Matryona's House Analysis

Solzhenitsen uses the symbolism and the interconnection of Matryona and her house to convey the unnatural ideas of communistic ideology. This idea spawns from Solzhenitsens own experience with a communistic way of life. In a communist government, there is no one person; there is only a group of people. This type of government does all in its power to destroy independence in a person. A person works for the good of the people, and not in the best interest of themselves. Solzhenisten quite fervently puts this idea to sleep.

Greed, corruption, and selfishness are normally associated with capitalism. This short story displays the exception for a communistic society, in that the selfishness and greed of the other characters are able to destroy Matryona. “Apparently, in order to validate their tenure of a plot of land in Cherusti they had to build on it, and Matryona’s outhouse was ideal for the purpose: there was no hope of getting the timber anywhere else.” (Howe, 677) This selfishness in of itself is not horrible, but taking advantage of family members is a worse offense. Ilya seemed to care less for Matryona by being so keen on getting the timber, reguardless of how it affected her. “The person who was keenest on getting the plot of land in Cherusti was neither Kira nor her husband but old Ilya on their behalf.” (Howe, 677) This translates to a selfishness of the characters: if one is to own the land, one has to build on the land. In order to build, one needs timber.

The short story does not dictate whether other avenues of receiving timber were tried. It instead immediately turns its attention to Matryona’s house. This idea could be in reaction to whom the house was originally for: Ilya.

“Long ago, as a young boy, he [Ilya] had helped his own father build this cottage, and the extra room that they were now demolishing had been designed as the place where he , the eldest son, should bring home his bride. Now that he hosue belonged to someone else, he relished the idea of pulling it apart and carting it away.” (Howe, 677)

The house seemed to be the very essence of who Matryona was. It was the vitality of her, and protected her for 40 years. Once the greed for limber took over her extended family members, Solzhenitsyn makes quite a statement. “Even I, a mere lodger, objected to them tearing down the planks and wrenching out the logs from her cottage. For Matryona, it meant the end of her life.” (Howe, 677) Solzhenitsen truly wanted his readers to understand the connection between her house and Matryona. It almost seems as if her relatives realized this as well because of their constant bombardment of pleas for the timber. “But her insistent relatives knew that they would succeed in breaking up her house while she was still alive.” (Howe, 677)

Her extended family members tore Matryona’s home apart. After the timber was taken from the outhouse, a truck was needed to take the timber to Cherusti. Now the wood needed two trailers in order to transfer the wood.  The owner of the truck was getting paid the same amount, whether the truck took two trips or one. Now if greed was not a factor in this communistic society the truck driver would not have thought of himself before the people that were compensating him. Because the truck was pulling two trailers, it was difficult for them to cross the train tracks. One of the trailers detached as the truck crossed the railroad. This created a deadly situation for several people, one of whom was Matryona. In the end the greed of the family members for the timber and the greed of the trucker destroyed Matryona. The previous quote by the narrator truly comes true, the tearing of her house was Matryona’s downfall.

Other aspects of this story are evident in the connection between Matryona and her house. The resilience of the two is quite evident. The life of Matryona goes against communistic ideologies. Though her life is consistent with a rough terrible life that one would associate communism to, she does not wallow in self pity as others would. Both her marriages did not work due the husbands being called to wars, and all six of her children passed away.  She takes what little she has received to become successful. Even in her old age she neglects to be paid or compensated for her work. This is the resilience seen through her actions. Now the house is resilient through the fact that it has protected Matryona from the elements of nature.

There has been discussion on elements of this story in which display  the interconnection between Matryona and her house. There has also been discussion of the anti communistic ideologies symbolized in these two characters in the play. In the end Matryona willingly gave of herself, part of her house, to the greed of others to be destroyed. Her life in essence was complete and successful.

Work Cited

Howe, Irving, ed. Classics of Modern Fiction. 4th ed. Orlando: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich,, 1986. 655-694.

Oedipus the King

In Oedipus the King, Sophocles makes it clear that the gods control the destiny of Oedipus. The story of Oedipus the King had existed for decades before Sophocles transcribed it into a play. By understanding that the ideas and concepts of Oedipus existed before Sophocles had written the play, it reveals his attitudes and philosophies were embedded in the play. It is virtually impossible for a person to avoid writing personal influences on a story. One’s environment and philosophy greatly effects the perspective in which they analyze the world.

This play requires some understanding of the background. Oedipus the King was first performed at the Great Dionysus festival. The highpoint of this festival was a three-day competition among the playwrights.

Sophocles and other playwrights who introduced their work during the Great Dionysia sought to instill a sense of religious awe at the mysterious power of the gods, whose perfect knowledge of events stands in contrast to the imperfect knowledge of mortal beings. (1082, Charters and Charters)

It is important to realize the entertainment value of these plays. The playwrights goal is not to just create a play that has a deep philosophical meaning without a good storyline. In understanding that playwrights “…sought to instill a sense of religious awe…” one would think that the role of the gods would be emphasized. (1082, Charters and Charters)

The role of the gods is quite clear: they control Oedipus’s fate. Fate is unavoidable; no matter if a person knows before hand that they are going to commit an act. Many individuals think that if they foreknow the act, they would change something in their life to stop it from occurring. The only true solution to the correction of the problem would be to never hear a prophecy in the first place. Otherwise the prophecy sets into motion events that will eventually bring the person to the point where they will commit the act.

The foreshadowing of the eventual fate of Oedipus is written in the first lines of the play. The citizens of Thebes have been struck with a plague because the murderer of Laius is in Thebes. “It was believed at that time that the well-being of the state was a reflection of the health of its ruler.” (1082, Charters and Charters)

Once King Oedipus is told of the reasons for the plague, he walks out of the palace to begin a large and long speech. The basic idea of this long speech is to let the chorus know that he will be the one to answer their prayers. Ironically this statement is true. Unknowingly he stumbles upon the truth. Because the audience knew beforehand the story of Oedipus the King, a foreshadowing takes place.

After Oedipus states that he will answer their prayers, sets out to seek a prophet to tell him who committed the murder. In this scene there are a few things that we must discuss. Tiresias is blind, but sees the truth about the situation. Oedipus has sight, yet is blind to the truth about himself. Once the truth is said in plain sight, Oedipus’s actions seemed to be controlled to a certain extent. Even though the truth is laid out, Oedipus is kept in the dark by actions of the gods. If at that point Oedipus realized what he’d done, he’d lose his power. Interestingly enough, the gods will for Oedipus to keep his pride. Apollo controls this flaw to continue Oedipus down his path to his demise. Later in the play when Oedipus’s is revealed to be the murderer, he rakes his eyes. An ironic change occurs here. He becomes blind but now can see the truth.

Other actions of Oedipus are seen to be controlled by the gods. His biological parents upon learning of the prophecy sent their child away with a shepherd to be a prince in Corinth. These are events the prophecy set into motion; they were unstoppable. Oedipus was never told what the prophecy said. At one banquet the young Oedipus overheard that he was prophesied to kill his father and sleep with his mother. Again this event caused the young prince to run away and return to Thebes, his birth town. If the prophecy was told by an oracle who was empowered by Apollo, would not the events themselves be planned to lead Oedipus to his awful destiny? I believe so, and Oedipus believed it as well. Line 1467 and 1468 contain Oedipus’s claim:

Apollo, friends, Apollo –

He ordained my agonies –

This play clearly sets forth a belief that the gods determine our destiny. Our actions are controlled to make their will complete. Oedipus was guided by the actions of his parents and those of his own choosing. The events were set in motion by a prophecy, and each event was predetermined by Apollo. As seen, fate cannot be avoided, and must be followed whether the individual desires it to be or not.

Work Cited

Charters, Ann and Charters, Samuel. Literature and its Writers: A Compact Introduction to Fiction, Poetry, and Drama . 3rd ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 2004.

Hills like White Elephants Analysis

Ernest Hemingway in “Hills like White Elephants” uses third person objective to show the inadequacies in the relationship. I will be focusing on the inadequacies in the relationship between the couple through Jig.

The third person objective writing style is normally used to portray a situation in a short story by its details. Each detail is used as a symbol or metaphor. A third person objective narrative can only be seen through the actions of each of the characters because the thoughts and the emotions are not known, but felt by the reader. The lack of emotions leaves the reader feeling left out and disconnected from the story. Hemingway used this technique to perfection. The inadequacies of the relationship are felt through this disconnection.

One instance of the story that is really vivid through the actions of the American boyfriend in the end of the narrative is after there is a huge climax to the couple’s discussion. The discussion is interrupted when a lady states that the train is five minutes away. At this point it seems as if the void that was created by the discussion is truly shown. The American boyfriend gets up and moves across the train station with the bags alone. Solitude is not good in this circumstance. Not being with the person you love is the epitome of miscommunication and relationship inadequacies.

Once the boyfriend returns from his solitude journey across the station, Jig responds to the guy in a manner that shows definite miscommunication issues. “‘Do you feel better?’ he asked. ‘I feel fine,’ she said. ‘There’s nothing wrong with me. I feel fine.” (Hemingway, 233) From the whole discussion between the couple, Jig is unwilling to continue. She leaves the discussion still in the air. While the boyfriend opens the discussion once again. It is sad as a couple that they are not willing to work through this.

Not much is stated about Jig, but her actions truly define who she is. She tends to be immature. I say this because in the beginning of the story she asks to taste a new alcohol. Once she tastes this beer, she refers to its taste as licorice. (Hemingway, 230) Another instance of immaturity is seen through the response of how the couple talks. They do not talk about sex in the open, yet they feel free to have it. Though they are talking about an abortion, they don’t feel comfortable enough to be frank with each other. The way the couple handles the situation of the pregnancy shows a great deal of immaturity because both are selfish. Both want happiness at the cost of a child.

Jig throughout the story tries to get the point across to her boyfriend about how she feels. Throughout page 232 in Literature and Its Writers, Jig pushes the idea that this child is a gift that is a curse. She gives the impression that even though this pregnancy is something that wasn’t planned she doesn’t want to have it terminated. “‘No it isn’t. And once they take it away, you never get it back.’” (Hemingway, 232) But the American boyfriend never saw this, and kept using reverse psychology against her.

The fact that he used reverse psychology against her truly shows the inadequacies in the relationship. There was no true communication declaring to each other what their true feelings were. This is where the third person objective comes into play. It creates a feeling of confusion. This would be the same confusion the couple would be feeling at the same time. The couple spoke in metaphors and symbols. Which I think really assumes upon the other person in the relationship to understand what the true meanings are.

“Hills like White elephants” is a short story of inadequacies in relationships. It makes use of the third person objective. It takes into consideration a girl who is immature, but thrust in a situation which a guy is not understanding his girlfriend. Through this short story we should learn that we should be careful with how we communicate with others.

Work Cited

Hemingway, Ernest. “Hills like White Elephants”. Literature and its Writers: A Compact Introduction to Fiction, Poetry, and Drama 3rd Edition. Charters, Ann and Samuel, Editors. New York: Bedford/St. Martin’s Press, 2004. 230 – 233

Sonnets

Shakespeare uses elements of a poem such as imagery and symbolism in “Shall I Compare Thee to a Summer’s Day” and “My Mistress’ Eyes are Nothing like the Sun” to bring out the theme of a man’s love toward a woman. The two sonnets have a similar theme, but the author describes two different women at two separate times in their lives.

            The two sonnets use objects in our world to relay facts about the women. The first line of sonnet eighteen asks a question “Shall I Compare Thee to a Summer’s Day?”  This question is a good elicitor of emotion and imagery. (Shakespeare, 943) A person could read this question and feel warmth because of the natural idea of the sun creating heat. This imagery not only creates warmth but also the ideas of youth and beauty. The next line of the poem pushes these ideas further. It reads, “Thou art more lovely and more temperate.” (Shakespeare, 943)

One understands the beauty associated with the sun; but with the second line, a person can imagine that this young woman is gorgeous. The author goes on in the next few lines: “And often is his gold complexion dimm'd; and every fair from fair sometime declines” (Shakespeare, 943). We understand that the sun does not always shine; there are times when it sets, and by comparison, a young woman’s fairness tends to decline over time. Shakespeare then states in the sestet, 

But thy eternal summer shall not fade
Nor lose possession of that fair thou ow'st;
Nor shall Death brag thou wander'st in his shade,
When in eternal lines to time thou grow'st:
So long as men can breathe or eyes can see,
So long lives this, and this gives life to thee. (Shakespeare, 943 – 944)

Those lines are an interesting response to the first octave. The summer fades, but this young woman’s “eternal summer” shall not fade because the lines of the poem described her beauty. It is also interesting to think Shakespeare hints at the idea that death cannot hold a person if she is remembered. This is not saying that a person does not die, but that remembrance in literature is the key for eternal posterity. The lines ironically give life after death.

        Shakespeare’s Sonnet 130, “My Mistress’ Eyes are Nothing like the Sun,” also compares a woman to objects in the world. (Shakespeare, 944) This sonnet is designed and written in a way that pushes the reader’s mind to understand true love. Understanding true love comes from questioning. One such question is, whether there is a connection between love and beauty.

               Shakespeare begins the sonnet with a negative outlook. From the first line of the poem, one should realize that this poem is about an older woman. If one’s eyes are nothing like the sun, the youth most likely has passed. In addition, line five and six hold a clue of the woman's older age. 

I have seen roses damask'd, red and white, 

But no such roses see I in her cheeks; (Shakespeare, 945)

We can see imagery in these lines. One imagines rosy cheeks of a youthful young woman, but when imagining an older woman those rosy cheeks are no longer rosy. This is quite amazing how Shakespeare writes a sonnet that completely goes against traditions. Writing of any woman and not exaggerating her beauty or her features is not traditional. Instead, Shakespeare writes of her plainness and of her beauty that has faded. This gives a true image of her, and gives more respect to the author when one reads lines thirteen and fourteen.

               Line twelve and thirteen states 

And yet, by heaven, I think my love as rare 

as any she belied with false compare”. (Shakespeare, 945)

After describing the woman as she is, Shakespeare uses these final two lines to bring a brilliant concept to the forefront of the mind: love is not intrinsically connected to beauty. The idea of true love emanates when we love people no matter how old they are or how they look 

               Sonnet 130 is in reality the love of a man for an imperfect woman. Shakespeare says that this man finds his love rare and special. The lines that contain the imagery and symbolism of Sonnet 130 contain insulting remarks, but in the sestet, the author redeems himself by stating he loves to hear her speak. The only problem is the next line after stating he loves to hear her speak, the author says that music is far more pleasant to hear.       

            After an analysis we see that both sonnet eighteen and 130 use imagery to accomplish its own theme. Though one sonnet uses the negative imagery and the other uses positive imagery, both sestets of the sonnets redeem the author. Sonnet eighteen’s redemption is in line nine, which states that the woman’s eternal summer shall not fade; but in Sonnet 130 we see the redemption in line thirteen and fourteen. Therefore, in the end, we see that Shakespeare uses the same elements to show the themes, but ends up showing two different aspects of similar themes.

Work Cited

Shakespeare, William. “Shall I Compare Thee to a Summer’s Day?”. Literature and its Writers: A Compact Introduction to Fiction, Poetry, and Drama 3^rd Edition. Charters, Ann and Samuel, Editors. New York: Bedford/St. Martin’s Press, 2004. 943 – 944

{Do not use two end marks – use the question mark after the poem title if you make the citation this way.}

Shakespeare, William. “My Mistress’ Eyes are Nothing like the Sun”. Literature and its Writers: A Compact Introduction to Fiction, Poetry, and Drama 3^rd Edition. Charters, Ann and Samuel, Editors. New York: Bedford/St. Martin’s Press, 2004. 944 - 945