Monday, February 27, 2012

Landscape and Cyclical Violence Within "The Woman at the Store"

           In Katherine Mansfield’s short story “The Woman at the Store”, the harsh New Zealand landscape is portrayed as a destructive force that creates isolation and influences the characters, transforming the woman and child into animalistic and savage “others”, and directing the actions of the other characters in a way that produces an inescapable cycle of violence.
          Within the opening lines of the short story, the New Zealand landscape is depicted as having influence over the characters. The narrator, traveling with a group of men through the country describes the dust as, “a dry skin itching for growth on our bodies” (55). Immediately, it can be seen that the land is pervasive, filling even the air; possessing the innate desire to become part of the characters' bodies. The travelers themselves are not immediately impacted by the environment in any obvious way besides Jo's failure to sing as usual and the narrator's near tumble from her horse due to the heat (55, 56). Because they are merely passing through the country side, the influence is not as great. However, when presented with the characters of the woman and the child, the true effect of the grotesque landscape can be seen. In the scene in which the reader is introduced to the character of the woman, she is described in terms of the landscape and the effect that it is having on her, “[the sun] gleamed on the woman's yellow hair, over her flapping pinafore and the rifle she was carrying” (57). Additionally, the child is repeatedly described as being influenced by the environment and as having various lights cast over her that affect her appearance. Therefore, these characters, who have been living under the influence of the environment for so long, become products of the grotesque land in which they live; adhering to its will.
          As the text continues, it becomes apparent that the harsh environment goes beyond merely influencing the characters - specifically the mother and child who are transformed into savage and erratic “others”. The mother, is repeatedly referred to as having, “too much alone”, establishing that, left to the influence of the countryside, she has become savage and animalistic - beating her child and changing from calm to furious in mere seconds (59). Once “pretty as a wax doll”, her looks have been transformed to resemble the grotesque conditions in which she lives (63). The term “wax doll” to describe the woman can also be used to show the influence of the environment over time. Years earlier when visited by Joe, she was considered beautiful, but because she has always lived under the influence of the landscape, even then she wasn't completely human - just a pretty replica. As all outside contact, including that of her husband, ceased, she declined into a type of hideous “other”. This is evidenced repeatedly throughout the text; on page 58 the woman is portrayed as “a hungry bird” and on page 62, she is described by Joe as an “old bitch”. This, too, can be applied to the young girl - having lived in the land all her life - in the way that she is consistently compared to animals. The child is described as “a rat” and verbs such as “bleat” are used to describe her actions (66). Her actions are often insane and disconcerting, her drawings described as “repulsively vulgar”, eliciting the grotesque in the same way that the environment surrounding her does (68).
          As the landscape exacerbates the savage qualities of the characters, this type of animalistic behavior gives way to a cyclical violence that the landscape itself helps to reinforce. The mother is later revealed as having killed her husband, establishing the character not only as insane, but capable of violence. However, this action, too can be seen as a product of the environment, the woman stating, “if you was back at the coast, Id 'ave you lynched for child murder” (66). In this scene, the woman is referring to the abuse that her husband inflicted upon her. Because of her isolation, the landscape obstructs her ability to find justice without violence. The environment then proceeds to provide the mother with another victim – the storm forcing the characters to stay inside, the character of Jo spending the night with her, taking the place of the husband. Even her appearance is transformed to become more appealing to the man, encouraging him to stay; "the woman's hair was tumbled - two red spots burned in her cheeks - her eyes shone" (65). This description is not in terms of what the woman has done in at attempt to make herself more attractive - on the contrary, each of these improvement seem to have happened on their own, her eyes shining as a result of the light, and thus, her environment. In addition to the woman being provided with a new victim to support the cycle of violence, the child herself can be seen as the ultimate continuation of it. Because she is a product not only of the environment in which she exists, but of her mother, a fact that her mother insists upon, stating, “she's the dead spit of me”, when asked if the child is more like her father, it can be assumed that the child, just like the mother, lacks the freedom to leave that the father possesses (61). Additionally, because the mother is influenced so strongly by the harsh landscape, this suggests that the child is just as affected creating a future for the child in which she essentially becomes her mother, and setting up a cycle in which violence is continuous.
         Throughout Mansfield's short story, the landscape in which the characters operate is inherently violent and creates isolation that drives the characters to savage behavior. This creation of the “other” within the character of the woman and child produces a cyclically violent environment that is further supported by the grotesque New Zealand surroundings.

25 comments:

  1. Katie,
    Interesting response! Right from the title I can see your clear focus of how the landscape in the short story has an effect on the character savage and violent behavior. I think this is an interesting focal point for your piece, but I would like to see you unpack it a bit more. You make some statements without evidence, for example, that the child is described as influenced by the environment as well as the mother, but where? how? If you took away some of the plot details and substituted them with textual evidence I think the piece would be stronger. Overall, great job!

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think you have a really great topic on how the environment plays a vital role in the story. My only concern would be on giving the landscape too much power. It's not the landscape that ruins the mother's appearance, it's her abusive husband. While I agree the landscape and isolation could drive someone to insanity, I think you need more support to say that it made her kill her husband. Lastly, I'm not sure about the cycle of violence you posit. If the mother would have had the husband lynched on the coast, then that is still a violent act even with the mother taken out of the landscape. Great topic choice, just substantiate your claims more.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I thought this was a great topic choice, looking at how the landscape has a significant role. I see all the points you're making, and you make great connections, but I also agree with the previous comments -- work through some counterarguments or even use landscape as a way to discuss other destructive forces (i.e. the husband).

    ReplyDelete
  4. Interesting topic choice! You provide a strong argument that you introduce early on and provide an evident “so what” factor by discussing how the landscape in “The Woman at the Store” not only affects and influences the characters, but it also makes them “others”.

    ReplyDelete
  5. You keep mentioning "other" throughout your close-reading, but as a reader I never get a real definition of what you mean by "other" which makes it difficult for me to understand what the implications of your close-reading are.

    ReplyDelete
  6. This is great work! Your argument is very clear and you really dig into the quotes to maximize the effectiveness of each sentence. I think the most room for improvement is in your conclusion. You manage to establish that the environment and isolation transforms the woman and her child into others - so what is being said about violence and (in this case) familial relationships? Is this a version of the "love is a fist" kind of thing? Or is it a totally different kind of relationship? Think about ways you can push the conclusions you make for this paper to the next level.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I think this is a very interesting direction to go in for this close reading. You have a number of great examples that show the influence the environment had on the characters. I like how you chose the physical environment rather than just circumstantial environment to focus on. The only negative comment I could make would maybe be to set up your introduction a little bit more. I know this is a particularly long response already, but jumping directly into your thesis probably could be changed. Overall though very good!

    ReplyDelete
  8. This is really good. You give a lot of great evidence that supports your claim. There's one thing I'm not sure about: the idea that the woman is using the passersby as new victims. This seems to take away from the irresistible manipulation of the environment on the women in favor of her power to somehow victimize the travelers. Maybe add more to this idea to make it more relevant, or just take it out. (In my opinion, your writing would be just as strong with it removed.)

    ReplyDelete
  9. I really enjoyed reading this essay because you delved into the argument right off the bat and I knew exactly what you were going to talk about. I found your topic very interesting and saw all of the points that you were making through the examples that you used. You did a great job setting up and supporting your argument and your thesis carried all the way through the essay. Great job!

    ReplyDelete
  10. Katie,

    Your first paragraph is great, but its only problem is that it is a one-sentence thesis statement. While it serves as a fantastic thesis statement, it does not introduce the essay properly. Develop the introduction paragraph a bit more, and the paper will benefit.

    ReplyDelete
  11. You do a nice job of using textual evidence and unpacking the quotes. This makes it easy for me to see your argument as a whole. In addition, your title is very informative.

    My suggestion would be to make your intro more manageable. Despite your sentence making sense, possibly focus on breaking your one sentence into two or three so that it is more manageable for the reader.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I'm going to agree with Dane, in that you have a good focus and support it well, but when that ever-looming "So what?" rears its head, you don't have much to work with. As long as this piece is, you still need to go a little bit deeper to decipher why and in what ways the effect the land is having matters, not just the fact that is is affecting.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I thought this was an amazing close read--your argument is well supported and thought provoking, and provides an interesting perspective on the story. I think your last "so what" argument (about the cyclical nature) detracts from your overall argument, because it seems to be reaching. I think examining the dynamic between the landscape and the character development is more interesting, and don't think you need to work in this slightly broader angle at the end.

    ReplyDelete
  14. You have a lot going on in this piece. You have a strong focus--the environment influences how the characters behave/appear. However I would like to see more evidence to back this up, and more analysis of the evidence you have. I particularly enjoyed your reference to the mother as a "wax doll", and I think you can do a lot more with that statement than what you have currently

    ReplyDelete
  15. I really like your topic and your argument is clear. However, you do have a lot to work with so I think you could improve your argument if you took some of it out and focused on less. Also, I think a longer introduction could help set up your argument. Great start!

    ReplyDelete
  16. I think you have a solid argument, but you need more evidence. It is very interesting, just unpack it a bit more and add more relevant text.

    ReplyDelete
  17. I think that less is more in this case. I agree with some previous posts and think you should narrow down what you talk about and then you'll be able to nail those things.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Your paper is very well organized and easy to follow. Your paper follows exactly as the title says it will. I liked your connection of the land and the the affect it has on the characters. Maybe for your revision you could include why this change in gender roles to the woman being the one to act violently is significant?

    ReplyDelete
  19. As a few people have mentioned, this close read was very well written. Your argument was focused, but I do think if you really want to focus on one of the specific points you bring up, it would take your analysis that much further.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Great job, Katie! I thought your paper flowed nicely and was well organized. Like others have said, I think focusing on one specific piece of evidence would help strengthen your argument even more. Good work!

    ReplyDelete
  21. I think this is a very good start! You have an argument and support it. I do think diving into the So What? factor would help to strengthen your piece. Providing an answer to the So What will probably help to eliminate places where words may not be as needed and to unpack in other areas to make your work that much stronger. Overall, really good piece. You're off to a great start!

    ReplyDelete
  22. You definitely put a lot of thought and it shows! My only suggestion would be to perhaps try and find a place in where you can break up a couple of your paragraphs. Sometimes long paragraphs can drag on and I found myself losing the point you were trying to get it. Other than that, you have a great close reading here!

    ReplyDelete
  23. Katie,

    This is an excellent post. I was with you the whole time- your ideas were clearly, and all of the evidence you used was unpacked very well. Fantastic job. I think your intro/thesis could be broken up into another sentence, it's quite long (although it is clear and interesting). Also, although you argue each point you make very well, you could address counterarguments to strengthen your piece. Was the environment really THE dominant force affecting the characters?

    Again, great job.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Well thought out and interesting read! It was clear what your argument was and you used a lot of evidence to support your claims. There were a lot of ideas here, so maybe shave a few arguments off to make it more to the point. A bit more of a fleshed out conclusion would make it stronger, but otherwise job well done!

    ReplyDelete
  25. Great job! I found your close reading to be extremely interesting and engaging. Your thesis is great and I understood exactly what you were arguing. Your supports are also really good and very clear. Perhaps mention more about their "otherness" because you mention it in your thesis but only briefly touch upon it in the body of your close read. Other than that, good work!

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.