Character Anarchy And The Stylistics Of Identity In Diana Wynne Jones Howl’s Moving Castle
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
This study interrogates the limits of conventional stylistic analysis by examining how instability, rather than coherence, constructs character identity in Diana Wynne Jones’ Howl’s Moving Castle. Anchored in discourse stylistics, identity construction theory, and post-structuralist perspectives, the research introduces “character anarchy” as a systematic framework for analyzing fluid and non-cohesive identities. Using a qualitative, text-based design, the study analyzes Howl’s dialogue through a coding scheme focusing on deixis, modality, evaluative language, tonal shifts, and contradictions. Findings reveal that Howl’s identity is not fixed but dynamically negotiated through language, in which deictic shifts signal unstable positioning, modal expressions encode ambivalence, and evaluative markers reveal layered, often conflicting attitudes. Moreover, contradictions and tonal oscillations function as deliberate stylistic strategies, producing a performative, context-dependent self that resists a unified interpretation. Rather than treating inconsistency as a narrative flaw, the study demonstrates that linguistic instability operates as a meaningful mechanism of characterization. By integrating micro-level linguistic features with macro-level theoretical insights, the proposed Character Anarchy Stylistic Framework (CASF) offers a replicable model for analyzing complex literary identities across texts and media. The study contributes to stylistics by reconceptualizing identity as emergent, fragmented, and discursively constructed, advancing methodological approaches that account for multiplicity and variation. In alignment with Sustainable Development Goal 4 (Quality Education), it further promotes critical and flexible reading practices that engage with textual complexity. Overall, the research positions character anarchy as a significant and innovative lens for understanding contemporary narrative characterization in literary and interdisciplinary studies.
Article Details
Section
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright © 2024 IJPLH, its licensors, and contributors. All rights are reserved. For all open access content, the Creative Commons (CC) Attribution 4.0 International Public License terms apply.
How to Cite
References
Ahmad, H., & Ghafar, N. A. (2025). Stylistic variation and linguistic strategies in Qur’anic discourse: A rhetorical, phonetic, and translational analysis. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, 9(4), 100-110.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology, 3(2), 77-101.
Brown, G., & Yule, G. (1983). Discourse analysis. Cambridge university press.
Bucholtz, M., & Hall, K. (2005). Identity and interaction: A sociocultural linguistic approach. Discourse studies, 7(4-5), 585-614.
Castro, A. (2025). The year’s work in stylistics 2023 & 2024. Language and Literature, 34(3), 302-324.
Conway, M. L. (2019). Judging the Judges: A Narrative Appraisal Analysis. Penn State Press.
Derrida, J. (1978). Structure, sign and play in the discourse of the human sciences, in writing and difference, trans. Alan Bass.
Enkvist, N. E. (1985). Text and discourse linguistics, rhetoric and stylistics. Discourse and literature, 3, 11-38.
Fairclough, N. (2003). Analysing discourse: Textual analysis for social research.
Forehand, M., Reed, A., & Saint Clair, J. K. (2021). Identity interplay: The importance and challenges of consumer research on multiple identities. Consumer Psychology Review, 4(1), 100-120.
Foucault, M. (1972). The archaeology of knowledge: Translated from the french by AM Sheridan Smith. Pantheon Books.
Du Gay, P., & Hall, S. (1996). Questions of Cultural Identity: SAGE Publications.
Goddard, C., Taboada, M., & Trnavac, R. (2019). The semantics of evaluational adjectives: Perspectives from Natural Semantic Metalanguage and Appraisal. Functions of Language, 26(3), 308-342.
Herrmann, B., & Kraxenberger, M. (2025). Ambiguous Evaluation of Literature in the Digital Space. Charting a Multi-Faceted Phenomenon. Zeitschrift für digitale Geisteswissenschaften.
Hunston, S., & Thompson, G. (Eds.). (2000). Evaluation in text: Authorial stance and the construction of discourse: Authorial stance and the construction of discourse. Oxford University Press, UK.
Janks, H. (2010). “Language as a System of Meaning Potential”: The Reading and Design of Verbal Texts. In Beyond the grammar wars (pp. 161-179). Routledge.
Jaweed, S. H. (2025). Modality in linguistics (Doctoral dissertation, Doctoral dissertation, Ministry of Higher Education). Retrieved from: https://systems. uomisan. edu. iq/projects/uploads/files/m4fa6oe03u9ijdt. pdf).
Jeffries, L., & Walker, B. (2020). We are NOT all in this together: A corpus-assisted critical stylistics analysis of" Austerity" in Print News Media 2009-10 and 2016-17. In The Discursive Construction of Economic Inequality: CADS Approaches to the British media (pp. 125-141). Bloomsbury Publishing.
Jia, N. Y. (2019). Intertextuality in the Socio-cultural Elements of Howl’s Moving Castle (Master's thesis, University of Malaya (Malaysia)).
Kreuz, R. (2023). Linguistic fingerprints: How language creates and reveals identity. Simon and Schuster.
Leech, G. N., & Short, M. (2007). Style in fiction: A linguistic introduction to English fictional prose (No. 13). Pearson Education.
Levi, A. (2008). Howl's Moving Castle.
Lyons, A. (2014). Self-presentation and self-positioning in text-messages: Embedded multimodality, deixis, and reference frame (Doctoral dissertation, Queen Mary University of London).
Mansoor, M. S., & Salman, Y. M. (2020). Linguistic deviation in literary style: A stylistic analysis. Cihan University-Erbil Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 4(1), 7-16.
McLean, K. C., Syed, M., Pasupathi, M., Adler, J. M., Dunlop, W. L., Drustrup, D., ... & McCoy, T. P. (2020). The empirical structure of narrative identity: The initial Big Three. Journal of personality and social psychology, 119(4), 920.
Medina, J. (2003). Identity trouble: Disidentification and the problem of difference. Philosophy & social criticism, 29(6), 655-680.
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldana, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis. sage.
Palmer, F. R. (2001). Mood and modality. Cambridge university press.
Pounds, G. (2015). Evaluative language. In International Encyclopedia of Language and Social Interaction 3 Volume Set. Wiley.
Price, H. (2022). The year’s work in stylistics 2021. Language and Literature, 31(4), 519-540.
Riffaterre, M. (1959). Criteria for style analysis. Word, 15(1), 154-174.
Schilling, N. (2013). Investigating stylistic variation. The handbook of language variation and change, 325-349.
Simpson, P. (2004). Stylistics: A resource book for students.
Stephens, J. (2018). Linguistics and stylistics. In Intl Comp Ency Child Lit E2 V1 (pp. 99-111). Routledge.
Stubbs, M. (2010). Three concepts of keywords. Keyness in texts, 21-42.
Van Leeuwen, T. (2008). Discourse and practice: New tools for critical discourse analysis. Oxford university press.
Wang, X., & Evanini, K. (2019). Features measuring content and discourse coherence. In Automated Speaking Assessment (pp. 138-156). Routledge.