Shaking Hands

"The doctor and me have got to be kind of partners..." (Jewett 60).

In Sarah Orne Jewett's The Country of the Pointed Firs, Almira Todd expresses that the doctor can't see and help every patient seeking it, and, therefore, she supports him by reaching out to other patients with her knowledge of herbalogy. Although the two have different procedures in curing, they both are able to assist people in need of one. The cooperation of two people with such difference is also seen in Gloria Naylor's Mama Day when Miranda calls Dr. Smithfield in need for assistance of curing Bernice's pain caused by a drug foreign to Miranda. Not many men play significant roles in both stories overall. In the case above, Mrs. Todd, who also have a large figure and the way of showing affection somewhat more masculine than feminine, is indicating the importance of the doctor getting her support in order to take care of the townspeople, making the women as important as the men. In Mama Day, Miranda is also shown to have a high respect in her town and a irrational power--a power much greater than what the men has in the novel. Both stories magnificently hint women's power. Do the art works portray the superiority of women over men, written in order to support a theory exceeding the feminist one, or did they want to signify the importance of women's role and its maternal qualities in the society? What kind of qualities of women apply to them so that they are kind of a sacred being? Except for the giving of birth to children, what are their significant qualities? Do the stories indicate the importance of men and women shaking hands and working together? If so how? In what way? What would be the most efficient way of the two genders cooperating with each other?

The Use of Force on an Animal

"The child was fairly eating me up with her cold, steady eyes, and no expression to her face whatever. She did not move and seemed, inwardly, quiet; an unusually attractive little thing, and as strong as a heifer in appearance. but her face was flushed, she was breathing rapidly, and I realized that she had a high fever. She had magnificent blonde hair, in profusion. One of those picture children often reproduced in advertising leaflets and the photogravure sections of the Sunday papers...I have already fallen in love with the savage brat...But now I also had grown furious-at a child...I tried to hold myself down but I couldn't..."(Bohner and Grant 1170-172).

In "The Use of Force" by William Carlos Williams, while a lot of people interpreted the doctor's feeling towards the girl more of a luscious one, making the doctor a kind of a pediphile figure and the act as rape-like. However, I took his feeling more like a feeling a person might have towards an animal-as if the girl is one. When he first saw her and the girl was eating him up with her eyes, it was as if an animal, especially one that would be a pet, was deeply observing him. The way he thinks how she has magnificent hair and so forth is as if he is talking about a beautiful doll-as if he is dehumanizing the figure. He feels the want to force the investigation of her throat, like the feeling of wanting to get control over his/her pet or an animal. It is like the determination one has when he/she decides to do anything to get control over an animal. Although I was thinking of the animal being more dog-like than anything else, I think it could be anything. Anyhow, I felt that the doctor wasn't feeling pleasure for the girl, but he was more dehumanizing the girl. The mother and the father was annoying to him because he thought he is able to control the "animal" and their talking was interfering with his process. Because she was dehumanized in his eyes, he was able to force the examination.

The Moment

"'Nemo me impune lacessit.'
'Good!' he said" (Bohner and Grant 937).

"The Cask of Amontillado" written by Edgar Allan Poe is full of incredible elements that astonish a lot of the readers. One of the ways he does that is by playing with the readers' mind, which he also does in so many different ways. However, one part that made me feel the awesomeness was when Fortunato says "Good" when Montresor tells him their family motto. This short story starts with Montresor's vow of revenging on his friend who had given Montresor "thousand injuries" (Bohner and Grant 935). Hence, the image of Fortunato being a "bad" guy, along with the image of Montresor as a kind of a heroic figure-like Hamlet-was implanted in me. As the story moves on, Montresor's statement gets less and less authoritative as if he is a crazy person. This part of the story especially emphasizes the fact: it completely changes our view of both men. If Fortunato did something wrong, it wouldn't have been severe. Maybe it was for Montresor, but it may have been solved if he just told him. Fortunato seem to have no clue that he have offended his friend because he has no hesitation or awkwardness in saying that Montresor's family motto, which simply says that he would get back on someone who offends him, is good. He doesn't suspect anything nor decide to go back up. Fortunato's sense of innocence is brought and the reader is somewhat baffled. Montresor does not seem to have a good enough reason to convey vengeance on his friend. This takes away the whole conflict of "should I" or "should I not" appearing in Hamlet as Hamlet suffers through anxiety of if it is really okay for him to kill his uncle. Montresor, at least in the story, does not appear to have been through such thinking. Since he is lacking such "human" characteristic, he is crazy, at least more than Hamlet would be. Also, in Hamlet, we see Claudius confessing to himself that he have killed the king. In "The Cask of Amontillado," we could only see Montresor's feelings and Montresor's action. Because his actions are not valid anymore, this story as a whole is corrupted: we don't know to what extent the story is true (in the setting of the story). Why would Poe write in such way? I wonder if this is some kind of way in going against the popular novels and short stories.

Luck

"'Well anyhow,' he said stoutly, 'I'm a lucky person'"(Bohner and Grant 711).

In "The Rocking-Horse Winner" by D.H. Lawrence, Paul's mother explains to him the if one has luck, the person would "always get more money" (Bohner and Grant 710). Paul identifies himself, to his mother, as being lucky, and surely, after that, he starts winning money in horse races. When he had arranged to give the money to his mother, he said, "I shouldn't like Mother to know I was lucky...[because] she'd stop me" (Bohner and Grant 715). This is curious because his mother wanted more money, and in order to get them constantly, she describes, one needs luck. Wouldn't she be happy if her son was lucky and he got money persistently? Anyhow, he does not tell his mother: possibly because he doesn't want to make her envious of him or because he has a feeling, if not conscious, superconscious, that there is something wrong with this "luck."

Nevertheless, his life doesn't seem to get well, and except for the fact that he was winning at the races, he seemed to get crazier and crazier until he dies. Was he really lucky if he wasn't achieving happiness which he thought he would be able to attain once he got "lucky" and started winning money? He even died by achieving the "luck." Was Paul really lucky? Was this an illusion or a quality he had achieved in exchange of a compensation-his life? What is luck? Is it necessarily "good"? Having too much luck could be scary because it could be a premonition of something "bad" happening. Are we, as human beings, actually happier with luck or without luck?

A Good Man is Hard to Find...Or is It Possible?

"A good man is hard to find..." (Bohner and Grant 907).



The title of the short story by Flannery O'Connor and the phrase Red Sam gives on page 907, indicates that a good man is difficult to find...if there is such thing as "a good man." I think this is a foolish statement. What is a good man? Is a man good if he treats everyone else well? Is he good if he is patriotic? Is he good if he lies for a good purpose or if he says the truth for a bad purpose? If there is such thing as "good man," there would not be any universal concept. Different cultures...different people have different understanding of what a good man is.

Anyhow, there is no such thing as a "good" man or a "bad" man. It is undoubtedly impossible to identify a person as one or the other. Human have both qualities, not specifically meaning anything good nor bad, that balance out each person. We don't live in a fairy tale world where everything is black and white. Although some people may have more of one quality than the other, that doesn't make the person good or bad. A person has too many qualities, that it is impossible to explain in one word. Also bad qualities can be good in some circumstances and vice versa. In other words, the environment makes one quality look good or bad and even one quality cannot be completely defined as being good nor bad.

A good man is not hard to find...they are impossible to find. It is impossible to classify one person with one word. A person is so much worth than one adjective.

Just Stop and Think

"The original paraphernalia for the lottery had been lost long ago, and the black box now resting on the stool had been put into use even before Old Man Warner, the oldest man in town, was born" (Bohner and Grant 563).

As the tradition, horrific for most of the readers, in "The Lottery" by Shirley Jackson is kept over time, we have a lot of traditions-cultural, communal, and family traditions-being kept. A lot of the time, the whole purpose is lost and/or ambiguous. I believe we could be caught doing things that has no definite purpose: we would do something "because that's how it's done." We would say "bless you" to the person that sneezes because that's how it's done, that's part of American culture. However, are traditions always good? Are all of them worthy to be kept? For an example, in this area of the United States, there is a night called "Mischief Night" or "Cabbage Night" which is the day before Halloween. The custom is for preteens and teenagers to play pranks and mischiefs on their neighbors, which are usually toilet-papering and/or spraying shaving cream, around this area. The minor vandalism are dismissed for this night-possibly because teenagers needs some kind of output to pour out their stress. However, if one just stops for a moment and thinks, I think he/she would be able to see different things about this. For an example, I personally think this is a ridiculous and very disrespectful thing to do. The person of the house that was vandalized, has to spend a part of his/her day to clean it up, because the prankster doesn't. It doesn't teach the teenagers that they should clean up after themselves. Also, it is disrespectful to their neighbors. Even if it does no harm, it is still not nice, and people, if not conditioned in this kind of environment, may take this personally, even if that was not intended for. I don't believe that this is only disrespectful to the victims, but also to the people who can't afford shaving creams and/or toilet papers. I have heard about people stealing toilet papers from bathrooms of retail stores to use money on other necessities. It is disrespectful to the people who made it or provided the ingredients. Nevertheless, I may not have felt this way if I didn't come from California where I never have seen or heard about such thing. This is one thing that makes diversity so important. It brings in different views. The setting for "The Lottery," I believe, consists of a non-diverse, similar people, which was why no one had thought that there was something wrong with the stoning. We educate ourselves, including about diversity, to learn to think because if we just stop and think-analyze-what we are doing or intending to do, we would come up with some different perspectives or ideas-something we would never have thought of is we didn't just stop and think.

The Light That Mankind Search For

"He would lie in the bed and finally, with daylight, he would go to sleep."

In Ernest Hemingway's "A Clean, Well-Lighted Place," a death old man is said to have tried to kill himself. The waiters, however, are not able to find out why he had tried to commit suicide because he had "plenty of money." The young waiter had a job, a wife, and confidence-or at least that's what he says. Nevertheless, he is not happy because he "never get[s] into bed before three o'clock." So what is happiness? How does one obtain it? What does a person need to be happy? The men in this story are not happy despite the fact that they had money, confidence, job, and/or family, which are the elements of the American Dream. The American Dream, therefore, is a nada-a nothing-after all. Then what do people search? What do they long for? The older waiter wants to be in a well-lighted place because it is "good" and pleasant. In the dark, one can seen nothing. Usually, one would feel emptiness in the dark. However, in the light, one could see everything. However, it is the real light-the light of the sun, for an example-that people are seeking. The older waiter is able to finally go to sleep in the daylight, and not in the electric light, which are artificially made my human hands. People used to go to sleep when the sun went down, or even a little before, and get up when the sun came up. The peace, the thing that people are really searching for may be the product of the past and the present: the lifestyle of waking up with the sun and going to sleep with the sun, combined with today's knowledge and style.

The "Me"

"I don't care about me" (Bohner and Grant 554).

In "Hills Like White Elephants" by Ernest Hemingway, Jig, or the girl, tells her American partner that she does not care about herself. She is giving up her baby because the man does not want it and she doesn't want to break up with him. However, she wouldn't "not care" about herself at all if she is willing to go through abortion to cling to this man, to the man she loves. It would mean that she doesn't care about her body, perhaps. It would be more about not caring about the unborn child, because the procedure completely destroys the child's chance of living-of going through life, possibly a wonderful one. In the beginning of the short story, she glances over the bare land and refers to it as white elephants. White elephants have several different interpretation, but one important one is a holy one. Buddha's mother is said to have had a dream of a white elephant going into her body before she had the child in her womb. The girl may be debating her decision because the process of abortion would be committing a sin-a crime against God. Therefore, by saying that she doesn't care about herself, she might be referring to what happens after she dies-possibly going to hell for doing such thing. After she says that she doesn't care about herself, however, she refers to the other side of the railroad as well: the fertile land with fields of grain and trees, river and mountains (Bohner and Grant 554). This section illustrates the beauty of mother nature, possibly her emerging maternal instinct of wanting to give birth to the child and protecting him/her. She may have realized or that this operation was not only about her, or the man, but also about the baby. It could also have been that the "me" included her and her unborn child since they were one body at that point. The American keeps referring to his beliefs or thoughts as "we" or "us." The girl may have wanted to distinguish from the man by saying "me": that she had opinions, thoughts and feelings that were much different from his, and that there was the hidden, unborn child in the "me" which the man doesn't think or talk about at all-that the matter was only about the couple and no one else.

The Eternal Link of Cause and Effect and it's Inescapable-ness

"As nearly as could be discerned, the second traveller was about fifty years old, apparently in the same rank of life as Goodman Brown, and bearing a considerable resemblance to him, though perhaps more in expression than features" (Bohner and Grant 540).

If this short story written by Nathaniel Hawthorne was a complete fantasy story, the devil expressed in this story could have been the older self of Goodman Brown himself. Although this story is written in the "young" Goodman Brown's perspective, as the title indicates, it could have been written from the "old" Goodman Brown's perspective. This story depicts young Goodman Brown going through the changes as he, either in his dream or in real life, witnesses the dark part of human nature: the evilness of the people whom he had expected to be perfect and heavenly, with no faults. He becomes "a stern, a sad, a darkly meditative, a distrustful, if not a desperate man" after that night, and it stays throughout his life (Bohner and Grant 547). As this story portrays the fact that certain amount of moderate suspicion or distrust may be sufficient and in times needed and that, however, an excessive amount leads to unhappiness, this story may also be illustrating the possibility of the inescapable-ness from one's destiny and the eternal link of the vagueness of what is the cause and what is the effect of everything. For an example, which came first-the hen or the egg? If it was the old Goodman Brown who, possibly traveling back in time to, exposed the young Goodman Brown to the dark side of human nature, it may have been because, in his life, he was betrayed and tricked by a lot of people and he wanted to change that miserable life by going back in time and cautioning his young self about it. The cause, nevertheless, may have been the result of going through the witnessing when he was young, that made him pessimistic and grim that induced him to go back in time to expose his younger self to the same somberness.

This story reminded me of a part of this one completely fictional story I have read before: There was once a man, named Noin, who had loved Jone of Arc. Actually, the two had loved each other. After her crucifixion, however, Noin becomes a demon and lives forever. Meanwhile, Jone reincarnates to a girl named Marron, who is fighting against the forces of evil. Noin finds her and tries to seduce her but fails because Marron loves somebody else. He finds out that he still loves her, and helps her in doing her task. Somehow, one day, the two go back in time and end up in the time and place where Jone was still locked up in the prison. After they get to talk to briefly talk to Jone, they watch her get crucified. Noin decides to stop the previous, human self from becoming a daemon and finds his younger self. However, he finds out that it was his future self, the self that time travelled back to that time, that had done the action, to encounter the reincarnated Jone, Marron, whom he got friendly with, and to help her again.

Which is the cause and which is the effect? Which was first? Does it matter? Was it destiny and was it impossible for Goodman Brown to escape it? In other words, are people born with a destiny and are there no way to escape how they are and how their lives are going to be?

The Nursery for the "Little Girl" and the Ghost

"It is a big, airy room, the whole floor nearly, with windows that look all ways, and air and sunshine galore. It was nursery first and then playroom and gymnasium...for the windows are barred for little children, and there are rings and things in the walls. The paint and paper look as if a boys' school had used it. It is stripped off--the paper in great patches all around the head of my bed, about as far as I can reach, and in a great place on the other side of the room low down...[The room had] barred windows, ...[a] gate at the head of the stairs, and...[a] great immovable bed [that] is nailed down..."(Bohner and Grant 488-91).

In "The Yellow Wallpaper" by Charlotte Perkins Gilman, Jane is stuck in a large room with a bed in the center and nothing else except for barred windows and rings and things in the walls. She thinks of this room as a nursery that have changed into a playroom and then into a gymnasium. However, I believe she is totally wrong. Why would there be a bed in a gymnasium? It would not be in a playroom either. If it was a nursery, the room would not have a bed, but would contain a crib. The bed is set...nailed down in the center of the room, as if it is for someone to observe the person sleeping on it. There is a gate at the head of the stair and the windows are barred, as if to block someone from escaping. Also, the barring of the windows hide the person in the room from outside. There are "rings and things" in the wall. Someone may have been tied up to the rings to be forced to stay still. This is not a room Jane believes it is. It is a room that was used for people like Jane-people who were believed to have psychotic problems-at least once, and probably more than that.
She is stuck in a inescapable room with only a bed, and no fresh air. John thinks that is going to make her better. That not only helps her condition, but worsens it. John treats his wife with love and care. More so like a baby. He calls her "little girl," "little heart," and "blessed little goose" as if she is his child, a baby girl or something. So, if the room was a nursery, it would be a nursery for a big baby. If Jane was crazy, the reason would be of John treating of his wife like a baby. Of course she is not his baby, she is his wife! If he does not realize that, they would be stuck like this forever, unless gets worse. She should have more voice in the house and more freedom.

She seems to become very crazy in the end. I think it could really be the "woman behind the wallpaper," or the ghost. If the room had been used for such treatments for "ill" women, there could have been women who have died. That means, there could be a ghost of one of those women, left back in the room, still crying for help and struggling for escape. If there was a ghost, Jane could have freed it and become possessed by the ghost. This throws in another character-another woman character who have suffered-into the story. The short story is not only implying the tragedy of a woman, but it is implying the tragedy of men's ignorance and women's helplessness in the men-centered society.

Severus Akina

"Severus Akina" is the name of my avatar in NMC's Second Life. The first name comes from my favorite fictional novel character of all, Severus Snape from Harry Potter. I loved him since he appeared in the first book, a kind of obssession I had with him of especially concentrating on scenes with him in it. I personally do not really know why I love him so much since his hair is greasy and he appears to be "bad," but that is not the point. The last name I chose was pretty random. I was too lazy to look through the list of last names so I just chose from the ones that was on the screen at the moment: "Akina" because it was one of the ones on the top, so it came into my eyes first, and it is a first name in Japanese and I thought it was interesting to have a last name that sounds like a first name. As I have mentioned, I got the first name from my favorite fictional novel character. Now why would I include "novel"? Ofcourse, to distinguish from other stories such as films, short stories, etc. No, I wouldn't think that deeply. My hobby is reading and that not only includes english and japanese novels, but it includes the japanese comic books, or "mangas." I love them so much, I have around 600 to 700 comic books. Well, anyways, I have a favorite "manga" character and I couldn't choose between Snape and the other character so I decided to distinguish it: I thought it would bring down my love for Severus Snape if I had two favorite characters. Yes, that was the reason for indicating that he is my favorite "fictional novel character" and I guess this is getting me off topic.

I chose a male for my appearance because my greatest fantasy is to become a male. Now this does not mean that I am lesbian or I want to go through surgery to become a man in appearance. I kind of wanted to be born as a boy not a girl. But that is impossible. So I decided to think that I would like to reincarnate as a guy. After I die and if I come back to this world, I would want to be born as a boy. Also, I found that I would be able to act out a boy through the virtual world. Therefore I decided to use this chance to become a "guy." The hair, eye, clothing, and other appearances I have on right now is kind of goth, or in a japanese term, "v-kei" (visual-kei or visual-type). This is to show a hint of "Severus" in the avatar. Since his name is Severus, I decided to dress him up all black, in a long black cloak-like coat, just as Professor Severus Snape in Harry Potter does. Also, for some reason, I have a lot of friends that are goth, or "v-kei." They listen to songs sung by the "visual-type" bands and dress up in black and white and/or pink...but I don't. I have no clue what kind of songs they sing, and although I think they are cute and/or cool, I do not dress up like that. So I thought it was interesting and fun to dress up kind of like that in the virtual world: since I could be someone that I am not!






(This post was of different style compared to all my other ones, and I would think it would be the only one so different. Unlike the other posts, which I have written about short stories written by other people, I wrote about myself, or myself in a virtual world, and therefore, this post ended up sounding quite inappropriate. I found, however, that it was difficult to write differently and I wonder why. I thought this was interesting...I wonder how it is for other people.)

What Emily Grierson Attained and What She Didn't When Her Father Died

Miss Emily Grierson in "A Rose for Emily" by William Faulkner was an extraordinary, rather strange woman. When her father had passed away, she kept his body in the house claiming that he is not dead, until she finally broke down (Bohner and Grant 406). Did she act in such way purely out of love? He was her only immediate family left. Her father, however, had a complete control over her, I would say in more of an authoritarian way, as the "we" or the townspeople in the story recalls: "We remembered all the young men her father had driven away" (406 Bohner and Grant 406). Would she have had only love towards him? I believe she would have had a mixed feeling of love, respect, a type of resentment towards the controlling, and a kind of a disgust towards the lack of freedom because of him, unless she believed that was the way of living-that it was the only way and the truth, there was no "other way" of being given at least some sort of liberty. Why would she cling on to him? Perhaps, since she was brought up completely controlled, she had no clue what she should and could do without him. She hadn't acquired the skills to live by her self and terrified by the idea that she had to. Or perhaps, she was invaded by the sudden attainment of freedom, the realization that there was no one to hover over her and take control of her life anymore, and didn't know what to do, or fearful of it that she couldn't let go of what her life was until then. Like Mrs. Mallard in "The Story of an Hour" by Kate Chopin, she could have "loved him--sometimes" which didn't matter at the moment because she was free, free from his control and had her very own life (Bohner and Grant 268). She may have been confused, not knowing what she was really feeling, sorrow or ecstasy. She could have been feeling both at the same time. The "too much control" does not do any good to anyone. As in psychology, especially concerning parenting styles, the authoritative one is considered the best, and I think this is one of the things, that both "A Rose for Emily" and "The Story of an Hour" is trying to convey-leading us to the present society, always encouraging for more and more improvement.

Human vs Human

Most of human mind and feeling cannot be deciphered conclusively. Freud's use of an iceberg to show that human are only conscious of the tip of human mind is an excellent example of it. The short story, "We Can Remember It for You Wholesale" by Philip K. Dick, excellently indicates how human mind, focusing on memory, is not simple enough to be completely unraveled by human themselves. The conflicts of this story include man vs technology and man vs society, however, this is also a matter of man vs supernatural, or man vs man: man's knowledge and intelligence verses the mind and the soul of man-the unconscious which is completely impossible to thoroughly understand. "We Can Remember It for You Wholesale" starts with the line, "He awoke-and wanted Mars" (Bohner and Grant 355). We later understand that he had actually been to Mars before but his memory of it had been impaired. Did he want "to go" to Mars? Did he want his memory back? Did he want a false memory of having been to Mars? Did he want to live in Mars? Did he want to capture Mars? Douglas Quail interprets this feeling as wanting to go there...to see Mars before he dies (Bohner and Grant 355). Despite the fact that he desperately want to go there, he doesn't have the money. Therefore, he decides to go to an agency offering a false memory of "having been" to Mars (Bohner and Grant 357). During the process, he retains his lost memory. Later, he does the same thing with the memory of meeting species from outer space and having a contract between them. The technology in this story tries to take control of Quail as he gets confused with the various memories he has. This story plays a lot of tricks in our minds and gives us a lot of thinking. I believe it is basically saying, even though technology is advancing and it is good, it also have faults. An example will be our efficiency of working as a result of technological advancement contradicted by the sleep deprived society. Also Dick suggests us not to trifle with the supernatural part of mankind, for it will bring confusion and perhaps destruction.

Overcoat

"The Open Boat" written by Stephen Crane consists of a lot of repetitions, most of them coming from the four men's dialogues. One of the object repeated in this story is a coat, a type of clothing with sleeves, usually worn over something. At first, an overcoat is worn by the captain, offering him protection and warmth in the middle of the ocean. The overcoat, then, is suggested and is used as a sail:

"I wish we had a sail," remarked the captain. "We might try my overcoat on the end of an oar and give you two boys a chance to rest." So the cook and the correspondent held the mast and spread wide the overcoat(Bohner and Grant 343).

This coat is used as a device to make their traveling a little more efficient: by using it so, the four stranded men were able to get closer to the shoreline. After they were able to see the land, "The correspondent[,]...in the top pocket of his coat,...found therein eight cigars [and] with an assurance of an impending rescue shining in their eyes, [they] puffed at the big cigars"(Bohner and Grant 344). The coat then, is used as a provider for the cigars, which the men were trying to relax their feelings with. However, because they seemed they were relaxing and enjoying themselves, the people on the shore do not get a conception that the men are stranded. A man, who sees the dingy with the four men in it, waves his own coat:

"That ain't a flag, is it? That's his coat. Why, certainly, that's his coat."
"So it is. It's his coat. He's taken it off and is waving it around his head. But would you look at him swing it"(Bohner and Grant 346-47).

This coat, is used as a object of torture for the men. The four men, at first, takes it as a signal for rescue. It wasn't so, however, and they end with nothing, at least at the moment. Coats, which protected, helped, soothed, and tortured them, nevertheless, is discarded of, at the end when a man tries to save the men: "Presently he saw a man running along the shore. He was undressing with most remarkable speed. Coat, trousers, shirt, everything flew magically off him" (Bohner and Grant 354). Showing the uselessness at that time. The repeated use of the object, each time for different purposes, shows the possibility of one thing or one person: it depends on how one uses something, or does something at specific events or happenings. Also indicating that important things could be completely useless at times.

Mrs. Mallard as a Scapegoat of Feminism

Louise Mallard in "The Story of an Hour" shows an indescribable joy after overcoming the sad news of her husband's death. Instead of feeling gloomy and finding the environment to seem different, which people usually feel after being informed of a loved one's death:

She could see in the open square before her house the tops of trees that were all aquiver with the new spring life. The delicious breath of rain was in the air. In the street below a peddler was crying his wares. The notes of a distant song which some one was singing reached her faintly, and countless sparrows were twittering in the eaves. There were patches of blue sky showing here and there through the cluds that had met and piled one above the other in the west facing her window (267).

After being filled with the joy, she descends the stairs like the "goddess of Victory" (269). This doesn't mean she did not love him, however, the feeling of lack of freedom by being married to Mr. Mallard was larger than the love she had for him. This concept goes with the feminist movement breaking out during the time. Kate Chopin describes how men would possibly not come up with ideas that (some) women are restrained. The doctors, who are most likely men at this time, concludes that she had died of "joy that kills," of the happiness she was assumed to have been consumed by when she saw her husband, whom she believed to have been dead. However, Louis Mallard's death overall seems to create an argument for and against the feminism movement. Her death could have been the punishment for the ecstasy she had felt after hearing her husband's death, or it could have meant to prevent her from further sufferage-from going through the life deprived of freedom, again. The perception of her death is another way of presenting the feminism in this short story.

Colorful

Although "Paul's Case" was quite a depressing story, it was multicolored, symbolizing Paul's emotional status and ambitions. When he appears at school to plead for his continuation in school, he wears a red carnation on his overcoat (Bohner and Grant 202). This, which the teachers have felt inappropriate and that Paul was mocking them, portrayed his ambition to get out of the middle-class life he's living in at that moment, to the bourgeoisie life he dreams of. It also signified his discontent in the middle-class life, and the power in which he keeps on trying to attain independence from the middle-class values. Red also comes up later in the story as the "red robe" he purchases after the escape from his home, and the "red velvet carpet laid from the door [of the hotel he's staying in] to the street," illustrating his belief that he had attained power to get out of the proletariat life (Bohner and Grant 210-11). When he thinks about his house, he thinks about the "horrible yellow wallpaper" of his room along with the other terrible things (Bohner and Grant 205). Yellow represents the ugliness and abhorrence of Paul's own life. Purple, especially represented by purple he was wearing, represents luxury and prosperity-the bourgeoisie life Paul wanted to belong in (Bohner and Grant 212). The color blue is mentioned excessively when he is in the art gallery: "Raffelli's gay studies of Paris streets and an airy blue Venetian scene" would be one example (Bohner and Grant 204). Blue symbolizes Paul's dream, or his dream world, far from his reality. He experiences such grand feeling when he looks at the art works in the beginning of this short story. When Paul realizes that his dream he had thought had come true was only temporary, the color black facades him:

"The memory of successive summers on the front stoop fell upon him like a weight of black water. He had not a hundred dollars left; and he knew now, more than ever, that money was everything, the wall that stood between all the loathed and all he wanted" (Bohner and Grant 213).

The color black proposes darkness, loneliness, how the fear comes back to Paul to haunt him. It also hints the upcoming death, which he carries out after seeing his red flower dying in the winter's coldness, in an unstable environment, realizing the briefness of his unstable "flourishing" moment. Although astonishingly colorful, the most of the colors in this story signifies quite repugnant concepts, indicating that being colorful does not necessarily mean happiness, although it does certainly mean a sign of life of enthusiasm, unlike one of boredom and passiveness. If Paul's color was supported by his community and helped him do something that could advance him in the society he wants to be in, he would not have run away from his own life would have made a huge difference in his life.

A Sarcastic Message to his Friend

In "The Celebrated Jumping Frog of Calaveras County," Twain writes about what he have heard from a man whom a friend of his have requested for Twain to get information about Leonidas W. Smiley. I believe Twain was pretty angry, or at least annoyed by his friend's request for he have written that he has:

"A lurking suspicion that Leonidas W. Smiley is a myth; that [his] friend never knew such a personage; and that he only conjectured that if [he] asked old Wheeler about him, it would remind him of his infamous Jim Smiley, and he would go to work and bore [him] to death with some exasperating reminiscence of him as long and as tedious as it should be useless to [him]" (Bohner and Grant 272).

He even adds to it that, "If that was the design, it succeeded" (Bohner and Grant 272). "The Celebrated Jumping Frog of Calaveras County" was first written as a letter to the friend from the East, or at least written in letter format, although it is now displayed as a short story. Mark Twain was living in a time when the East was considered civilized, cultured and advanced; and the West was considered less-educated for the fact that Americans have settled in the East far before they started to move out to the West. Frogs, "Smiley" says, can do almost anything, if they received the education (Bohner and Grant 274). This signifies the people deprived in education; that they could do almost anything, or just like the educated people, as long as they were educated. Twain's thoughts also proceed during the bet of frogs. The other man cheats by filling the frog up with "quail shots," which Smiley does not notice until he was gone (Bohner and Grant 275). He shows how education can also be meaningless at times: cheating, would be an example for that. Mark Twain wanted to send a message to his friend that, if the process of getting the information of Leonidas W. Smiley was just for him to go through the boring and meaningless process, it had succeeded and wanted to show the irritation he had experienced during it by stating indirectly that education, which his friend could have practiced excessively, can be useless at times.

Thirty-three

"The Other Duel" by Jorge Luis Borges, I believe, contained some unimportant informations, or atleast, informations that seemed unimportant and meaningless for the short story. The fact that Carmen Silveira had named his sheepdog Thirty-three, was the most confusing to me. It may be that, by stating the name, the dog becomes more important, or significant to the story. However, that was the only information, besides that it "was found dead in the ditch," that was inscribed in the text. Does the number thirty three mean something, or was it just Silveira's favorite number? Researching the specific, I have found out that areas such as Buenos Aires, Argentina and Durazno, Uraguay, which I believe were the locations where the event took place, are located on 33°30' of the Southern Hemisphere. Therefore, the dog's name may have been significant. I do not believe, however, that Silveira had been so intelligent, giving the fact that he had been continuing the meaningless fight with Manuel Cardoso. Also, those knowledge may not have been existing at the time and place. It could have been Borges' application of elements of humor in this story. Although I do not know if the people in the area spoke Spanish or not, I also have found out that, in Spanish, "Diga treinta y tres" ("Say thirty-three") is the same as "say cheese," indicating to "smile to the camera." Since when we take pictures, especially by saying "say cheese," we are a content, it may be pointing out Silveira's happiness when he was with his dog, or his love for the dog. Perhaps, Borges is using both facts for both meanings, or that was all the information he have received from Carlos Reyles about the dog and it has missing pieces to the story, or it does not have any significance and the fact is just there, which, I think, is the most doubtful.

The death of Peyton Farquhar

What was the advantage, for the Union, in deceiving, tricking, and killing Peyton Farquhar? It is explained in the text that Farquhar is "a well-to-do planter, of an old and highly respected Alabama family" and he is not in the army. He was, however, "naturally an original secessionist and ardently devoted to the Southern cause," and "he did what he could" to support his side. "No service was too humble for him to perform in aid of the South," the first paragraph of part 2 reads, "no adventure too perilous for him to undertake if consistent with the character of a civilian who was at heart a soldier." Anyhow, there would have been a lot of civilians in the South who would have felt the same way. Was it the fact that he was wealthy, which would have made significance to the people, including both the Federals and the Confederates? Being rich, would mean that the person or the family own slaves, which is definitely true for Peyton Farquhar who is "a slave owner." The Federals, who, at least appear to, believe, strongly in the immorality of slavery, would have loathed the wealthy slave-owners, and therefore, they slaughter the man. This may not be a "smart move" since the man's slaughter would not give the Federals victory nor would it end slavery. Also, there would have been a lot of other wealthy Southerners who would have had the belief. Why Farquhar? Could it have been any Southern civilian? Was it to show an example to the other Confederates so that they would not do the same thing, as a warning from the Union? Is this insignificant and we, as readers, are not supposed to care or is the short story trying to convey something by indicating a death of one civilian and not focusing on army combats and soldier deaths?