"I did something I never had done before: hugged Maggie to me, then dragged her on into the room, snatched the quilts out of Miss Wangero's hands and dumped them into Maggie's lap. Maggie just sat there on my bed with her mouth open" ("Everyday Use," 76).
Mrs. Johnson's unprecedented words and actions with Dee illustrate a major change in character -- the narrator is a dynamic character. Both Mrs. Johnson's motivation and foreshadowing throughout the story make this a fitting shift in character.
I would describe both the narrator and Maggie as "simple." Mrs. Johnson is a rough, hardworking mother, and Maggie lacks "good looks," "money," and "quickness," much like her mother (13). While Mrs. Johnson and Maggie share this special connection, Dee has developed a different "style," which the narrator passively resented (12). "No" was a word Mrs. Johnson has rarely spoken to her eldest daughter (2). That's the before situation -- there is a conflict between Dee and her mother, and I knew it would be resolved, probably by her mother finally saying that word, "no."
Several plot elements probably drove the mother to refuse to let Dee have her mother's quilts. Dee detached herself from her "oppressive" family by changing her name to "Wangero" (25). Then, she took the family's churn top, a tool both beautiful and useful to Mrs. Johnson (54). Then, when the narrator suddenly refused to allow Dee to take the quilts, Dee accused her of not understanding her heritage (81).
I attribute the narrator's sudden shift to an epiphany, and I believe that this change in character is permanent -- it fits perfectly. The narrator made a promise to Maggie (64) -- or at least said she did -- because she is legitimately closer to Maggie. Additionally, Dee's actions were inconsistent; she abandoned her family name, yet accused Mrs. Johnson of not understanding her heritage. Go, Mrs. Johnson!
Also, Big Dee (in video game form -- 0:33):
Wednesday, November 16, 2011
Wednesday, November 9, 2011
Evidence that I need to sleep:
"We did not say she was crazy then. We believed she had to do that" ("A Rose for Emily," 28).
This is not going to be one of my most profound blog posts. I would just like to express my confusion and theories about the conflicts within these three short stories. Specifically, I'm going to try to identify the protagonists and the antagonists of all of the stories, which is mostly speculative and kind of difficult for me. I don't expect these to be completely accurate. Then, I will pose a question about "A Rose for Emily."
How I Met My Husband:
This is not going to be one of my most profound blog posts. I would just like to express my confusion and theories about the conflicts within these three short stories. Specifically, I'm going to try to identify the protagonists and the antagonists of all of the stories, which is mostly speculative and kind of difficult for me. I don't expect these to be completely accurate. Then, I will pose a question about "A Rose for Emily."
How I Met My Husband:
- Protagonist: Edie (the central character -- this one is easy to identify)
- Antagonist: Herself (maybe? Specifically, Edie's past self before she became "wiser")
Interpreter of Maladies:
- Protagonist: Mr. Kapasi (alternatively, Mrs. Das, as a lot of action revolves around her)
- Antagonist: Umm, himself (an internal conflict about Mrs. Das, perhaps; if the protagonist is Mrs. Das, I would say the antagonist is herself, as well, due to her unstable family life)
A Rose for Emily:
- Protagonist: Emily (alternatively, the town as a collective "we," but the action revolves more around Emily, I think)
- Antagonist: The town ("we"), who always seem to be working against her (alternatively, Emily if the town is the protagonist)
Here's my question. Let's say that the protagonist of "A Rose for Emily" is indeed Emily. Recalling that the book defines a "happy ending" as the solving of the protagonist's problems, and observing that Emily solved her problem with Homer by murdering him, doesn't "A Rose for Emily" have a happy ending?
"Then we noticed that in the second pillow was the indentation of a head. One of use lifted something from it, and leaning forward, that faint and invisible dust dry and acrid in the nostrils, we saw a long strand of iron-gray hair" ("A Rose for Emily," 60).
How many people used that quote, do you think? Also, I had to read this story a few times to understand; the chronology is all mixed up, which is nice and rhetorical and everything, but it's not easy to read.
The evidence seems to be there that Emily murdered Homer -- the poison she bought, the iron-gray hair, and the presence of his body in her house. I'm going to talk about motivation; why would Emily murder Homer? Let's take a look at some possibilities!
How many people used that quote, do you think? Also, I had to read this story a few times to understand; the chronology is all mixed up, which is nice and rhetorical and everything, but it's not easy to read.
The evidence seems to be there that Emily murdered Homer -- the poison she bought, the iron-gray hair, and the presence of his body in her house. I'm going to talk about motivation; why would Emily murder Homer? Let's take a look at some possibilities!
- The town pressed her for taxes (4).
- Her father died (15).
- Potentially, she was crazy (28).
- Homer was not a good fit for her -- a Yankee, a foreman (30).
- Homer himself liked men (43).
There are clues all over the story that foreshadow Emily's murdering Homer. She handles situations without leaving her house, as she did with the people collecting taxes, and she clings to people after they die, as she did with her dead father. It's likely that because Homer was not a good fit for Emily and he liked men, Emily could not leave him the way a normal person would. She left him Emily-style -- she didn't leave her house, and she clung to his dead body.
This is all kind of gross.
Pain or guilt? Or am I the only person who cares about this scrap of paper?
"The paper curled as Mr. Kapasi wrote his address in clear, careful letters. She would write to him, asking about his days interpreting at the doctor's office, and he would respond eloquently, choosing only the most entertaining anecdotes, ones that would make her laugh out loud as she read them in her house in New Jersey" ("Interpreter of Maladies," 89).
The central conflict in this story is emotional, inside Mr. Kapasi, and in response to Mrs. Question Four (that question is a girl), I would argue that the conflict is resolved. During the story, Mr. Kapasi develops of "feeling of intoxication" for Mrs. Das, who his unhappily married like himself (79). The "scrap of paper" (88) on which he wrote his address serves as a metaphor for Mr. Kapasi's fantasy-relationship with Mrs. Das, which changes throughout the plot.
Mr. Kapasi first develops his feelings for Mrs. Das just before he writes his information on the scrap of paper, and once he does, the fantasy begins. "The promise that he would hear from Mrs. Das" (89) makes everything in the world seem right. Later, he develops a desire to be "alone with her" (100) and an obsession with when he will hear back from her (109). The feeling begins to fade when Mrs. Das assumed that Mr. Kapasi had children (147 -- my favorite integer). By the time the paper "fluttered away in the wind" (179), Mr. Kapasi preserves an image of the Das family from the monkey attack, which is not a particularly flattering image.
When the scrap of paper was in Mrs. Das's purse, Mr. Kapasi fantasized about their potential relationship. When the paper was absent from the purse, Mr. Kapasi had no intimate feelings toward Mrs. Das. Thus, the presence of the scrap of paper is a metaphor for that fantasy-relationship.
If I define the major conflict in the story as Mr. Kapasi's internal relationship development with Mrs. Das, then the conflict is resolved. When the scrap of paper flies away, Mr. Kapasi has come to the conclusion that he has different family values than Mrs. Das, and she does not have any feelings for him.
The central conflict in this story is emotional, inside Mr. Kapasi, and in response to Mrs. Question Four (that question is a girl), I would argue that the conflict is resolved. During the story, Mr. Kapasi develops of "feeling of intoxication" for Mrs. Das, who his unhappily married like himself (79). The "scrap of paper" (88) on which he wrote his address serves as a metaphor for Mr. Kapasi's fantasy-relationship with Mrs. Das, which changes throughout the plot.
Mr. Kapasi first develops his feelings for Mrs. Das just before he writes his information on the scrap of paper, and once he does, the fantasy begins. "The promise that he would hear from Mrs. Das" (89) makes everything in the world seem right. Later, he develops a desire to be "alone with her" (100) and an obsession with when he will hear back from her (109). The feeling begins to fade when Mrs. Das assumed that Mr. Kapasi had children (147 -- my favorite integer). By the time the paper "fluttered away in the wind" (179), Mr. Kapasi preserves an image of the Das family from the monkey attack, which is not a particularly flattering image.
When the scrap of paper was in Mrs. Das's purse, Mr. Kapasi fantasized about their potential relationship. When the paper was absent from the purse, Mr. Kapasi had no intimate feelings toward Mrs. Das. Thus, the presence of the scrap of paper is a metaphor for that fantasy-relationship.
If I define the major conflict in the story as Mr. Kapasi's internal relationship development with Mrs. Das, then the conflict is resolved. When the scrap of paper flies away, Mr. Kapasi has come to the conclusion that he has different family values than Mrs. Das, and she does not have any feelings for him.
No Post on Sundays
"I was always smiling when the mailman got there, and continued smiling even after he gave me the mail and I saw today wasn't the day" ("How I Met My Husband," 196).
That, Mr. Question One, is where my expectations as a reader were overturned definitively. That's not to say that there weren't elements throughout the plot that suggested the turn of events at the end of the story.
The plot structure was mostly chronological with two exceptions -- a flashback (the story of how Edie got her job) and a few subtle references to the future. For the most part, the flashback characterized Edie as common and humble (making her a sympathetic character) as she dropped out of school and started simple work (23-24). The future references, on the other hand, foreshadowed the end of the story. Phrases like "I see that now, but didn't then" (157) and "I didn't figure out till years later" (195) suggested an impending shift in Edie's life in which she would become wiser.
Another element within the plot was the slow revelation that Chris Waters was arguably very unsuitable for Edie. He was engaged to Alice (93), was not very close with her (117), and cheated on her -- without intimacy, of course (143). The simple girl, Edie, needed someone who was ready to settle down, a prerequisite Chris clearly did not meet (I originally typed "meat").
Although I did not completely expect Edie to settle down with someone other than Chris until the second-to-last page of the story, I recognize that the arrangement of the plot gave me, the reader, clues about Edie's future with not Chris but Carmichael.
That, Mr. Question One, is where my expectations as a reader were overturned definitively. That's not to say that there weren't elements throughout the plot that suggested the turn of events at the end of the story.
The plot structure was mostly chronological with two exceptions -- a flashback (the story of how Edie got her job) and a few subtle references to the future. For the most part, the flashback characterized Edie as common and humble (making her a sympathetic character) as she dropped out of school and started simple work (23-24). The future references, on the other hand, foreshadowed the end of the story. Phrases like "I see that now, but didn't then" (157) and "I didn't figure out till years later" (195) suggested an impending shift in Edie's life in which she would become wiser.
Another element within the plot was the slow revelation that Chris Waters was arguably very unsuitable for Edie. He was engaged to Alice (93), was not very close with her (117), and cheated on her -- without intimacy, of course (143). The simple girl, Edie, needed someone who was ready to settle down, a prerequisite Chris clearly did not meet (I originally typed "meat").
Although I did not completely expect Edie to settle down with someone other than Chris until the second-to-last page of the story, I recognize that the arrangement of the plot gave me, the reader, clues about Edie's future with not Chris but Carmichael.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)