Sunday, March 11, 2012

Female Empowerment through Violence in “The Woman at the Store”



Feminine violence against men, while somewhat atypical in society, can be a method through which female empowerment is possible for the individual committing the act. However, female violence against men hurts the status of women in society on the whole. Katherine Mansfield’s “The Woman at the Store” is a short story that depicts the pathetic and depressing lifestyle of a mysterious shop owner in rural New Zealand, and the self-empowerment she attained through murdering her husband.  Through the course of the short story, the store owner is presented to the audience as a woman who has freed herself from the constraints of her abusive husband, thus empowering herself to live independently from her husband and his abuse. However, the description of the woman and the revelation that she murdered her husband is negative in that it reinforces the gender stereotype that a woman cannot live independently from a man, and in this way “The Woman at the Store” is a text which negatively portrays female empowerment.
            The store owner in “The Woman at the Store” is meant to be viewed by the audience as a character who is lives independently of her husband. The store owner claims, “Trouble with me is, he (her husband) left me too much alone. When the coach stopped coming, sometimes he’d go away days, sometimes he’d go away weeks, and leave me ter look after the store” (Mansfield 66), and she is described elsewhere in the text as a lonely woman who runs the store while her husband is frequently away. When her husband is around, he is described as a physically and emotionally abusive man who has “broken the spirit and looks” of the woman. When later in the short story it is revealed that she murdered her husband, there is an inclination that the woman is justified in her actions because her actions liberate her from the oppression that she faced from her husband, and that she is now free to live as she pleases and without the threat of abuse from her husband.
            The seemingly positive message of the freedom attained through violence as a form of feminine self-empowerment, however, is lost in the manner through which she attained her freedom. By murdering her husband as opposed to leaving him, the woman, though now independent, is portrayed as unstable and insane. The woman is described physically as “A figure of fun. Her front teeth were knocked out, she had red pulpy hands, and she wore on her feet a pair of dirty Bluchers” (Mansfield 58) and emotionally as “Mad, of course she’s mad” (Mansfield 61). Though she is free from her husband’s abuse, runs her store, and is a single mother who provides for her child, her physical and mental description as well as the fact that she murdered her husband make her appear as a maniac to the audience. This appearance only furthers the stereotype that women depend on men in life, and cannot live a functional life without men, but instead would exist as physically wretched and emotionally unstable beings without men.
            “The Woman at the Store” by Katherine Mansfield is a short story which reinforces negative stereotypes about women through the physically and emotionally unstable description of the murderous shop owner, who is free and independent of her husband. Though this freedom and independence may seem like positive attributes, they are ultimately examples of how female violence against men is unacceptable in society.

23 comments:

  1. I think you have a great argument about the text and have a fair amount of support for your claims. However, the only thing that rubs me the wrong way is your use of "reinforces negative stereotypes" at the end.

    I think you're better off talking about how the whole "women committing acts of violence as empowerment" thing is ultimately detrimental to female empowerment without bringing stereotypes into the equation. I mean, I can see where you're coming from, but I think you have to do more legwork to justify that this sort of character is, in fact, a stereotype than is necessary. I think it's actually divergent from what you're trying to say.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Ryan,

    I think I agree with Logan. I would suggest continuing your argument about women's empowerment through violence, but I think I might leave the part of stereotypes out of the equation for now. Doing so might give you more room to unpack the rest of your argument a little more -- you might consider giving a little more "proof" of the claims you make in the beginning two sentences of your post. Overall, a really good close read. I like where you're going, and I think you have a great framework.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Ryan,

    I think you're off to a good start. You make a bold claim, and I like it. However, I think you need to add a lot more meat to your argument. Your first body paragraph is mostly summary. Unpack those quotes, and show the reader how you arrived to your claims rather than assuming they're on the same page. Also, I think you need to be a little more careful when using "the shopkeeping killed her husband" as a fact. The text really never says this is a true beyond a shadow of a doubt, it's just implied. While I think it is true, I would make a note that it's just highly plausible. Also, the fact that the woman keeps saying, "he left me, he left me all alone" doesn't paint her as an empowered woman, it suggests that she's quite the opposite. I think if you really tease out some of the issues here you'll have a great piece, I'd just caution you to really examine each of the claims you're making and make sure you can back them up.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Ryan,

    I really like where this is going. I like that you looked at how it portrays negative images rather than positive ones. You need to decide between stereo types and empowerment though. I think this piece would be stronger if you used stereotypes rather than empowerment. Either way, you should give an example of what the positive is, showing how it becomes is negative.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I think you have a very interesting close reading that brings up a very specific topic in Woman at the Store. I think, though, that part of your thesis is detracting from your actual argument. You say that 'a woman cannot live independently from a man' but I don't see how this is related to your argument about female empowerment and I don't see it reflected in your essay. This might be something you just want to take out and focus more in on violence's negative relation to empowerment.

    ReplyDelete
  6. You have an interesting topic here, but it needs more argument to it. I feel that a lot of what you have is summary and it should be mostly arguing your view of the story. Agreeing with some of the other posts I also feel that it would be a good idea for you to focus on women's empowerment through violence. This way you would have more evidence to support the argument and you would be able to create a stronger argument as well.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Great start and really interesting topic! I don't think you need to make huge changes. You could explicitly discuss how her freedom should be portrayed positively as opposed to how it really is to help support your argument. For example, are you saying that an independent woman is a positive image of women? Or is it just because she doesn't put up with the abuse and then becomes independent?

    ReplyDelete
  8. Ryan,

    I like the conclusion of your third paragraph because it fits the general direction of how I view your paper. The stereotype logic you bring up makes sense and you appear to have the textual evidence to support such a claim. Perhaps build more on that aspect and focus in on that point.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I had a little bit of trouble getting into your post from the beginning, and I think that has to do with your introductory paragraph. I think you should rework that paragraph a little to make it easier to understand where your paper is going. I didn't get on board with your argument until well into your second paragraph. Aside from the intro though, I like your post. I think your argument about female empowerment is where you should focus your thoughts and like everyone else has said, leave out your statements about stereotypes. You don't really talk about stereotypes in your paper, so at the end I think you will have a stronger argument if you just focus on the empowerment through violence issue.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I like the way you're reading this text, and I think you've made a strong argument. However, I think you still have a lot to do with the quotes you've chosen. I think an interesting place to begin is to notice how your quote that begins describing her as a "figure of fun" puts her into terms that describe her relation to man; she is a figure of fun--for men. This detracts a little from the rest of your quote (the part you focus on) that describes her broken down body as a result of being independent. Analyzing the relationship between these two aspects of the character might help you clear up your argument.

    ReplyDelete
  11. As many before me have commented, you have a great start here. It's a very interesting topic you are tackling, and I will agree that bringing in stereotypes in the last part of the reading somewhat takes away from your arguments as a whole. If you were to just look at female empowerment. Also, considering what Rachel pointed out about the story never explicitly stating that the woman killed her husband could make a point of your essay. Perhaps it is because we are never actually told out right that she killed her husband that her potential "empowerment" is actually seen as negative? Just food for thought. Great start though!

    ReplyDelete
  12. I noticed you use negative stereotypes in a very broad fashion. I think you have some interesting points you pull from that idea that can only be expanded once you explain and give examples of certain characteristics and relate them back to the story in general. I feel that the argument is somewhat one dimensional without a proper explanation of the argument of stereotypes. Otherwise I believe that this is a very strong analysis of the woman and her situation.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Your thesis is a bit unclear to me at this time. Your first two sentences appear to lay out the argument for the rest of your close reading, but at the same time, they are contradictory. I believe your thesis is in your last paragraph but it is still a bit unclear.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I think restructuring your introduction could make your thesis more clear for a reader. I also agree with many others in saying the aspects of stereotype vs. empowerment presents a conflict within the piece. Focusing on one or the other will give a clearer focus and digging deeper into each quote will make for a stronger piece.

    ReplyDelete
  15. I agree with many others, great start, however, you need to make sure that you do not enforce a stereotype throughout your piece. This can be problematic, and if you use your quotes right, this could be avoided.

    ReplyDelete
  16. i think the idea of negitively shadowed female violence is very interesting and an unusual topic for an author to cover. I think if you took the unusualness of this attitude, especially by a female writer, and the point of her doing this, combined with what you've already got could be something really good!

    ReplyDelete
  17. Ryan,
    You have a really interesting focal point of how the story negatively portrays female empowerment, but I think it needs to be made more clear. Your last sentence of the first paragraph is very confusing and I don't think functions well as your thesis. However, the first sentence of your last paragraph I think captures the ideas you are working with better. Clearing this up will make for a much more smooth piece! Great work.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I really like this a lot, but I think it's interesting you use the word "empowerment" in your first sentence, and really only show how violence against men from women empowers women as if it does not empower men also. I would argue men abuse women because it empowers them and reasserts their manlyhood. I think in your argument you should focus more on what you say in your last sentence -- how violence from women is not accepted -- and consider why (in some ways) violence against women is.

    ReplyDelete
  19. It seems like you are trying to say a lot in the first paragraph, which is distracting. Narrow down your argument and you should be good. Also note that she was pretty much independent when her husband was alive. He was never there though. So when he was gone she managed everything, like she is doing now. I do not see a strong enough argument here to prove that she needs her husband.

    ReplyDelete
  20. This is definitely an interesting and argumentative paper. I think, though, you're missing a big "so what" - given what you're trying to prove, what do we do with the fact that the author is a woman? What would a female writer be trying to say about society by reinforcing such stereotypes? If you can think about those types of questions and work in an answer, I think your paper will be much stronger and much more complex.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Hey Ryan!

    So I completely understood your argument and it was well thought out. However, for some reason your first paragraph still didn't grab me. Perhaps a little rewording could help? I caught a few misspellings and grammar errors in your second paragraph that you might want to look into. In your one quote, what about her having the image fun? What does that mean and how does it add to the portrayal of a negative perception? I don't think your response supports the idea of the dependence of man. I would either find a better quote or explain this quote further so your audience can make that connection. Overall, I enjoyed reading your paper. :)

    ReplyDelete
  22. I think this is an interesting topic and you did a good job supporting your argument. However, I agree with some of the other commenters that you might need to narrow your argument and explicitly say why this argument is significant.

    ReplyDelete
  23. I am somewhat unclear on your argument right now and think it's because it seems that you are working with two of them right now and need to choose one of them to focus on. Once you decide on one argument I'd encourage you to add more contextual examples of evidence that supports your claim in order to make your argument that much stronger.

    ReplyDelete

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