This essay mainly questions the validity of some ”bright” optimistic criticism on Eugene O'Neill's famous tragedy, Long Day's Journey into Night, especially the validity of Frederic I. Carpenter's argument that ”the play focuses on the Transcendental idealism of Edmund Tyrone” (158), that ”he achieves what O‘Neill had prophesied for his autobiographical hero: 'the birth of a soul'” (155), ”which would result in his ultimate triumph” (158), that Edmund will ”journey into light.” With many insightful comments by other critics and abundant references of the play itself, this essay carefully examines many statements by Carpenter to suggest that his optimistic argument about ”Transcendental idealism” of the play is unconvincing and questionable. In other words, this essay will explore the reasons to show why such an argument is inappropriate by closely examining the main characters and the important relevant events in the play. The aim of the essay is to draw a conclusion that the play does not really focus on any ”idealism,” transcendental or not. Rather, as one of the most powerful modern tragedies, it focuses on the tragic condition of human anxiety and suffering and on the human self-destructive struggle against desperation, alienation and loneliness in the modern world. More precisely, the play demonstrates the dark side of the universal condition of man through the tragic effects of the miserable and desperate Tyrone family. Thus, if we can identify any-isms in the play, tragic realism, pessimism, naturalist fatalism or determinism are much more strongly displayed than Carpenter's ”Transcendental idealism.”
