all reflective persons at a certain stage of their mental development. From the explanation above, we knew that Scarlett was beautiful, as the explanation before, that beauty was reflective persons for the mental development. 2. Rhett Butler For this character, Akhlis, Vivi and I, gave the same opinion that he was opportunist, confident and realistic. Rhett Butler was the third husband of Scarlett. Before he married her, he was a famous person in Charleston because of his rumour. He has the most terrible reputation. He refused to marry a girl, then her brother fought a duel and Rhett shot the girl‟s brother and he died. After that, he left Charleston, and nobody wanted to receive him. He was a dashing figure and one that people turned to look at. He spent money freely, rode a wild black stallion, and wore clothes which were always the height of style and tailoring. Had it not been for the upset conditions due to the war and his own services to the Confederate government, Rhett Butler would never have been received in Atlanta. Outside the army heroes, he was the most topic of conversation in Atlanta. Before he came to Atlanta, he wandered to California in 1849. And then, to South America and Cuba. The reports of his activities in these parts were none too savory. Akhlis and Vivi added that he was a great blockader because of his business. He went to New York to buy food, clothes, medicine, etc., from the Yankee firms. “.......... There are plenty of sturdy Union patriots who are not averse to picking up money selling goods to the Confederacy. I run my boat into New York, buy from Yankee firms, subrosa, of course, and away I go. And when that gets a bit dangerous, I go to Nassau where these same Union patriots have brought powder and shells and hoop skirts for me. It‟s more convenient than going to England. Sometimes it‟s a bit difficult running it into Charleston or Wilmington, but you‟d be surprised how far a little gold goes.” (pg. 151 line 3-10) According to Akhlis, Rhett loved Scarlett very much, although she did not love him. I agree with my friends‟ opinion that he loved Scarlett very much. When he married her, he tried to be a kind husband. According to Wolfgang Iser as cited by Jane P. Tompkins (1980:62), We look forward, we look back, we decide, we change our decisions, we form expectations, we are shocked by their nonfulfillment, we question, we muse, we accept, we reject, this is the dynamic recreation. Rhett Butler never looked 33 back for his life. He did not care what the people talked about him. He felt that he has done the best for his life. He also decided something without thinking about the risks. 3. Ashley Wilkes He was a gentle, blond, courteous, interested in books, music and wrote poetry. According to Vivi, he was a dreamy person. It was because he was born of line for men who used their leisure for thinking. For Ashley was born of a line of men who used their leisure for thinking, not doing, for spinning brightly colored dreams that had in them no touch of reality. He moved in an inner world that was more beautiful than Georgia and came back to reality with reluctance. He looks on people, and he neither like nor disliked him.... (p. 22 par. 5) Akhlis added that he was a patriot. When the war was begun, he risked his life at the country interest. In my opinion, Ashley was a weak person. When he got the problems, he usually was forced to shelter behind Melanie‟s skirt. According to I.A. Richards, as cited by Stanley E. Fish (1980:90), whether we are discussing music, poetry, painting, sculpture, or architecture, we are forced to speak as though certain physical objects...are what we are talking about . And yet the remarks we make as critics do not apply to such objects but to states of mind, to experience. It means that, Ashley was interested in music, and wrote poetry, what he had seen in his surrounding, then he wrote it in the diary with beautiful words. 4. Melanie Hamilton Akhlis and Vivi gave the same opinion that she was kind, shy and modest but she did have common sense. Melanie had the face of a sheltered child who had never known anything but simplicity and kindness, truth and love, a child who had never looked upon harshness or evil and would not recognize them if she saw them. Akhlis and Vivi also said that, she was different from Scarlett. The difference between the two girls lay, in the fact, that Melanie spoke kind and flattering words from a desire to make people happy, if only temporarily, and Scarlett never did it except to further her own aims. Some exercised the same charms as Melanie but with a studied artistry and consummate skill. (p. 125 line 8-11) In my opinion, Melanie was young but she also patient, kind, and loyal to her fsmily. According to, Jane P. Tompkins (1980:205), and they have no reticence or proprieties towards different classes of persons, and, if they are unjustly assailed or abused, their parent is needed to protect her/his offspring, for they cannot defend themselves. Melanie was a shyness girl, she was different from Scarlett, she did not have boy friends. Her boyfriend was only Ashley 34 Wilkes. Her parents also were taught her to become a kind and patient girl. She always emphasized other people from herself. According to Hans Eysenck (Eysenck & Rahman, 1965:19), there are two types of personality, extrovert and introvert. The characteristics of an extrovert are sociable, like parties, has many friends, needs to have people to talk to, and does not like reading or studying by himself. While the characteristics of an introvert are quiet, retiring sort of person, introspective, fond of books rather than people, he is reserved and distant except to intimate friends. From the explanation above, I conclude that Scarlett O‟Hara was an extrovert girl, because she has many friends although her friends were boys. She also like d to go to the party. Although she did not like reading, she would do anything for Ashley Wilkes. Melanie Hamilton was an introvert girl, because she was a quiet girl and liked reading some books. She did not have many friends as Scarlett. 4.2. Analysis of the Factors 4.2.1. Love Scarlett O‟Hara loved Ashley Wilkes very much. Although her father, Gerald O‟Hara said that the Wilkes family were different from them. “Our people and the Wilkes are different” he went on slowly, fumbling for words. “ The Wilkes are different from any of our neighbors-different from any family I ever knew. They were queer folk, and it‟s best that they marry their cousins and keep their queerness to themselves.” (p. 29, par. 2) When the O‟Hara came to the Wilkes party, Scarlett secretly went to the library. Unintentionally, Ashley went to see her. She said that she loved him. Ashley told her that he was going to marry Melanie. He also said that they were different, he knew that Scarlett wanted the man of his body, his soul, and his thoughts. “Love isn‟t enough to make a successful marriage when two people are as different as we are. You would want all of man, Scarlett, his body, his soul and his thoughts. And if you did not have them, you would be miserable. And I couldn‟t give yon all of me. I couldn‟t give an of me to anyone....” (p. 95, par. 7) According to, Waller and Shaver as cited by Mischel, Walter, et al., (2003: 329), six different love styles were measured, ranging from one that values passion, ecitement, intimacy, self-disclosure and “being in love from the start”, to one that values a relationship that is affectionate, reliable, has companionship and friendship. Vivi and Akhlis said that when Scarlett was in the library, Rhett Butler heard what they talked about. She said to him that, he was an eavesdropper. He grinned that eavesdroppers often hear highly entertaining and instructive things. When Scarlett lived in Atlanta, she still met Rhett Butler. He always remembered the incident at Twelve Oaks. If he went to the town, he always visited her, and gave her the prizes. For all his exasperating qualities, she grew to look forward to his calls. There was something exciting about him that she could not analyze, something different 35 from any man she had known. There was something breathtaking in tile grace of his big body which made Scarlett seemed to love him. “It‟s almost like I was in love with him!”, she thought, bewildered. “But I‟m not and I just can‟t understand it.” (p. 177) One day, they went together across Five Points. Scarlett and Rhett Butler talked about Yankee. “I believe you‟re lying about a siege. You know the Yankees will never get to Atlanta.” (p. 246, par. 4) “I‟ll bet you they will be here within the month. I‟ll bet you a box of bonbons against.“ His dark eyes wandered to her lips. “Against a kiss.” (p. 246, par. 5) For a last brief moment, fear of a Yankee invasion clutched her heart but she forgot about the word “kiss”. This was familiar ground and far more interesting than military operations. Then, Rhett said that he would wait for the memory of the estimable Ashley Wilkes to fade. At the mention of Ashley‟s name, sudden pain went through her, sudden hot tears stung her eyes. The memory of Ashley would never fade. She was angry and they rode along in silence for a while. “I understand practically everything about you and Ashley, now,” Rhett assumed. “I began with your inelegant scene at Twelve Oaks and, since then, I‟ve picked up many things by keeping my eyes open. What things? Oh, that you still cherish a romantic schoolgirl passion for him which he reciprocates as well as his honorable nature will permit him. And that Mr. Wilkes knows nothing and that, between the two of you, you‟ve done her a pretty trick.... (p. 247) In my opinion, Melanie and Rhett sacrificed for Scarlett and Ashley‟s love. Akhlis added that Melanie loved Ashley very much, it was equivalent to him, because when Ashley met Scarlett he remembered about their memory at Twelve Oaks and Tara. For this love, Scarlett recognized that she loved Rhett Butler very much. She regretted it all. Georges Poulet, as cited by Jane P. Tompkins (1980:43), asserts that: This dependence is at once a disadvantage and an advantage. By definition they are condemned to change their very nature, condemned to lose their materiality. They become images, ideas, words, that is to say purely mental entities. In sum, in order to exist as mental objects they must relinguish their existence as real objects. On the one hand, is cause for regret. Disadvantage here means that when Rhett Butler was in the library, he heard what Scarlett and Ashley talked together. He also saw her when Ashley did not love 36 her, she threw the vase on the wall. According to Georges Poulet, if we use the object as real object to see that we are angry or sad, it means that we had regretted what we had done. It happened to Scarlett, when Ashley refused her love, she was angry and then threw the vase on the wall. Advantage here means that, when Ashley refused Scarlett‟s love, then he decided to marry Melanie Hamilton, he felt that his decision was true. 4.2.2. Marriage Scarlett married three times. First, she married Charles Hamilton. In fact, Scarlett did not love him. However, Charles loved her very much. Scarlett knew that he wanted to marry Honey Wilkes in the next fall. Charles was not excited over the prospect of marrying her, he only loved books, he did not have aromantic feeling to his wife. He had always yearned to be loved by some beautiful, dashing creature full of fire and mischief. When he said he wanted to marry her, she said nothing. He was so embarrassed. He wanted to shout, to sing, and to kiss her, then he ran to tell everyone that she loved him. Within two weeks, Scarlett had become a wife, and two months later she was a widow. Akhlis and Vivi said that, she married Charles Hamilton because she wanted to make Ashley jealous. When she knew that Ashely‟s wedding had been moved up from the autumn to the first May, Scarlett set the date of her wedding for the day before his. Nightmarish as her own wedding had been, Ashley‟s wedding was even worse. She saw the plain little face Melanie Hamilton glow into beauty as she became Melanie Wilkes. She thought that Ashley had gone forever and she married a man that she did not love but for whom she had an active contempt. She regretted it all. Second, she married Frank Kennedy. She knew that Frank loved her sister Suellen O‟Hara. He wanted to marry her if he had enough money. He said to her that he had store and mill. For a moment she considered asking him to lend her three hundred dollars, because she had to pay the taxes for Tara. She thought that Suellen could not posses Frank, his store and mill. Then, Scarlett said to Frank that her sister wanted to marry Tony Fontaine. Finally, she married Frank Kennedy two weeks after they met and talked together. He did not know during those two weeks she had walked the floor at night, praying that no untimely letter from Suellen. Then, Frank gave her three hundred dollars. She also had a letter from Suellen, poorly spelled, violent, abusive, and tear splotched. However, Suellen‟s word could not make her happy that Tara was safe from the danger. Frank learned of the deception Scarlett had used him in thier marriage. Perhaps the truth dawned on him when Tony Fontaine came to Atlanta on business, or from her sister in Jonesboro who was astounded at his marriage. Scarlett was his wife and a wife was entitled to the loyalty of her husband. Furthermore, he could not bring himself to believe she had married him coldly and with no affection for him at all. His masculine vanity would not permit such a thought to stay long in his mind. It was more pleasant to think she had fallen so suddenly in love with him, she had been willing lie to get him. But it was all very puzzling. He knew, he was no great catch for a woman, half his age, pretty, and smart to boot, but Frank was a gentleman and he kept his bewilderment to himself. Scarlett was his wife and he could 37 not insult her by asking awkward questions which, after all, would not remedy matters. (p. 496, par. 2) I gave the readers opinion that when Scarlett handled the business, Frank thought that in the tradition men were omniscient and women none too bright. When she heard that Frank died because he went out with the Klan. She felt that she killed him. He had begged her not to go out alone but she had not listened to him. She shivered, frightened, and wishing Frank were alive, she could be nice to him to make up for it all. My friends said that Scarlett regretted again. My friends also said that she always remembered Ashley, she could not lose his name from her mind. Third, Scarlett married Rhett Butler. He knew everything about Scarlet. Her love, and her reputation. Since the first day he saw at Twelve Oaks when she threw a vase, he began to love her. “I always intended having you, Scarlett, since that first day I saw you at Twelve Oaks when you threw that vase and swore and proved that you weren‟t a lady. I always intended having you, one way or another. But as you and Frank have made a little money, I know you‟ll never be driven to me again with any interesting propositions of loans and collaterals. So I see I‟ll have to marry you”. (p. 672, par. 10) With Rhett, she could tell him anything. He had been so bad himself that he would not sit in judgment on her. For her it was wonderful to know someone who was bad, a cheat, a liar, and dishonorable. Rhett brought her to honeymooning in New Orleans. She did have fun, more fun than she had had since the spring before the war. New Orleans was such a strange, glamorous place and Scarlett enjoyed it. She felt happy since she had married Rhett. However, she could not loss Ashley from his mind. When Melanie Mamilton died, Rhett told her everything about his feeling. “Did it occur to you that I loved you as much as a man can love a woman?Loved you for years before I finally got you?During the war I‟d go away and try to forget you, but I couldn‟t and I always had to come back. After the war I risked arrest, just to come back and find you. I cared so much I believe, I would have killed Frank Kennedy if he hadn‟t died when he did. I loved you but I couldn‟t let yon know it. You‟re so brutal to those who love you. Scarlett! You take their love and hold it over their heads like a whip.” (p. 810, par. 10) Then he continued, “I knew you didn‟t love me when I married you. I knew about Ashley, you see. But, fool that I was, I thought I could make you care. Laugh, if you like, but I wanted to take care of you, to pet you, to give you everything you wanted. I wanted to marry you, and to protect you and give you a free rein in anything that would make you happy.....” (p. 810, par. 12) 38 Scarlett had never understood either of the men, Ashley Wilkes and Rhett Butler. She had little knowledge about their love. Ashley Wilkes loved Melanie very much. For Rhett Butler, he loved Scarlett very much, but she did not know. Now, she had lost them both. My friends added that she realized to Rhett Butler‟s love. She would come home, Tara, and she would get Rhett back. According to my friends opinion, Scarlett had made a fool of a sacred marriage. In my opinion, Scarlett and Rhett had never felt of their loved and they also did not care of each others for their marriage. Stanley E. Fish as cited by Jane P. Tompkins (1980:90), asserts that: A statement may be used for the sake of the reference true or false, which it causes. We may either use words for the sake of the references they promote, or we may use them for the sake of the attitudes and emotions which ensue. It means that Scarlett had made a big mistake for her feeling. She only loved Ashley and she had sacrificed her feeling to other men. She did not love them, but she wanted to change Ashley for her life and left Melanie. However, Ashley still loved her wife, Melanie Hamilton. 4.2.3. Patriotism For the patriotism, Melanie and Ashley were honest and straightforward of it. Ashley hoped the Yankees would let go and people in the country would live peacefully without fighting anymore. “.........if Georgia fights, I‟ll go with her......” (p. 88) He joined his army to save the country. He was willing to die to maintain the country from the Yankee. Melanie also did the same with him. She gave the wedding ring for the Cause. As Rhett Butler said to her, “What a great gesture, it is such sacrifices as yours that hearten our brave lads in gray.” There was mockery in everything he said. She disliked him heartily, lounging there against the booth. But there was something stimulating about him, something warm, vital and electric.All that was Irish in her rose to the challenge of his black eyes. (p. 149) When he returned her ring, he wrote a letter that Confederacy needed the lifeblood of women. Rhett could not have chosen a more difficult time to beat his way back to respectability. Since the surrender, Rhett‟s name had been inextricably linked with Yankees, and Republicans. Atlanta cursed the name of Bullock and his Republicans, they cursed the name of anyone connected with them. Rhett was connected with them. For Scarlett, sometimes she was honest and straightforward for it. When she went to the bazaar with Melanie, she was embarrassed to be the only person who was giving nothing. Then, she saw the bright gleam of her wide gold wedding ring. And then she threw into the basket which was full of chains, watches, rings, pins, and 39 bracelets. But sometimes, she was bored with the Cause. When she helped the Troops in the hospital, she felt queasy. She chose to go out from the hospital. She did not care about that anymore. “I‟m just sick and tired of that old hospital,” she said, settling her billowing skirts and tying her bonnet bow more firmly under her chin. “And every day more and more wounded come in. It‟s all General Johnston‟s fault, if he‟d just stood up to the Yankees at Dalton, they‟d have.” Scarlett had no qualm of conscience as she watched them, but only a feeling of vast relief that she had made her escape. (p. 241) For their patriotism, my friends and I, gave the same opinion. They said that Ashley and Melanie were honest and straightforward for this patriotism. They were willing to die to maintain their country. For Scarlett, we gave the opinion that sometimes she supported the patriotism, but sometimes she was unconcerned of this patriotism. She always thought that the war had ruined her happiness. For Rhett Butler, we informed that he was a traitor. Akhlis said that he always thought of his business. He did not care of the war, he also disparaged this patriotism. According to David Bleich, as cited by Jane P. Tompkins (1980:144), the reader defines this experience by bringing to the work personality traits, memories of past events, present needs and preoccupations, a particular mood of the moment and a particular physical conditions. It means that when we read this patriotism, we could feel what happened in the past. We could feel that Ashley and Melanie were straightforward and honest for their country. Ashley and his soldier hoped that Yankee would let them go from the country. We also could feel the physical conditions of the soldier and the people because of the war. 5. Conclusion From the analysis above, the writer conclude that the main characters have the problems during the war. First, according to Akhlis and Vivi, Scarlett O‟Hara had the obsession of her love that she love Ashley Wilkes very much. Although Scarlett had married three times, she could not forget him from her mind. However, she recognized that she loved Rhett Butler, and she would get him back. It is different from Rhett Butler, he loved her. He knew that she love Ashley, he felt that she would forget him after they got married. Second, for their marriage, according to Akhlis, only Ashley Wilkes and Melanie Hamilton who were happy. Scarlett O‟Hara and Rhett Butler were not happy, because of Scarlett could not forget Ashley from her mind. Third, for the patriotism, according to Vivi, only Ashley Wilkes and Melanie Hamilton who were honest and straightforward. Scarlett O‟Hara sometimes supported the patriotism, but sometimes, she was unconcerned of it. Akhlis added that Scarlett feels the war has ruined her happiness. Rhett Butler was a traitor, because he does not care about the war. He always thought of his business. 6. References Berg, Bruce L.1990. Qualitative Research Methods For The Social Sciences. Pennsylvania: Indiana University of Pennsylvania 40 Bond, Guy L., et al.1984. Reading Difficulties:Their Diagnosis and Correction. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Inc. Collie, J. & Slater, S. 1992. Literature in the Language Classroom-A Resource Book of Ideas and Activities. Great Britain: Cambridge University Press. Colman, Andrew M. 1996. Applications of Psychology. Malaysia: Longman. Davidoff, Linda L. 1976. Introduction to Psychology. New York: Mc. Graw-Hill Book Company. Encyclopedia Americana. 1988. New York: Grolier Incorporated. ---------------- Britannica. 1978. New York: Encyclopedia Britannica, Inc. Freud, Sigmund. 1987. Memperkenalkan Psikoanalisa. Translated from Ueber Psychoanalyze, Fünf Vorlesungen by Dr. K. Bertens. Jakarta: PT. Gramedia. Fromm, Erich. 1956. The Art of Loving. New York: Harper. Gordon, Allport W. 1961. Pattern and Growth in Personality. New York: Holt. Hall, Calvin S., and Gardner Lindzey. 1978. Theories of Personality. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Hurlock, Elizabeth B. 1976. Personality Development. New Delhi: Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing Company Ltd. Hornby, A.S., 1994. Oxford Advanced Learner‟s Dictionary. Great Britain: Oxford University Press. Koenosoebroto, S. B., 1988. The Antomy of Prose Fiction. Jakarta: Departemen Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan, Direktorat Jenderal Pendidikan Tinggi, Proyek Pengembangan Lembaga Pendidikan Tenaga Kependidikan. Krench, David and friends. 1969. Elements of Psychology. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, Inc. Mischell, Walter, et al. 2004. Introduction To Personality: Toward An Intregation. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. May, Elaine Tyler. 1980. Great Expectations: Marriage and Divorce in Post-Victorian America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Morner, Kathleen & Ralph Rausch. 1991. NTC‟s Dictionary of Literary Terms. New York: NTC Publishing Group Inc. Moskowitz, Merle J. 1967. Psychology Life. New York: Scott, Foresman and Company. Pervin, Lawrence A.1984. Personality: Theories and Research. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Schultz, Duane. 1981. Theories of Personality: 2nd Edition. New York: Wordsworth, Inc Tesch, Renata. 1990. Qualitative Research: Analysis Types and SoftwareTools. London: The Falmer Press. Tompkins, Jane P.1980. Reader-Response Criticism From Formalism To Post-Structuralism. London: The Johns Hopkins Press Ltd. Tressider, Megan. 1997. The Secret of Language of Love. San Fransisco: Chronicle Books. Wardhaugh, Ronald. 1969. Reading: A linguistic Perspective. New York: Harcout Brace and World. Woody. RH, and Jane Divita Woody. 1973. Sexual, Marital, and Familial Relations. New York: Charles C. Thomas. www.explorelove.co.uk http://www.explorelove.co.uk/ Page 1 Page 2 Page 1 Page 2