Analytical and Personal Evaluation of Feminism in Prue and My Hear Is Broken

             Technically, both stories, My Heart Is Broken and Prue, published in 1964 and 1981, belong to the time period of the second wave feminism (1960s-1990). As such, I expected the works to portray some of the characteristics of the second wave feminist movement, refusing social and cultural inequalities, or “throwing ‘oppressive’ feminine artifacts such as bras, girdles, high-heels, makeup and false eyelashes into the trashcan.” (Rampton)

               Published during the early stages of the second wave feminism, My Heat Is Broken has two potential protagonists: Mrs. Thompson and Jeannie. By examining their conversation and attitude towards the main incident of the story, Jeannie’s rape, we can easily assume the contrasting characters of the two main characters. On the surface, their attitudes contrast in a way that Jeannie seems calm – applying “a bottle of coral-pink Cutex nail polish”- while Mrs. Thompson is worried, keeping Jeannie’s company because she thinks Jeannie “might be needing me.” On the other hand, under the surface, their attitudes shift. Jeannie reveals signs of shock: “I already can’t remember it…I was walking the wrong way- I couldn’t talk anyway” while Mrs. Thompson shows her true feelings: “Women don’t know when they’re well off. Here you’ve got a good, sensible husband working for you- You have to go and do a terrible thing.”

               Even disregarding Jeannie’s rape, the general opinion of women and gender role of the two ladies differ. Mrs. Thompson is conservative, denying “peroxides”, pursuing lovely homes and a life where she “get some curtains up and some carpets down” until her husband is home. “Fooling around” with her hair and having “grease spattered behind the stove”, Jeannie is more carefree and absentminded. She finds nothing wrong with taking a walk “like a little girl… in high heels… with a purse…and a hat” on her head.

               Up to this point, I appreciated the feminist insight of Jeannie denying the standardized role of women as a housewife, having freedom over her personal time, or being unrestricted of her appearance, with Mrs. Thompson setting a counterexample. However, in the last page of the story, Jeannie wishes that the rapist “could at least have liked” her and Mrs. Thompson wonders “if her heart had ever been broken, too.” They disappointed me by both turning out to be naïve female characters that depend on men for their happiness.

               Written closer to the third wave feminism period, Prue’s protagonist is a 40-year-old, seemingly light-hearted woman: Prue. As she “presents her life in anecdotes”, Prue is treated insincerely in all her relationships, but pretends not to care by always responding with a joke.

               In her relationship with Gordan, she is portrayed much like a safety net of Gordan. Not only when Gordan describes their marriage as “the Problem” does she “lightly” answer “What a problem?”, but when he confesses “I think I’m in love with this person…but I do think I want to marry you”, she jokes “oh… after you get over being in love?” Even worse, it seems like for Gordan, the crème brûlée is more important than Prue’s feelings. In terms of her relationship with her children, she rarely acts nor is treated seriously as a mother: “they bring presents, try to do her accounts,…. She is delighted with their presents, listens to their advice…” Lastly, although “everybody hopes that” she is not staying in Toronto because of Gordan, gossiping about and mocking her personal life, “She would laugh at the idea” and “people always feel cheered up after listening to her.”

               As a lover, a mother, and a female in society, Prue sets an example for the readers “what not to be” not only in terms of feminism, but also in terms of the equality of human race in general. I believe the author’s description of Prue’s method of coping with life - treating herself like the cufflink: “a reminder” yet “an intimate prank, a piece of nonsense” “not of great value but not worthless” in the tobacco tin, being “more or less forgotten” – is what really drew me away from viewing this work as a feminist literature.

               Although the two stories might have promoted women’s equality from a macroscopic perspective - having been written by a female author about a female character –, the motives and the content of both stories failed to reach me as a reader seeking for a more active, firsthand feminist movement. In a way, they both seem to belong to the third wave feminism where the concept of “feminism” is often not to be defined in a single manner. Thus, the ambiguousness had a negative impact on my evaluation of both stories.

 

<Works Cited>

Rampton, Martha. “The Three Waves of Feminism” Pacific University.Vol. 41 No. 2, Fall 2008

http://www.pacificu.edu/magazine_archives/2008/fall/echoes/feminism.cfm  

The Student

The Student

Chekhov is essentially a humorist. His is not the quiet, genial humor of an Addison or a Washington Irving nor the more subtle, often boisterous humor of a Mark Twain. His is rather the cynical chuckle of a grown-up watching a child assume grimaces of deep earnestness and self-importance. In his earlier stories the laughable, and it is a more or less cheerful laugh, with little of the serious behind it, often predominates. But as the stories grow more in volume, the undercurrent of gloom and a stifled groan of pain become more and more audible, until, in the later volumes, his laugh quite eloquently suggest the ominous combination of submission to Fate and Mephistophelian despair. — N Bryllion Fagin, "Anton Chekhov: The Master of the Gray Short-Story," Poet Lore, XXXII, Autumn 1921

         I quite enjoyed reading this short story by Chekhov. Mainly describing the conversation between three characters in a third person narrative, the Student has some unanswered questions and an open ending that encourage the readers to read the story multiple times. Furthermore, the most interesting factor was that the story has a “theme within a theme” where Chekhov seems to portray a theme in a straightforward way while actually he uses that theme to refer to another theme in a humorous way.

         At first reading the story, the story seemed somewhat awkward. The overall atmosphere of the writing -diction, depiction of scenery, character’s attitude- started out pessimistic; for example, Chekhov describes winter as “cheerless, remote, and lonely.” However, as the narrator says “life seemed to him enchanting, marvelous, and full of lofty meaning,” the atmosphere suddenly shifts to be optimistic towards the end. Also, the change in the story’s structure, from the metaphorical lecture about Peter to the straightforward statement about the student’s realization of “the chain”, was confusing. Then, as I read the story several times again, I realized that the awkwardness that bothered me was, really, a smart intention of the author who tried to show his cynicism on the student’s immaturity in an indirect, witty way.      

When interpreting the story in a simple manner, “The story tells of betrayal and remorse--a very human sequence but also offers the hope of forgiveness. Peter, after all, becomes one of the greatest of all saints. Human weakness and the need for redemption link us all, past, present, and future” (Coulehan,Jack.1999.NYU). The story seems to have a happy ending where Ivan, a student of the clerical academy, “experiences the power of the word to heal” while giving a biblical lecture to the two widows he encounters on his way home. However, although the last two paragraphs, beginning with the sentence “And joy suddenly stirred in his soul,” finishes the story in an optimistic atmosphere, the optimism soon reveals itself to have been a mere mask for the true pessimism hidden under it.

         In fact, even in the last paragraph the author hints at his doubts on the student: “He was only twenty-two”, “unknown mysterious happiness”, and “life seemed to him enchanting.” In addition, the uneasy attitude of the younger widow Lukerya, “staring immovably at the student, flushed crimson, and her expression became strained and heavy like that of someone enduring intense pain,” supports the author’s sarcasm, mocking the light hearted realization of the student who had not yet have lived long enough to judge and give lectures on the true meaning of life. In my opinion, by showing the student and the older widow’s belief in god and the distrust of the younger widow, the author tried to say that people, like the student, have faith in god until they encounter difficulties, like the young widow’s hardship of getting beaten by her husband; yet, as they experience even more obstacles in life, like the young widow’s mother, people ultimately return to having faith in god.