I felt that in all the works we read that the characters that were portrayed as outcasts were lonely and felt like they had no one to turn to. They all had problems and obstacles they were trying to overcome, and had no help from their family or those surrounding them. It could be argued that each character in the stories wouldn't be as much of an "outcast" if he/she was given the opportunity to explain themselves and their own stories. If all the stories were written in first person, I think they would be very different because we would be seeing the characters point of view on their world.
Saturday, January 29, 2011
Maggie DeMarco, Post 1
In relation to question number 2, it seems that in all of the stories that we read and discussed, that the women are the outcasts. In the short stories, "No Name Women," "Fleur," and in "Mrs. Sen's," the main outcast in each was a women. It seems that in each story, the women were seen as weird and they were misunderstood. The no name women in the first story was shunned by her family and the community, and she never got the chance to explain herself. Mrs. Sen felt out of place being far from home, however, people such as Eliot's mother didn't understand her or want to give her a chance. In this story as well, it seems that Mr. Sen is the controller of the relationship, and that she is inferior to him.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think you are on to something when you suggest that if we allowed the outcasts to explain themselves then perhaps they would not seem to out of place or we would not see being an outcast as such an undesirable thing. You are right to point out that none of the outcasts we have encountered thus far have really gotten the chance to speak for themselves. Going forward, I would encourage you to reference and then discuss specific examples from the week's readings that relate to the points you are trying to make.
ReplyDelete