Short Fiction Response II

"The Large Ant" by Howard Fast

Focussing Question: How do archetypes surrounding humanity affect Mr. Morgan's change in self-image?

To begin with, I'm not entirely sure of this specific focussing question, but I know archetypes will be instrumental in explaining the text. Here I want to attempt an archetypal analysis of the whole story, then choose which archetypes motivate the theme most.

From the outset, the archetype of "man" is understood to be critical. The narrator states that "we have never been any good at changing ourselves or the way we behave" and "I am like a great many other men, and do things they would do and just as thoughtlessly". Throughout the story, what it is to be "man" is explored. A great deal of the discussion revolves around how man is violent ("'I saw it, and somehow I knew that I must kill it. I didn't think or decide. I just grabbed the iron and hit it.'") and suspicious ("'They still won't believe you.'") and this would explain Mr. Morgan killing the ant; however, a deeper aspect of humanity is implied as well. The characters are generally in agreement that all humans are alike and would act the same in Mr. Morgan's place ("'I think that any man, black, white or yellow, in China, Africa or Russia, would have done the same thing.'"); perhaps, then, the habit of establishing and believing in a "human nature" is itself an archetypal trait of humanity. Maybe it's the conviction that all men are alike that is really causing the characters so much confusion; if they had more faith that they could change, perhaps they'd find out something useful about the ants. Intuitively, though, Fast seems to be implying that the characters are correct to say humanity is doomed with the "curse of fear", in Lieberman's words.

There are other archetypes present, like the setting; Morgan goes to a fishing shack in the summer. With its lawn and nearby water, the shack carries a number of archetypal connotations; it means Morgan can relax and that "there [is] nothing [he has] to do". Interestingly, Fast chose to set the story in Cold War America ("these nervous times", "since 1943, on my way to Europe", "the bomb", etc.), and that carries impressions about fear, confusion, distrust and the "iron curtain" of uncertainty. These two archetypes combine to make the appearance of the bug more effective; Morgan is astonished by the juxtaposition of such a grotesque creature and the archetypal "safe haven", and this event happening reinforces the impression that unbelievably terrible things of great scope could occur without anyone knowing, which is implied by the Cold War era. I'm reasonably confident that while these archetypes are used with effectiveness for establishing mood, they communicate relatively little about the theme.

Beauty, or its perception, have something to do with the theme. Morgan remarks about the bugs "tools", "they were beautiful the way any object of functional purpose and loving creation is beautiful--the way the creature itself would be beautiful, had it not been an insect and myself a man"; when I read this passage, my first instinct is to examine how the creature is, to Morgan, and object of functional purpose and loving creation. This is his first clue that the creature is something more than an ant. I'm unsure of whether, because the creature is an insect, Morgan's perception of its utilitarian beauty is impeded, or, if the creature were a man, would Morgan still consider it an object of "loving creation"? If so, who is the "creator"? God, presumably. Ironically, I think the creature would not be beautiful if it were a man, because it would be first and foremost a "man" in the sense of the archetype to Morgan; similarly, I realize it is probably an "ant" archetypally before it is a conscious entity in Morgan's eyes, but once he realizes it is capable of using tools, he understands that the "ant" has a certain beauty independent of the "ant" archetype.