In her novel Charlotte: A Tale of Truth, probably better known as Charlotte Temple, Susanna Rowson recounts the unhappy life of a young girl for a specific period. goal that she presents in the first lines of her work, with the following words: "and can, I flatter myself, be useful to some who are so unhappy that they have neither friends to advise, nor understanding for lead them, through the various and unexpected evils that accompany unprotected young women on their first entry into life” (Rowson 3). The author of this masterpiece was undoubtedly unaware at that time of the success that his work would experience over the following centuries. Indeed, first published in 1791 in England, Charlotte Temple has gone through more than two hundred editions to date and is still described today as “entertaining and readable” (Parker 59). The fact that a conduct manual originally written to educate young girls in the late 18th century remains popular to this day is likely the result of countless factors. The purpose of this essay is to discuss three of the many aspects of the story that contributed to Charlotte Temple's popularity. It will be suggested that the success of this novel comes above all from the form that Rowson chose to compose his work; secondly, the author's intrusions throughout the story and finally, the plausibility of the plot. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why violent video games should not be banned”? Get an original essay Initially, this essay will therefore focus on what is partly responsible for the success of Charlotte Temple, namely the form that Rowson chose to tell Charlotte's story. history. The particularity of this tale is that it contains a certain number of letters, without however being categorized as an epistolary novel. This framework allowed Rowson to exclusively select the advantages of the epistolary structure and, as we will see later, to simultaneously avoid the negative effects that this form could cause. First, let's focus on four strengths of the epistolary form present at Charlotte Temple. Professor Donna Campbell discusses three, namely: "[allowing] feelings and reactions to be presented without intrusion from the author, [giving] a sense of immediacy because the letters are written in the heart of the action, and [to give] a sense of immediacy because the letters are written in the heart of the action, and [to give] allow] the writer to present multiple points of view” (Campbell). Fourth, I would like to suggest that the epistolary form overall causes the reader to become more involved in the story. Thus, the combination of the two, the benefits listed by Campbell and the aspect of involvement, is a first approach to explaining the success of Susanna Rowson's novel. In accordance with the advantages highlighted by Campell, it is true that Rowson takes the opportunity to let his characters express their own state of mind through their letters. Mrs. Temple, for example, uses one of her letters to demonstrate her maternal affection for Charlotte when she writes: "As tomorrow is the anniversary of the happy day which delivered up my beloved daughter to the anxious wishes of a maternal heart" (Rowson 72). Charlotte also expresses her feelings towards her mother later in the story when she speaks of her remorse, saying that "my heart bled at the thought of what you would suffer" (132). In the same letter, she also shares her pain, writing “Oh! never, never! as long as I exist, will the agony of this moment be erased from my memory” (132). Finally, she evokes her helplessness when she asks: “But how should I proceed? (133). By directly accessing the characters' feelings, readers have the opportunity to get to know each of the letters' authors better and thus become more involved in the story. In addition to the freedom of expression given to his characters, Rowson also uses the "sense of immediacy" that Campbell praises in epistolary novels. Indeed, the author of Charlotte Temple applies the idea that the character composes his letter in the fire of action. This is seen when Charlotte inserts the following detail in a letter to her mother: “(I feel the burning blush of shame dying on my cheeks as I write it)” (133). can also be noticed in Montraville's letter to Charlotte when he adds "Tomorrow – but no, I can't tell you what tomorrow will produce" (158). actually writes the letters, which brings verisimilitude to the story. Thus, if the plot seems plausible or even completely real to readers, they will feel, once again, more involved. Finally, Rowson. exploited the last advantage that Campbell highlights concerning the epistolary form, namely its capacity to allow several points of view in the same story (Campbell). She gives Lucy Temple, Montraville and Charlotte the opportunity to express themselves and share their inner thoughts through their letters. The multiplicity of points of view shows the reader that Rowson does not simply add characters to shape a story around the protagonist, but that she creates them fully, giving them the ability to write, think and feel, which which, again, increases the plausibility of the plot and the reader's involvement in the story. Whether through the authentic expression of the character's feelings, the "sense of immediacy" or the multiplicity of points of view, readers have every chance of becoming involved in the story. According to Janet Gurkin Altman, “the epistolary form is unique in that it makes the reader (narrator) almost as important an agent in the narrative as the writer (narrator)” (Altman 88). It is true that, more generally, this form creates a feeling of involvement in the story which is explained by Altman as “the result of a union between writer and reader”. (88) and by Blythe Forcey as “a correspondence between the writers of the novel but also a correspondence between the author of the novel and his readers” (Forcey 229). The main idea behind these two explanations is that by adding letters in a story, the writer creates a connection between himself and the readers. Thus, thanks to this link, as well as the list of advantages of the epistolary form established by Campell, Rowson's readers feel more involved in the plot, which leads them to better appreciate the story in general, which which can largely explain the extent of the success encountered. by Charlotte Temple. It is now legitimate to wonder why Rowson did not choose to construct his novel entirely in epistolary form because it has several positive sides. Blythe Forcey raises a main issue linked to this structure which can justify Rowson's choice. When considering the exchange of letters as a reciprocal experience between reader and writer, as mentioned above, the audience must correctly interpret what the author wants to convey. However, the period in which Rowson wrote Charlotte Temple, as well as her aim of writing for innocent young girls, were inconsistent with such a form, "[s]ince [she] was writing in a time of rapid transition and for many possible audiences (rural/urban, British/American, naive/worldly, male/female, moral/amoral)” (Forcey 229). In this context, theRowson's audience was too diverse to be assured that everyone would correctly interpret the message the author wanted to communicate. Following this idea, Forcey also points out that "all the characters, even the villains, are allowed to 'speak for themselves' through the inclusion of their letters; they each have the opportunity to attract sympathy and identification of the reader” (233-34). Since Rowson's goal was to provide a driving manual for young girls, it would have been, once again, too dangerous to let them interpret the story for themselves. Thus, "[w]ithout the protective boundaries established by a controlling narrative presence, the epistolary novel leaves the female protagonist exposed, vulnerable, and even invisible" (230) and, therefore, what prevented Rowson from writing her entire narrative in epistolary form. is the lack of instructions that the narrator must give to the reader in order to avoid misinterpretations, misunderstandings and the risk of being seduced to the same level as Charlotte. The second aspect that contributed to Charlotte Temple's success as a driving manual is Rowson's style. participation in the novel as a “guardian” narrator. This specific name used by Forcey to describe the author's voice is, according to him, a "warm and maternal presence, [through which] this narrator acts as editor, moralizer, translator and guide for her young reader" (Forcey 230 ). . In addition to Forcey's explanation, I would suggest that Rowson's voice as "guardian narrator" has three functions that all contribute to the novel's popularity. It first acts as a counter-effect of the negative aspects of the epistolary form. His intrusion into the story serves on the one hand to guide the audience by emphasizing the important aspects of the story and finally, Rowson's voice, by speaking directly, aims to capture the attention of his readers and give them a feeling of individualization. Even if Charlotte Temple is not considered an epistolary novel, the risk remains that naive young girls will be seduced by certain letters written by "the bad guys", as Forcey calls them (229). To ward off this danger, Rowson simply chose not to include certain letters, the contents of which might attract young and innocent souls. For example, she substitutes Montraville's letter with the following explanation: Any reader who has the slightest knowledge of the world will easily imagine that the letter was composed of praise of its beauty and wishes for eternal love and constancy; nor would I be surprised if a heart open to all gentle and generous feelings felt warmed by gratitude for a man who claimed to feel so many feelings for her; nor is it improbable that his mind would return to the pleasant person and martial appearance of Montraville. (Rowson, 39 years old) Thus, Rowson succeeded in writing his story of truth and retaining all its verisimilitude but without harming his idea of ​​making his novel a conduct manual suitable for young girls. Another function of Rowson's voice as a "gatekeeper" narrator is to emphasize certain passages to ensure that readers understand the message she is conveying. This phenomenon occurs several times at Charlotte Temple. This is the case, for example, when she recounts the early life of Mr. Temple and, at one point, she explains that "Temple heard the news with emotion: he had lost his father's favor by confessing his passion for Luca, and he now saw that there was no hope of finding him again” (34). At first glance, this summary of the situation given by Rowson may seem unnecessary to any attentive reader. It is not impossible, however, that young readers may have misunderstood the previous dialogue between Mr. Temple and his father. Inextrapolating the idea that she is writing for innocent souls, it is true that the author's comment is justified. This emphasis on specific aspects of the story can also be easily noticed with the introduction of new characters into the plot. For example, when she first mentions Miss Weatherby, in addition to a preliminary description and the insertion of an illustrative poem, Rowson comments that "such was Miss Weatherby: her form was as fair as nature could return it, but his mind is uncultivated, his heart insensitive, his passions impetuous, and his brain almost turned by flattery, dissipation and pleasure” (32). The same process applies to the description of Montraville (57), a character the reader already knows. At this point in the story, this is probably the most striking example. Rowson's emphasis is as follows: “The reader had undoubtedly already developed the character of La Rue; design, clever, selfish, . . .” (92) and “Let the reader not imagine that Belcour’s designs were honorable” (95). Thus, even if she is aware that the audience knows, at this point in the story, the characters of Charlotte Temple well, the author continues to emphasize certain aspects on which the reader is supposed to concentrate so as not to be confused more late with one of the characters or with one of their intentions. Finally, the third function of the gatekeeper narrator is Rowson's ability to capture his audience's attention through direct address. Throughout Charlotte's story, she never stops speaking to them directly with calls such as "Oh my dear daughter" (41), "thoughtless daughters of madness" (51), "Oh my friends" (85), “my dear young readers” (86), and so on. Many times she goes further than just naming them and interrupts the story. This happens when she devotes an entire chapter to the reader's hypothetical reaction to her story. Indeed, in the twenty-eighth chapter, Rowson anticipates that readers will tire of Charlotte's misfortune and writes "my lively and innocent daughter, I must ask for your patience." . . . Please do not throw it aside before having studied the whole thing; perhaps you will find there something to reward you for the trouble” (169). In the same chapter, she also imagines and answers the questions raised by her readers (170). This interruption in the course of the story calls readers to order and captures their attention. The idea that Rowson piques the interest of his audience can also be seen in shorter passages. The following passage is a common example of Rowson's brief intrusion into Charlotte's tale: Oh my dear daughter – for I write only to this one – listen not to the voice of love, unless 'to be sanctioned by paternal approval: rest assured that it has now passed. days of romance: no woman can run away contrary to her own inclination: so kneel down every morning and ask the good heaven to keep you free from temptation, or, please to allow you to be tried, pray for the courage to resist the impulse of inclination when it goes against the precepts of religion and virtue. (41) Beyond simply capturing their attention, this extract even gives the reader a feeling of individualization. This feeling comes from two main aspects. On the one hand, Rowson speaks directly to her reader when she begins with “Oh my dear girl.” On the other hand, it dictates a certain behavior through imperatives such as “not to listen”, “to reassure”, “to kneel”, etc. These instructions are very similar to the advice of an older sister or a caring mother. And how could a lost and confused young girl ignore the advice of a caring older parent? AAnother typical example of this maternal role appears when Rowson behaves like a big sister on behalf of the mothers to emphasize the pain suffered by Mrs. Temple with the disappearance of Charlotte (85-86). Thus, Rowson's voice appears as a means of capturing readers' attention and even giving them a sense of individualization that could explain Charlotte Temple's success. The third and final factor suggested to explain the success of Rowson's novel is the verisimilitude of the story. This phenomenon is defined by The Oxford Dictionary as "[the] appearance of being true or real" and author Charlotte Temple ensures that her plot conforms to this idea. First of all, and from the beginning of her novel, she draws the readers' attention to the fact that they should "consider [Charlotte Temple] not only as an outpouring of fantasy, but as a reality" (3) and confirms the real existence of the protagonist when she states that “an old lady…”. had personally known Charlotte” (3). This is what critics, such as Elias Nason, praise in Charlotte Temple, asserting that it is "a faithful transcription of real life, in 1774, and it is therefore a living book, and if we criticize as best we can, people will read it after all, mourn it and appreciate it” (Nason 47). Several factors contribute to the plausibility of the plot. As mentioned earlier in this essay, the letters enhance the plausibility of Charlotte's story through the manner in which they are composed, the multiplicity of their authors, and their content. What also gives the story an aspect of reality are the recurring changes in points of view. It is a way of reminding the reader that life continues after the protagonist's departure for the New World and that even if Charlotte is at the center of the story, other characters continue to exist. This can be seen when Rowson devotes an entire chapter to Charlotte's parents who remained in England (Rowson 151-54). The same effect applies to Montraville when he argues with his father (61-64). Plot plausibility plays a major role for a driving manual. Indeed, if the author wants to convince young girls by making them learn something from Charlotte's experiences, the plot must be real, or at least appear to be, so that she can have a impact on them. Charlotte Temple has enjoyed success that remains unmatched for a long time and the reasons that could explain such popularity are probably innumerable. The purpose of this essay was to discuss three of these reasons. The primary explanation for such success has been said to lie in the structure of the novel itself. The fact that Rowson chose to include a number of letters without relying entirely on the epistolary form allowed him to create the perfect framework for a driving manual. Indeed, it has been shown that this structure allows the reader to be confronted with the character's feelings, to benefit from a feeling of immediacy, to discover the story from several points of view and generally to become more involved in the plot. There was also discussion of why Rowson did not rely solely on the epistolary form despite all its strengths. The second part of the essay was devoted to Rowson's voice, which plays a crucial role in achieving the goal of his work, either in countering the negative effect of epistolary novels, by guiding his reader on important aspects of the story or giving the audience a feeling of individualization. Last but not least, the third part of this essay suggested that the verisimilitude of the plot was also necessary for the success of the novel. Other elements probably also contributed to the popularity of Charlotte Temple, such as the presence of the,.