At its core, Wieland is an epistemological investigation that examines how we know the world. The novel was written about a century and a half after René Descartes published his major works on philosophy, specifically a branch of philosophy called skepticism.
Descartes understood that the answer to the question “how do we know the world?” is through our senses. We know that fire is hot and honey is sweet because we have experienced them as such, and with enough experiences we construct a view of the world solid enough to help us navigate it. However, our senses can and do deceive us. Optical illusions that distort size and distance or imagining our name being called when no one is calling are a couple examples of how our senses are susceptible to manipulation and error.
Not only that, but Descartes acknowledged that many of the beliefs he once had have turned out to be completely false. Whether it’s the geocentric model or the existence of Santa, beliefs that were once held so strongly that any doubt of them would be absurd can be discredited so powerfully that considering even a hint of truth in them becomes the new absurd. For Descartes, this meant that nothing can be taken for granted. If you were wrong once about something you can very well be wrong about everything and therefore, must be skeptical of everything.
The other central idea to Descartes’ claims is our experience of dreams, which he writes about extensively. His argument regarding dreams can be summarized in the following quote:
There are no conclusive signs by means of which one can distinguish clearly between being awake and being asleep, and that I am quite astonished by it; and my astonishment is such that it is almost capable of persuading me that I am asleep now.
Descartes, Rene. Discourse on Method and the Meditations. 1637
In other words, most of us, Wieland’s Clara included, have had dreams that vividly mimic reality and real moments that feel excerpted from dreams. By questioning the boundaries that demarcate dreams from reality as a whole, we participate in what he calls global doubt, a type of doubt we cannot step out of because it engulfs our very thought processes.
This is where he introduces the idea I believe is most central to Wieland: the Evil Genius. In his skeptical approach to epistemology, Descartes proposed the existence of an evil genius/demon, whose sole intent is to deceive humanity so convincingly his deceptions become indistinguishable from reality. There is nothing you can do to prove you are actually on your computer right now and not being efficiently deceived into thinking you are. For Descartes, the evil demon is not a literal entity, but because the possibility of his existence cannot be disproved, we are naturally deprived from truly knowing anything about the world.
Cartesian themes in Wieland are nearly impossibly to ignore, and it is probable that Brown would have been aware of the discourse at the time of writing this novel. From the shifts in beliefs throughout the novel to recurring dreams that merge with reality and the involvement of an evil genius who masterfully deceives the characters, this novel reads like an exemplary tale of radical skepticism.
From your post above: “Cartesian themes in Wieland are nearly impossibly to ignore, and it is probable that Brown would have been aware of the discourse at the time of writing this novel.”
Absolutely! Brown was part of an intellectual and social coterie called “The Friendly Club.” They engaged in wide-ranging philosophical discussions and shared works in progress (as writers, lawyers, and medical practitioners). Brown often discussed drafts of his works with this group.
Departing from the Cartesian focus on the individual as the ultimate source of knowledge, the Friendly Club (and other contemporary intellectual groups like it) located authority in the exchange of group conversation. These conversation circles and the production of knowledge thus depended on honest, reliable, and sincere communication between individuals. Through this lens, _Wieland_ probes the consequences of insincere (or “double-tounged”) communication and highlights the limits of individual discernment. But we could also ask to what degree narrative techniques in the novel – withholding, misdirection, layered voices, and the dreams you mention – are considered “insincere” forms of communication.
You could have lots of fun analyzing this novel though a specific philosophical lens (Brown himself would love it!). Thanks for starting that conversation!
I don’t know how much this relates, but when you brought up the fact that Brown was a part of a group called the Friendly Club, I could not help but think of Amy Tan’s The Joy Luck Club. In it the immigrant parents do much of the same thing that Brown and his group did. Much of their conversation revolved around their experiences in American society and various ways of Chinese thought and philosophy.
It is just interesting to see this idea of a club, has existed for so long in American history, and the significance that it has on American society. This idea of a club where people share and explain various thoughts and theories can be seen in Wieland. They have a very tight nit family, and often go to the temple to debate various topics and theories for years. The temple was their meeting spot.
I believe it is also safe to mention how Wieland was written after the Enlightenment period (the Age of Reason.) Not only do philosophical works like the one you mentioned revolve around the time period of Wieland’s publication, but also major social and political changes.
The Age of Reason (the Enlightenment) was a movement emphasizing skepticism (as you have mentioned in your blog post) as well as individualism, reason, and science. If we look at how Wieland is a novel full of doubt, questioning, rationality, and the self (senses), we may realize that it is not far off from its’ time period. Throughout the entirety of the novel, all the characters try to do is understand one another and the actions that follow. That need for logic, reason, and morality is emphasized on, even to the very last line of the novel: “If Wieland had framed juster notions of moral duty, and of the divine attributes…”
The characters really tie to the concepts/ideas of the time period and I think it is interesting that you mentioned the evil demon. I think that is the perfect description of Carwin.