Fantaisie Printaniere may be seen, on the surface level, as a sardonic look at the negative effects of alcoholism in lower-class domestic relationships, but a deeper look at the story indicates a criticism, not of alcohol or the poor, but of the integrities of certain people. The novella begins with a description of two lower-class men—McTeague and Ryer—who have “taken to drink” (Norris 1). The description of these men provides two very important pieces of information: firstly, both of these men were not always poor and in fact lived comfortably. McTeague is described as a former dentist who worked “at the respectable end of the street,” and Ryer was a livestock dealer who “had done fairly well” financially (1). The second piece of information is that they lost their financial stability through illegal business practices. McTeague was discovered to be working without a license, or even any formal training, in dentistry (1). Ryer too broke the law by feeding his pigs “poultices obtained from the City and County Hospital,” which resulted in a scandal and his going out of business (1). Thus, the eventual violence that these characters show toward their wives is not because of their being poor or alcoholics, but more likely because they are just iniquitous men.
This fact is further shown through the specificity of Ryer’s abuse of his wife. The narrator says, “Both men thrashed their wives […] Ryer on the days when he was sober” (1). Obviously, this suggests that it isn’t alcohol that drives Ryer to abuse his wife, but instead his cruel character. This is again supported by the narrator’s description of Ryer’s method of abuse: “Ryer found amusement in whipping Missis Ryer with a piece of rubber hose filled with gravel, or (his nature demanded variety of sensation), with a long, thin rawhide, which he kept hidden between the mattresses” (1). That this character finds amusement in beating his wife—with purposefully created torture weapons—shows that, completely separate from his economic or physiological status, he is just an evil man. In fact, he even deliberately separates himself and his torture methods from the lower class, saying to the idea of using fists or boots, "What! am I a drayman, am I a hod−carrier!" (1). Ryer believes his methods of abuse are more sophisticated than the class in which he ironically resides. But the mere idea that he believes there is a sophisticated means of beating a person indicates that he is a man of damaged morals. Thus, Fantaisie Printaniere communicates that men like Ryer and McTeague are not violent because of their class or indulgence in alcohol, but because they simply have violent temperaments.
Great argument and great statement of all your points. Your textual evidence is really strong. A general note is to perhaps consider moving away from using language like "more likely because." This takes away from your initial bold, clear statements and almost comes off as if the argument is a little unsure of itself.
ReplyDeleteArguing that Ryer and McTeague beat their wives because they are "iniquitous men" is an interesting perspective, and I also wonder how their wives' own temperaments play into their abuse, or at least into their eventual feud.
ReplyDeleteThe two wives seem to be the protagonists of the story, at least in as much as the story has any protagonist, and I'm curious about how their personalities fit with their husbands.
Rob, It would be very easy to disagree with your main point and claim the obvious cause of alcohol or low social class as sources for abuse, but the truth is I think you are really onto something. I really like the main argument you are making and think it is illustrated in this text through the contrast of when the two men choose to beat their wives perfectly. In your last paragraph I really like when you bring up the men's lack of morals, you should go with that and mention it earlier. Also, I think your last sentence is great and would make a strong thesis, you should consider using it earlier in the response. Overall, great job!
ReplyDeleteI really like your response. I think you come up with an inventive idea and then provide excellent examples to support it. My only comment is that you say both men beat their wives due to poor morals, but you only give examples for Ryer. Therefore, do men both have poor morals, or only Ryer and what implications does that have?
ReplyDeleteI thought you argument was good and you used a decent amount of text to support your argument. One thing I would note is that it took me a while to understand what you wanted to say. Use your beginning paragraph to set up your argument, but do not use plot summary. Also when making an argument, make sure that you are sure of what you want to say. Saying things such as, "more likely." You have created a great argument, just stay away from phrases that would make the reader feel as though you are afraid of your argument.
ReplyDeleteI thought that your argument was something that can be brought out further if needed to write a longer piece. You created a piece that can be looked at through one side, but also the other. This is very good to have when creating an argumentative piece because you need to be able to have people not agree with your points. I really liked your ending statement about the two men in the work. It brought your argument to a close very nicely!
I think this is an extremely well written piece. It is very clear and your analysis of Ryer as a cruel man is great. I really like your analysis of how the weapons he uses reinforce his cruel nature. I did feel, however that your close reading was incomplete because you did not also analyze McTeague. I think the short story provided lots of support that McTeague is also an "iniquitous" man and I would have liked to see that analysis as well. Otherwise, this was great work!
ReplyDeleteYour argument that abuse occurred because of the husband's lack of morals is interesting and clearly thought-out. I really like this original idea, and you defend it well. I think the only thing that you really need to tweak is your original focus- you start off speaking of the husbands plural, but only focus on Ryer in your argument. Either make your thesis specific to Ryer in the beginning, or add in supporting evidence of McTeague in your body paragraphs (which I think is the better choice and will strengthen your claim).
ReplyDeleteA little side note: You say fantaisie printaniere is a novella, but it's a short story. This is a small detail, but it's important to catch things like this to establish your credibility.
I also think you could expand a little more and break up your paragraphs. Your paper would be stronger if you had more evidence clearly divided into separate but correlated thoughts.
I think that as far as concept, the entry is well thought out. However, I think that the development/evidence is lacking. I would like to see supporting evidence concerning McTeague and how his abuse is caused by iniquity and not due to class or simply alcohol consumption. Although McTeague's abuse takes place during times of drunkenness, I think that you could find evidence to support your claim of his poor character. Other than this, I like what you have so far.
ReplyDeleteI think you did a great job at forming a strong argument and using textual evidence to support your argument. I agree that your last sentence could be used in your first paragraph as a great thesis. Also, I think you have enough evidence concerning Ryer, but if you wanted to keep McTeague's abuse as part of your argument, you should add some evidence to support that claim, as well. Overall, great job and I enjoyed your interesting outlook on the reason for abuse.
ReplyDeleteI like your argument that Norris' story is not a cautionary tale about alcoholism or the working-class, but rather, is a character study of two distinct men. Like others who have posted before me, i think you have enough evidence to suffice for Ryer (although exploring his previous line of work in comparison to his methods of abuse could be interesting...), and I don't think an analysis of McTeague is necessary (so long as you change your thesis accordingly). I really like where you're going with this paper.
ReplyDeleteThe premise of this discussion is quite interesting. I think it's wonderful that you took the common belief that intemperance leads to domestic violence and inverted it to form a strong, argumentative thesis.
ReplyDeleteHowever, there are two wife-beaters in Norris' short story. Your analysis of Ryer's moral destitution is thorough and well-crafted, but the lackluster analysis of McTeague weakens your argument. What about McTeague's character aligns him with Ryer? Or, perhaps, does McTeague represent a different view of domestic violence (maybe the more common view)? What does the juxtaposition of the two characters (whether they're the same or different) do in terms of supporting/refuting your argument?
I had a really easy time finding your argument as well as the support for your argument. I think you did a fantastic job. I really like that you choose to go for something different, rather than just examining the social class within the text. Your textual evidence supports your argument very well. Good Job!
ReplyDeleteI really like your argument, and I think it's an interesting one (I definitely didn't think of it!) However, I wish you would give me a little more. While the response was jam-packed with analysis and citations, I felt like it was almost too short. I wonder how you would juxtapose Mrs. McTeague and Mrs. Ryer next to this argument. Is there anything to be said about their circumstances at all — be it their attitudes and lifestyles or their tactics for avoiding abuse? Also, is there anything to be said about how alcohol abuse affected society? You refute it, but I wonder if there's an argument to support it.
ReplyDeleteCool topic. In class, we haven't given much attention to the argument you propose. I find it interesting.
ReplyDeleteInterestingly, Ryer seems to fit your argument well because he rarely drinks and had a successful past. The problem is you frame your argument around McTeague as well. As you know, McTeague is a heavy drinker. I think it would be interesting for you to bring more about him into the paper and how the abuse of his wife is not related to his alcohol consumption.
I love your take on the text -- it's simple, which makes it so bold. I think you supply evidence well, and you analyze your quotes. I personally would just like to see more development in your arguments. For instance, is McTeague NOT evil since he beats his wife when he IS drunk? Do the wives come into play at all?
ReplyDeleteFantastic piece of writing and a great analysis of the short story. This really gives the reader a new perspective on the evil behaviors of the two main characters. The only point of advice is that I would either drop McTeague from your argument completely and just focus on Ryer, or include a bit more about McTeague. He's mentioned earlier in the essay, but is sort-of forgotten about throughout the body of the essay. Very good analysis overall.
ReplyDeleteI feel like you definitely could have broken up your paragraphs somehow for they are quite extensive. I do not think you have a strong enough argument to support your claim. The second paragraph describes only Ryer and how he fits into this mold of just having a terrible temperament but can't one argue the issue of nature vs. nurture? He is the product of his environment in which tolerates this terrible temperament and in fact encourages keeping the woman in line.
ReplyDeleteYour introduction paragraph relies to heavily on summarization then a argument. If you were to take from your second paragraph, where the argument is evident, and rework the introduction; your ideas would be clear. The fact that the men provide excuses for their evil is fascinating. They blame other things along with providing reasoning to their actions. You do a great job of pointing out these flaws in the characters.
ReplyDeleteIt seems that you have taken this story to a deeper, or at least different, level, which is excellent. I like that you took very obvious evidence and pointed out their less obvious conclusions.
ReplyDeleteI see your argument and has supporting evidence, so it is good on that note. But i noticed a lot of background info in the first paragraph before your thesis. This can be cut altogether because you should assume that your reader knows the basics of the short story. Also how is McTeague relevant to your argument. You give good evidence for Ryer but barely any on McTeague, there needs to be more there.
ReplyDeleteI liked your thesis and thought it was relatively clear. You used a good amount of evidence to back up your claims and found some interesting interpretations I hadn't thought of when initially reading the story. I think perhaps breaking up your paragraphs and adding a few might make this paper stronger. For example, you could try a paragraph taking up the opposite opinion and then proving that it is flawed. An old trick in the essay writing book, but it works. Good job, though!
ReplyDeleteI love how critical you are of the characters in this story and how you use a factor outside of alcohol to expose the ugly truth about domestic violence; how being violent is just how some people are. However, I am very interested in your perception of the women in this story as well, and where their violence toward each other comes from? Do you think that they, like their husbands, are also of "damaged morals"? Or is there another angle you could take on it? I think including a critique of the female violence in this story would be an interesting add to your revision.
ReplyDeleteYou hav an excellent thesis and make a very strong arguement. Your use of supporting evidence is well done and your quotes really pull together your arguement. You make a strong case for Ryers' intense cruel demeanor, which is neither due to unemployment nor alcoholism, but simply to his own character. Well done!
ReplyDeleteI thought your arguments were very strong. I liked your perspective. The only suggestion I have is to offer more evidence about McTeauge's reason for beating his wife since you focus a lot more on Ryer.
ReplyDeleteI thought it was great that it was easy to find a thesis yet it seemed contradictory, pointing at how the men used to better of seems to show that through rough times they found comfort in alcohol which helped fuel the beatings of their wives. There is evidence that the brutality became extreme painting the men as wicked characters yet it all seems fueled by their current disposition.
ReplyDeleteYour argument is clear, original, and well supported. I think your claim might be stronger if you focus solely on Ryer because he seems to be where your argument centers, but maybe even contrast his persona with that of McTeague.
ReplyDeleteI found your argument very interesting because I think that it is easy to deduce that the two men were abusive to their wives because of clearly apparent factors like alcohol or socioeconomic class. However, the fact that you chose to hold their morals accountable for their behavior helps to break down stereotypes and myths which perpetuate the belief that domestic violence only exists in relationships that involve those factors and to show that it can come about due to other reasons.
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed reading this piece. You have a clear and refreshing style. You articulated your argument well and made it easy for your reader to follow. At the same time, it was an interesting point well supported by textual evidence. If I had to suggest an area for improvement, I would simply say that I would like to see you take it just a little further. There might be a bit more to be teased out of this. For instance, in Jazmen's comment above, it is interesting that you chose morals and integrity as the reason. Why is that? Was there nothing else? Or does something specifically point to that as the reason?
ReplyDeleteI thought your paper flowed smoothly and you elaborated clearly. Your argument is strong, and you support it well. Like quite a few others already stated, maybe try and even out your arguments for McTeague and Ryer, focusing more on McTeague.
ReplyDelete