American Texts II
On this page
Read the assigned text alongside its entry. Recall the situation, explain a formal choice using a specific detail, and connect it to a theme or comparison. Test each model answer against the text.
How to use this guide. These sixteen entries cover the American required texts of the 20th and 21st centuries. Use the American Survey for literary history and multiple-choice practice, and Drill for recall. Practise plot recall, form and device vocabulary, and short written answers. Reconstruct each model’s claim and evidence in your own words. Verify exact quotations in the assigned edition, and distinguish an interpretation from a fact directly stated by the text.
Practice question guide
¶Use this table to find explanations for fifteen practice questions. Try answering from a short passage as well as from memory.
| Question | Topic (paraphrased) | Answered in |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Figurative language, symbolism/allegory in Frost ("Mending Wall", "The Road Not Taken") or Hughes ("I, Too") | §2, §3, §4 |
| 2 | Connection between Mark Twain and Heart of Darkness | aside below |
| 3 | The Great Gatsby as a perverted American Dream narrative | §6 |
| 4 | "Hills Like White Elephants" as literary minimalism | §8 |
| 5 | "A Rose for Emily": (1) Modernist short story? (2) allegory and hyperbole? | §7 |
| 6 | Two examples of literary symbolism in Gatsby or Streetcar | §6, §12 |
| 7 | Fading Southern Belle typology: "A Rose for Emily" or Streetcar | §7, §12 |
| 8 | One war-related reading that seems to endorse pacifism (Twain, Malamud, Salinger, Roth, Guterson) | §9, §10, §13, §15 + aside |
| 9 | Is "The Lottery" effective as a modern gothic tale? | §11 |
| 10 | "Bananafish" / "The Lottery" (both 1948) as social reflections of the era | §10, §11 |
| 11 | Melting pot vs. salad bowl in "Defender of the Faith" — which character is which? | §13 |
| 12 | Why does Claudia dismember the dolls in The Bluest Eye? | §14 |
| 13 | On what grounds is The Hours a Postmodern novel? | §16 |
| 14 | Snow Falling on Cedars: star-crossed lovers + courtroom drama + Bildungsroman; which character is at the intersection? | §15 |
| 15 | Guterson wrote his novel while teaching To Kill a Mockingbird — does it show? | §15 |
Pound (“With Usura”) and Plath (“The Applicant”) also have practice questions in their entries.
Comparison for question 2 — Twain and Heart of Darkness: both authors attacked the same atrocity — King Leopold II's exploitation of the Congo Free State. Conrad drew on his own 1890 Congo journey for Heart of Darkness (1899); Twain, a vice-president of the American Anti-Imperialist League, satirised Leopold directly in the pamphlet "King Leopold's Soliloquy" (1905). So the connection is a shared anti-imperialist exposure of the Congo horror, one novelistic and oblique, one satirical and frontal. (Related sample-test MC: Twain's "The War Prayer" responds to the Philippine–American War, ended 1902 — not the Civil War, not WWI.)
Useful comparisons:
- War-related readings: Twain ("The War Prayer"), Malamud ("Armistice"), Salinger ("Bananafish"), Roth ("Defender of the Faith"), Guterson (Snow Falling on Cedars) — the pool for question 8.
- The 1948 pair: "Bananafish" (The New Yorker, 31 Jan 1948) and "The Lottery" (The New Yorker, 26 June 1948) — same year, same magazine (question 10).
- Fading Southern Belle pair: Emily Grierson and Blanche DuBois (question 7).
- Symbolism pair: Gatsby and Streetcar (question 6).
- A striking verbal echo: Malamud's home-front bully Gus Wagner ("I'm a hundred percent American. I fought in the war.") and Williams's Stanley Kowalski ("one hundred percent American") both plant their aggression in the same nativist boast — two 1940s texts, one idiom.
1. Ezra Pound — "With Usura" (Canto XLV) (1937) — Modernist poem; incantatory litany/lament
¶- What it is: Canto XLV of Pound's lifelong epic The Cantos, published in The Fifth Decad of Cantos (1937) and known by its refrain "With Usura". The poem is a sustained curse against usury (lending at interest, for Pound the emblem of finance capitalism), cataloguing everything it corrupts: no one gets "a house of good stone", no "painted paradise on his church wall", bread becomes "dry as paper", craftsmen are severed from their crafts, and art is "made to sell and sell quickly". Against this it rolls out a counter-catalogue of pre-usura achievement — Duccio, Piero della Francesca, Bellini, Fra Angelico, the churches of St Trophime and Saint Hilaire. It climaxes in the accusation that usury is a sin against nature itself and ends with images of defiled fertility and death.
-
Themes & motifs:
- Usury as a force CONTRA NATURAM — against nature and natural increase.
- Good economy = good art and good craft; bad money severs the maker from the made.
- Sterility vs. fertility: usura "slayeth the child in the womb", lies "between the young bride and her bridegroom".
- The sacred profaned: "They have brought whores for Eleusis" — commerce defiling the ancient fertility mysteries.
- Death feasting on life: "Corpses are set to banquet".
-
Form & devices:
- Free-verse litany driven by anaphora ("with usura… with usura…").
- Deliberately archaic, Bible-flavoured grammar (hath, seeth, slayeth, gnaweth) — the voice of timeless moral law, not one man's opinion.
- Catalogue technique: a negative catalogue of harms answered by a positive catalogue of Renaissance artists and buildings.
- The craftsman's signature "Adamo me fecit" ("Adam made me") as the emblem of honest, named work; biblical diction such as "murrain" (cattle plague).
- Pound's own appended footnote defines usury: "A charge for the use of purchasing power, levied without regard to production… (Hence the failure of the Medici bank.)"
-
Context & significance: Pound (1885–1972), American expatriate, founder of Imagism, editor of Eliot's The Waste Land (which is dedicated to him as il miglior fabbro), and the great impresario of Anglo-American Modernism. Read the canto as Imagist method scaled up: evocative concrete images made to carry an abstract argument — a lament, not a treatise in economy. By the 1930s Pound's economics (influenced by C. H. Douglas's Social Credit) had fused with his support for Mussolini; during WWII he made pro-Fascist Rome Radio broadcasts, was arrested for treason in 1945, caged at Pisa, and confined in St Elizabeths psychiatric hospital 1946–58 (Bollingen Prize controversy, 1949). The usury obsession fed his antisemitism — the canto itself names no Jews, but its rhetoric cannot be fully separated from that context, and late in life Pound conceded he had mistaken a symptom (usury) for the cause (avarice).
-
Remember:
- Canto XLV; published in The Fifth Decad of Cantos (1937).
- "Usura" = usury; Pound's own footnote defines it and blames it for "the failure of the Medici bank".
- The Latin hinge: CONTRA NATURAM ("against nature").
- Read it as a lament, not a treatise in economy.
- Pound: Imagism, il miglior fabbro, Rome Radio, Pisa 1945, St Elizabeths 1946–58.
-
Quotable:
- "With usura hath no man a house of good stone"
- "Usura slayeth the child in the womb"
Exam angles
(no direct bank question — prepare these plausible ones)
What does Pound blame usura for in Canto XLV, and is the poem an economic treatise?
In the canto usury corrupts every sphere it touches: housing ("no man a house of good stone"), religious art ("no painted paradise on his church wall"), food ("bread… dry as paper"), craft (the stonecutter kept from his stone, the weaver from her loom) and finally biology itself, since usura "slayeth the child in the womb". Pound sets against this a roll-call of Renaissance masters — Duccio, Piero della Francesca, Bellini, Fra Angelico — whose work, he claims, "came not by usura". But the poem is a lament, not a treatise: it argues by incantation, anaphora and archaic, quasi-biblical diction rather than by analysis, pronouncing a curse on a civilisation that produces "to sell and sell quickly". The famous verdict is delivered in Latin: usury is CONTRA NATURAM, a sin against nature.
How does the poem's form enact its argument?
The relentless anaphora "with usura" mimics the very monotony and accumulation it condemns, while the archaic verb endings (hath, slayeth, gnaweth) borrow the authority of scripture and medieval moral law. The negative catalogue of ruined crafts is answered by a positive catalogue of named artists and churches, so the poem's structure literally weighs a usurious world against a pre-usurious one. Concrete images — thick lines, blunted needles, stale bread — do the work of abstract economics, which is Imagist doctrine applied to a moral argument. The final images of prostituted mysteries and corpses at a banquet complete the movement from bad craftsmanship to defiled life itself.
2. Robert Frost — "Mending Wall" (1914) — narrative/dramatic lyric in blank verse
¶- What it is: The opening poem of North of Boston (1914). Every spring the speaker and his neighbour meet to rebuild the stone wall between their New England farms, replacing boulders that winter (and hunters) have brought down. The speaker teases that the wall is needless — "He is all pine and I am apple orchard", there are no cows — and muses that "Something there is that doesn't love a wall"; the neighbour only repeats his father's proverb, "Good fences make good neighbors." The poem ends with the neighbour, stones in both hands, "like an old-stone savage armed", contentedly repeating the saying.
-
Themes & motifs:
- Barriers between people — physical and mental.
- Tradition versus questioning: a critique of conservatism and blind reliance on tradition.
- Community ritual as both bond and separation: the wall-mending brings the two men together once a year.
- Nature as an anti-wall force: frost heaves, the "frozen-ground-swell".
- Inherited language doing people's thinking for them: "He will not go behind his father's saying".
-
Form & devices:
- 45 lines of blank verse (unrhymed iambic pentameter) in a single verse paragraph; conversational New England idiom over strict metre — Frost's "sound of sense".
- Personification: "Something there is that doesn't love a wall, / That sends the frozen-ground-swell under it"; the boulders are told "Stay where you are until our backs are turned!"
- Symbol/allegory: the wall is a real stone wall and a figure for every barrier people build out of distrust.
- Irony: it is the speaker who initiates the mending each year ("I let my neighbor know beyond the hill") — the sceptic maintains the very wall he mocks.
- The speaker describes the neighbour as moving in more than literal darkness, but qualifies this with "as it seems to me". The image supports the speaker's criticism of inherited habits while also exposing his judgement; it is not an omniscient verdict from Frost.
-
Context & significance: Frost (1874–1963), born in San Francisco, farmed at Derry, New Hampshire, and broke through in England (A Boy's Will, 1913; North of Boston, 1914). Four Pulitzer Prizes; read at Kennedy's 1961 inauguration. He is a Modernist-era poet who kept traditional forms and rural subjects while building in Modernist ambiguity — which is exactly what question 1 tests. The proverb itself is older than Frost; the poem stages it rather than endorses it — but note that the poem does not simply damn walls either: it leaves the argument between mischief and maxim unresolved.
-
Remember:
- Opening poem of North of Boston (1914); blank verse, one continuous paragraph, 45 lines.
- The proverb appears twice (middle and final line): "Good fences make good neighbors" — US spelling neighbors.
- The counter-line also appears twice: "Something there is that doesn't love a wall."
- "He moves in darkness as it seems to me, / Not of woods only and the shade of trees."
- Speaker = apple orchard; neighbour = pine.
-
Quotable:
- "Something there is that doesn't love a wall"
- "Good fences make good neighbors."
Exam angles
Bank Q1 (figurative language / symbolism–allegory in Frost):
"Mending Wall" works simultaneously on a literal and an allegorical level: the wall is an actual New England stone fence, but it also stands for the barriers people build because they do not trust their neighbours. Frost personifies the anti-wall force — "Something there is that doesn't love a wall, / That sends the frozen-ground-swell under it" — so that nature itself seems to vote against division, while the neighbour's inherited proverb "Good fences make good neighbors" represents unexamined tradition. The speaker pictures the neighbour as an armed figure from the past and interprets his darkness as mental as well as physical. Yet the phrase "as it seems to me" marks that as the speaker's view; his own decision to arrange the repairs complicates his claim to be above tradition. Typically for Frost, the symbolism cuts both ways — the mocking speaker is the one who calls the annual mending, so the poem dramatises the argument about walls instead of settling it.
Extra: "Who wins the argument, the speaker or the neighbour?"
Formally the neighbour gets the last word, repeating "Good fences make good neighbors", and the speaker never says his objections aloud beyond his teasing. Yet the poem stacks the imagery against the neighbour — savage, armed, in darkness — while giving the speaker wit, spring "mischief" and nature as an ally. At the same time Frost quietly undercuts the speaker, who initiates the repair and admits the game pleases him. The honest answer is that the poem preserves the tension: it criticises blind tradition without pretending that boundaries have no uses.
Related topics and texts
3. Robert Frost — "The Road Not Taken" (1915/1916) — lyric poem, four ABAAB quintains
¶- What it is: First published in the Atlantic Monthly (August 1915) and placed as the opening poem of Mountain Interval (1916). A traveller in an autumn wood faces a fork, looks down one road, takes the other — "as just as fair" — telling himself he keeps the first for another day though he doubts he will ever return. In the final stanza he imagines retelling the moment "with a sigh / Somewhere ages and ages hence", claiming he took "the one less traveled by, / And that has made all the difference."
-
Themes & motifs:
- Choice and its irreversibility: "way leads on to way".
- Self-narration — how we retrospectively dramatise arbitrary decisions into destiny.
- The gap between fact and memory: the poem states twice that the roads were effectively identical ("the passing there / Had worn them really about the same"; "both that morning equally lay / In leaves no step had trodden black") — which the future self will conveniently forget.
- The fork as an allegory of any life decision (beyond a physical crossroads).
-
Form & devices:
- Four five-line stanzas rhymed ABAAB in a loose iambic tetrameter.
- First-person dramatic monologue whose speaker is gently unreliable.
- The title points at the road not taken — regret and counterfactual, not triumph.
- The "sigh" is calculatedly ambiguous (satisfaction? regret?); the future-tense self-quotation ("I shall be telling this…") frames the famous last lines as a prediction of a story he will tell, not a fact about the roads.
- Symbolism: the yellow wood (autumn, lateness), the diverging roads (life choices), the untrodden leaves (unknown futures).
-
Context & significance: Frost wrote it after his years in England, teasing his friend the poet Edward Thomas, who on their walks always sighed over the path they had not taken; Thomas took the joke seriously enough that it played a part in his decision-making (he enlisted in 1915 and died at Arras in 1917). Frost reportedly warned audiences it was "a tricky poem". It is now proverbially the most misread poem in America (critic David Orr wrote a whole book on the misreading): popular culture quotes it as an anthem of individualism, while the text itself documents how such anthems get manufactured after the fact.
-
Remember:
- Atlantic Monthly, August 1915; opens Mountain Interval (1916).
- Four ABAAB quintains; the sameness of the roads is stated twice.
- Written as a tease of Edward Thomas (killed at Arras, 1917).
- Title = the road not taken (regret), not "the road less traveled".
- Frost: "a tricky poem" — the ending is a projected self-mythology.
-
Quotable:
- "Two roads diverged in a yellow wood"
- "I took the one less traveled by, / And that has made all the difference."
Exam angles
Bank Q1 (figurative language / symbolism–allegory in Frost):
The fork in the road is a textbook allegory: literally a split path in a yellow wood, figuratively any decision whose alternatives cannot both be lived. Frost builds the allegory from concrete images — the bend in the undergrowth (the unknowable future), the leaves "no step had trodden black" (choices still unmade), the sigh "ages and ages hence" (retrospective storytelling). The trick is that the symbolic weight is supplied by the speaker, not the landscape: the poem twice insists the roads were "really about the same", so "the one less traveled by" is a myth the older self will tell. The figurative language thus dramatises not the choice itself but the human need to turn arbitrary choices into meaningful destiny.
Extra: "Does the traveller think he has made a good choice?"
The poem carefully refuses to say. At the moment of choosing, the speaker can find no real difference between the roads, and he immediately doubts he will ever come back to try the other. What he does know is how he will narrate it: "with a sigh", claiming the road was "less traveled by" and that it "made all the difference" — a judgement projected into the future, not delivered now. The sigh can be read as contentment or as regret, and the title, pointing to the road not taken, tilts toward loss. The good choice, in other words, is something the speaker plans to believe in rather than something the poem confirms.
Related topics and texts
4. Langston Hughes — "I, Too" (1925) — free-verse lyric; Harlem Renaissance
¶- What it is: An eighteen-line free-verse poem, first published in March 1925 in Survey Graphic — the special Harlem number edited by Alain Locke — and then collected in Hughes's first book The Weary Blues (1926), where it appears as "Epilogue". The speaker, "the darker brother", is sent "to eat in the kitchen / When company comes", but he laughs, eats well and grows strong; "Tomorrow, / I'll be at the table" and nobody will dare object — "Besides, / They'll see how beautiful I am / And be ashamed". It opens "I, too, sing America" and closes "I, too, am America."
-
Themes & motifs:
- African American claim to full national belonging.
- Segregation figured as household etiquette: kitchen vs. table, "company".
- Dignity, patience and growing strength rather than plea or apology.
- Prophecy: "Tomorrow" as certain emancipation.
- Beauty as an argument (anticipating "Black is beautiful"); shame transferred from the excluded to the excluders.
-
Form & devices:
- Short-lined free verse, plain diction, no rhyme — the power is in line-breaks and the pivot words "Tomorrow" and "Besides".
- Synecdoche/allegory: the "I" is representative — one voice standing for the African American community, the household standing for the nation.
- Intertextual reply to Walt Whitman's "I Hear America Singing": Hughes adds the voice Whitman's catalogue left out — the opening "I, too, sing America" answers Whitman directly.
- The shift from "sing America" (participation) to "am America" (identity) is the poem's whole argument in two verbs.
-
Context & significance: Hughes (1902, Joplin, Missouri – 1967), central poet of the Harlem Renaissance — the flowering of African American arts in 1920s Harlem fed by the Great Migration northward. Hughes championed black vernacular, jazz and blues forms, and racial pride (essay "The Negro Artist and the Racial Mountain", 1926). The Survey Graphic Harlem issue (March 1925) grew into Locke's anthology The New Negro — publishing "I, Too" there placed the poem at the movement's founding moment. Bank Q1 offers Hughes as the alternative to Frost for the symbolism/allegory question.
-
Remember:
- First published March 1925, Survey Graphic (Alain Locke's special Harlem issue).
- Collected in The Weary Blues (1926) as "Epilogue".
- Answer-poem to Whitman's "I Hear America Singing".
- Frame lines: "I, too, sing America." → "I, too, am America."
- Harlem Renaissance: 1920s Harlem, Great Migration, Locke's The New Negro.
-
Quotable:
- "I, too, sing America. // I am the darker brother."
- "I, too, am America."
Exam angles
Bank Q1 (figurative language / symbolism–allegory in Hughes):
The poem's central device is an extended allegory of the nation as a household: America is the house, white America the family entertaining "company", and the speaker "the darker brother" ordered to eat in the kitchen — segregation rendered as domestic etiquette. The "I" works as synecdoche: Hughes speaks not just for himself but on behalf of the African American community, which is what makes the poem allegorical rather than merely personal. Kitchen and table are symbols of exclusion and full citizenship, and "Tomorrow" carries prophetic weight — emancipation is presented as inevitable rather than requested. The frame is itself figurative dialogue: "I, too, sing America" answers Whitman's "I Hear America Singing", and the final shift to "I, too, am America" moves the claim from participation to identity.
Extra: "How does the poem manage tone — is it angry?"
Strikingly, the poem contains no rage: the speaker responds to being sent to the kitchen by laughing, eating well and growing strong, so that oppression is shown feeding the strength that will end it. The future scene is asserted with calm certainty ("Nobody'll dare / Say to me…"), and the climactic emotion belongs to the oppressors, who will "be ashamed" when they see the brother's beauty. This confident, unhurried tone is itself the argument: dignity is presented as already possessed, not begged for. The restraint makes the final line land as simple fact rather than protest.
5. Sylvia Plath — "The Applicant" (1962; Ariel, 1965) — satirical dramatic monologue; Confessional-era poem
¶- What it is: Written on 11 October 1962 in the astonishing burst that produced most of Ariel (published posthumously, 1965, edited by Ted Hughes). A salesman-like speaker interviews an applicant — first checking he is suitably incomplete ("First, are you our sort of a person?" — any glass eye, rubber breasts, missing parts?), then fitting him with a black suit, and finally marketing the product on offer: a wife. The woman is summoned "out of the closet", praised as an appliance that "can sew… can cook… can talk, talk, talk", guaranteed to appreciate like an asset — silver in twenty-five years, gold in fifty — while the refrain hammers: "Will you marry it, marry it, marry it."
-
Themes & motifs:
- Marriage as a commercial transaction and social conscription.
- The wife reduced to a commodity — the poem's most brutal stroke is the pronoun: the bride is consistently "it", a "living doll".
- Conformity: the suit "black and stiff" that fits everybody.
- The body as a set of replaceable parts.
- The emptiness of both parties: the applicant qualifies by lack (an empty hand, an empty head) and is prescribed a wife the way one is prescribed a poultice for a hole.
-
Form & devices:
- Eight five-line free-verse stanzas in the register of a sales pitch / job interview — imperatives, guarantees, warranty periods.
- Insistent, jingle-like repetition: "It can talk, talk, talk"; "marry it, marry it, marry it".
- Dramatic monologue with a silent addressee, implicating the reader as the applicant.
- Dark humour and mounting hysteria under the ad-speak surface; the "living doll" image fusing toy, automaton and bride.
- In a script for a BBC reading Plath glossed the speaker as a kind of executive super-salesman vetting candidates for the "product" — marriage.
-
Context & significance: Plath (1932, Boston – 11 February 1963, London); Smith College, Fulbright to Cambridge, married Ted Hughes 1956; The Colossus (1960), The Bell Jar (January 1963, as "Victoria Lucas"); Collected Poems won a posthumous Pulitzer (1982). She is grouped with the Confessional poets (she attended Robert Lowell's Boston seminar alongside Anne Sexton), though "The Applicant" is less confession than social satire. It anticipates by months the argument of Betty Friedan's The Feminine Mystique (1963) — the suburban wife as manufactured role — a useful comparison with The Hours (§16).
-
Remember:
- Written October 1962; in Ariel (1965), published posthumously by Ted Hughes.
- The bride is called "it" throughout; key coinage: "A living doll".
- Register: sales pitch / job interview; refrain "Will you marry it, marry it, marry it."
- Same month as "Daddy" and "Lady Lazarus"; Plath died February 1963.
- Pairs ideologically with Friedan's The Feminine Mystique (1963).
-
Quotable:
- "First, are you our sort of a person?"
- "A living doll, everywhere you look. / It can sew, it can cook, / It can talk, talk, talk."
Exam angles
(no direct bank question — prepare these plausible ones)
How does 'The Applicant' satirize mid-century marriage and gender roles?
The poem stages marriage as a commercial transaction: a salesman vets an applicant and then offers him a wife as the product that completes his package. The satire's sharpest device is grammatical — the woman is "it", a "living doll" whose selling points are domestic functions ("It can sew, it can cook") and guaranteed appreciation, "silver" at twenty-five years, "gold" at fifty, like a warranty on an appliance. The man fares little better: he qualifies by emptiness and is fitted into a one-size black suit, so conformity crushes both genders even as the woman bears the commodification. The advertising register — imperatives, guarantees, the jingle-refrain "Will you marry it, marry it, marry it" — lets the institution condemn itself in its own language, months before Friedan's The Feminine Mystique made the same case in prose.
What is the effect of the poem's repetitions?
Repetition is the poem's engine of menace: "It can talk, talk, talk" turns a wife's speech into a mechanical feature, and the final "marry it, marry it, marry it" escalates a proposal into a hard sell that will not take no for an answer. The repeated vetting questions and guarantees mimic advertising's manufactured urgency, exposing courtship as sales pressure. Because the addressee never speaks, the chant seems aimed past him at the reader, who is being processed by the same machine. The comedy of the jingle curdles into horror precisely because the form is so cheerful about it.
Related topics and texts
6. F. Scott Fitzgerald — The Great Gatsby (1925) — novel; Jazz Age tragedy, Modernist first-person narration
¶- What it is: Published April 1925 (Scribner's; working title Trimalchio). Nick Carraway, a Midwesterner selling bonds in New York in the summer of 1922, rents a West Egg cottage beside the mansion of Jay Gatsby, host of vast anonymous parties. Gatsby — born James Gatz, a poor North Dakota boy remade by ambition and by bootlegging money (his associate Meyer Wolfshiem "fixed the World's Series") — has built it all to win back Daisy Buchanan, now married to the brutal old-money Tom, across the bay in East Egg. Nick brokers the reunion; the affair collapses in a Plaza Hotel confrontation, after which Daisy, driving Gatsby's car, kills Tom's mistress Myrtle Wilson. Tom points Myrtle's husband George at Gatsby, who is shot in his pool; almost no one comes to the funeral, and Nick returns West, closing on the green light and the boats against the current.
-
Themes & motifs:
- The American Dream perverted (see question 3 below).
- Old money vs. new money (East Egg vs. West Egg) and the carelessness of the rich — "careless people" who "retreated back into their money".
- The past's irrecoverability: "Can't repeat the past?… Why of course you can!"
- Illusion and idolatry — Daisy as the dream's unworthy object: "Her voice is full of money."
- Moral wasteland — the valley of ashes; surveillance without God — the fading billboard eyes of Doctor T. J. Eckleburg.
-
Form & devices:
- Retrospective first-person peripheral narrator (Nick), partial and self-flattering ("inclined to reserve all judgments"), which makes Gatsby a rumour before he is a man.
- Scenic, elliptical construction with delayed exposition — Gatsby's true biography arrives in fragments.
- Symbolism (question 6): the green light at the end of Daisy's dock (the dream, longing, the "orgastic future"); the valley of ashes (industrial waste of the boom, moral consequence dumped on the poor); Eckleburg's eyes (an advertisement mistaken for God — Wilson: "God sees everything"); the two Eggs (caste line inside wealth); Gatsby's shirts and yellow car (money as display and as murder weapon).
- Lyrical prose over a hard plot skeleton.
-
Context & significance: Fitzgerald (1896–1940) named the Jazz Age and was its representative writer and casualty. Consider the Prohibition mechanism: Gatsby's fortune exists because Puritan-minded prohibitionists collided with Jazz Age appetite — the bootlegger is the era's true self-made man. The novel sold modestly in 1925 and was canonised after WWII; it is now the standard text for the corruption of the self-made ideal: Ben Franklin's self-improvement schedule survives parodically in young Gatz's timetable written in a Hopalong Cassidy cover.
-
Remember:
- April 1925, Scribner's; narrator Nick Carraway; summer 1922.
- Gatsby = James Gatz, North Dakota; mentor Dan Cody; money via bootlegging with Meyer Wolfshiem.
- Geography: West Egg (new money) / East Egg (old money) / valley of ashes between them and New York.
- Symbols to name in the exam: green light, valley of ashes, Eckleburg's eyes.
- Daisy drives the car that kills Myrtle; George Wilson shoots Gatsby, then himself.
-
Quotable:
- "Her voice is full of money."
- "So we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past."
Exam angles
Bank Q3: "How can The Great Gatsby be perceived as a perverted American Dream narrative?"
Gatsby's career has the outer shape of the American Dream — a poor boy's rise through discipline and self-invention, complete with a Franklin-style self-improvement schedule — but every term of the dream is corrupted. The rise is financed not by honest industry but by crime (bootlegging and Wolfshiem's fixes), which Prohibition itself made profitable; the dream's object is not liberty or self-fulfilment but a rich girl whose "voice is full of money", a person converted into the ultimate commodity. The promise of social mobility proves a lie: old-money East Egg closes ranks, Tom and Daisy retreat "back into their money", and the parvenu takes the bullet for them. Even the dream's direction is inverted — Gatsby strains not toward the future but toward repeating the past, and Nick generalises the failure in the final image of boats "borne back ceaselessly into the past". The dream is thus shown as beautiful in its longing (the green light) and rotten in its content.
Bank Q6: "Give at least two examples of literary symbolism in The Great Gatsby."
The green light at the end of Daisy's dock condenses the whole novel: to Gatsby it is Daisy and the recoverable past, to Nick "the orgastic future that year by year recedes before us" — desire kept alive by distance, since once Daisy is regained the light becomes "just a green light" again. The valley of ashes, presided over by the giant fading eyes of the oculist's billboard Doctor T. J. Eckleburg, symbolises what the boom excretes: the poor (the Wilsons) live in the industrial waste of the rich, and when Wilson takes the painted eyes for God's, the novel shows a world where advertisement has replaced deity. One can add the two Eggs — identical in shape, separated by caste — or Gatsby's yellow car, wealth as display that becomes the literal instrument of death.
Extra: "How reliable is Nick Carraway?"
Nick advertises himself as uniquely tolerant and honest, yet he is complicit in the story he tells — he arranges the adulterous reunion, admires the "gorgeous" fraud he claims to disapprove of, and edits events into elegy. His Midwestern moralising coexists with snobbery and evasions (his own affairs are barely sketched), so his famous final judgements are as much self-justification as verdict. This partiality is functional: Gatsby remains "great" only because we see him through a narrator committed to greatness. Reading Nick sceptically turns the novel from romance into a study of how myths — personal and national — get written.
7. William Faulkner — "A Rose for Emily" (1930) — short story; Southern Gothic, Modernist narration
¶- What it is: Faulkner's first story in a national magazine (The Forum, April 1930; collected in These 13, 1931). In Jefferson (Yoknapatawpha County), Miss Emily Grierson dies at seventy-four and the town narrates her life out of order: the aristocratic father who drove away her suitors; Colonel Sartoris's chivalric remission of her taxes (1894) and her later routing of the modern aldermen who try to collect; the terrible smell around the house (neighbours secretly sprinkle lime); her Yankee beau, day-labour foreman Homer Barron; her purchase of arsenic "for rats"; Homer's disappearance. After the funeral the town breaks open a sealed upstairs room and finds Homer's corpse in the bridal bed — and on the second pillow, "a long strand of iron-gray hair."
-
Themes & motifs:
- The Old South refusing to die — Emily as "a fallen monument", "a tradition, a duty, and a care; a sort of hereditary obligation upon the town".
- Time and denial: she denies her father's death for three days; the invisible watch ticking in her pocket; the sealed room as stopped time.
- The town's complicity — chivalry, curiosity and cowardice let the horror happen.
- One symbolic reading of necrophilia: holding on to that which is dead = clinging to the past.
- North vs. South: Homer the Northern labourer paving Southern sidewalks; isolation as both imposition and choice.
-
Form & devices:
- First-person plural narrator "we" — the communal town voice: gossiping, unreliable, implicated.
- Jumbled chronology in five sections (opens with the funeral, loops back decades, enters the room only at the end), forcing the reader to reassemble time — an example of flashback/flash-ahead construction.
- Gothic apparatus relocated to a Mississippi street: decaying mansion, secret chamber, corpse-bride.
- Foreshadowing (smell, arsenic, Homer's vanishing) that only clicks retrospectively.
- Allegory and hyperbole (question 5): Emily allegorises the Old South itself, and the town's language is systematically hyperbolic — the "fallen monument", the "hereditary obligation".
-
Context & significance: Faulkner (1897–1962), Nobel Prize 1949 (presented 1950), built his fictional Yoknapatawpha County out of Oxford, Mississippi. The story is the standard classroom case of Southern Gothic and of Modernist narrative technique applied to the short story — the sample MC even asks which device is least typical of Faulkner (answer: linear chronology). The title, Faulkner explained, is the narrator's gesture of pity — a rose for a woman to whom life gave nothing.
-
Remember:
- The Forum, April 1930; collected in These 13 (1931); Jefferson, Yoknapatawpha.
- Narrator = the town, "we"; five sections, non-linear.
- Names: Homer Barron (Yankee foreman), Colonel Sartoris (tax remission, 1894), Tobe (Emily's Black servant).
- Emily dies at 74; arsenic bought "for rats"; the closing image: a long strand of iron-gray hair.
- Sample-MC trap: Faulkner's least typical device = linear chronology.
-
Quotable:
- "When Miss Emily Grierson died, our whole town went to her funeral" (opening)
- "…we saw a long strand of iron-gray hair." (closing)
Exam angles
Bank Q5(1): "Does 'A Rose for Emily' qualify as a Modernist short story?"
Yes, on narrative grounds above all: Faulkner discards linear chronology for a jumbled sequence of flashbacks and flash-aheads that opens with Emily's funeral and withholds the bedroom revelation until the last paragraph, making the reader reconstruct the truth — a strategy associated with Modernist experiments in narration. The narrator is equally Modernist: an unreliable collective "we" replaces the omniscient Victorian storyteller, so meaning arrives filtered through gossip, guilt and myth-making. Time itself becomes the story's subject — Emily's denial of death and the sealed, dust-stopped room dramatise consciousness at war with history. The Gothic material is traditional, but its telling — fragmentation, delayed disclosure, perspectival narration — is Modernism applied to the American South.
Bank Q5(2): "Does it make use of allegory and hyperbole?"
Emily functions allegorically as the Old South: an impoverished aristocrat propped up by chivalric fictions (Colonel Sartoris's tax remission), resisting the New South's demands (the aldermen, free postal delivery), and literally sleeping with a dead past — her necrophilia is "holding on to that which is dead", the clearest possible figure for clinging to a lost order. Homer Barron, the Northern day-labour foreman, extends the allegory as the New North that the Old South can only possess by killing. The town's rhetoric is meanwhile openly hyperbolic — Emily is "a fallen monument", "a tradition, a duty, and a care; a sort of hereditary obligation upon the town" — inflation that shows how the community mythologises what it should have questioned. Allegory and hyperbole thus work together: the town's exaggerations build the monument, and the allegory shows what rots inside it.
Bank Q7 (Fading Southern Belle — Emily variant):
Emily Grierson embodies the fading Southern belle: raised as aristocracy, taught that her worth lies in family name and female gentility, and then stranded when the money, the suitors and the social order evaporate. The typology's double pressure is textbook here — her marriageable youth is spent under a father who drives every man away, and the Grierson pretension survives into poverty, leaving her only the performance of dignity (china-painting lessons, the refusal to pay taxes). Denied a legitimate bride's role, she secures a bridegroom by murder and keeps him as the Old South keeps its myths — embalmed in a bridal chamber. Where Blanche DuBois retreats into fantasy, Emily makes fantasy material, which is why the story reads as the typology's Gothic extreme.
Extra: "Why is the story narrated by 'we'?"
The plural narrator turns the town into a character and a culprit: the same voice that pities Emily polices her, feeds on her as spectacle, and looks away at every decisive moment (the smell is limed at night rather than investigated; the arsenic sale is gossiped about, not questioned). "We" also controls information the way communities do — by rumour and selective memory — which produces the story's non-linear shape. Finally, the pronoun implicates the reader, who joins the crowd entering the bedroom in the last scene. The horror is thus collective: Emily did it, but "we" made her possible.
Related topics and texts
8. Ernest Hemingway — "Hills Like White Elephants" (1927) — short story; literary minimalism ("iceberg method")
¶- What it is: First published in the Paris little magazine transition (August 1927), then in Men Without Women (1927). At a rail junction in the Ebro valley, on the line between Barcelona and Madrid, an American man and a girl he calls Jig drink beer and Anís del Toro while waiting forty minutes for the express. Their small talk — she says the distant hills look "like white elephants" — is a duel over something never named: he presses her to have "an awfully simple operation", she asks whether things can be as they were and whether he will still love her; she finally begs him, with seven "pleases", to stop talking. He carries the bags to the far track; asked if she feels better, she answers: "I feel fine… There's nothing wrong with me. I feel fine."
-
Themes & motifs:
- The unspoken abortion and the impossibility of honest speech.
- A relationship at a junction — two rails, two directions, choose.
- Fertility vs. sterility staged by the landscape: the barren, treeless side toward the hills vs. the river and fields of grain on the other.
- The white elephant — an unwanted, burdensome gift: the pregnancy as he sees it; perhaps the relationship as she comes to see it.
- Male pressure disguised as reasonableness ("I wouldn't have you do it if you didn't want to"); drinking as avoidance ("That's all we do, isn't it — look at things and try new drinks?").
-
Form & devices:
- The classic demonstration of the iceberg method / theory of omission (Hemingway, Death in the Afternoon, 1932: the dignity of the story's movement is underwater — only an eighth shows).
- Much of the story is dialogue, often with simple speech tags; sustained interior monologue and a full explanation of the dispute are withheld. Adverbs do occur: Jig smiles "brightly", and the waiting passengers are described as behaving "reasonably". Minimalism means selective explanation, not a ban on adjectives, adverbs or narration. The word abortion never occurs.
- The reader must infer everything — minimalism makes the reader construct the implications.
- The few narrated details are all load-bearing symbols: the two lines of rails, the bead curtain (with its Anís del Toro label), the luggage with "labels on them from all the hotels where they had spent nights", the divided landscape.
- The ending is a masterclass in irony: "I feel fine" closes the story without closing the question.
-
Context & significance: Hemingway (1899–1961), ambulance driver wounded in WWI, Paris expatriate in Gertrude Stein's "Lost Generation" (disillusioned expatriates in Paris, not war veterans as such), Nobel Prize 1954. His stripped style — short declaratives, concrete nouns, repetition instead of ornament — reshaped 20th-century prose; the sample MC asks what is least typical of him: an opulent style heavy with adjectives and adverbs. The story is also a set text for gender-reading: Jig sees the hills, the man sees the problem.
-
Remember:
- transition, August 1927 → Men Without Women (1927).
- Setting: rail junction, Ebro valley, Spain; express Barcelona→Madrid; 40-minute wait.
- The girl is Jig; drinks: beer and Anís del Toro; the operation is never named.
- Iceberg theory formulated in Death in the Afternoon (1932).
- Seven "pleases": "Would you please please please please please please please stop talking?"
-
Quotable:
- "It's really an awfully simple operation, Jig… It's not really an operation at all."
- "I feel fine… There's nothing wrong with me. I feel fine."
Exam angles
Bank Q4: "How does 'Hills Like White Elephants' qualify as an example of literary minimalism?"
The story gives us a couple's dialogue, gestures and surroundings while withholding sustained access to their thoughts and a full explanation of their dispute. The man repeatedly calls the operation simple, but Jig asks whether he will still love her and eventually asks him to stop talking; that mismatch lets the reader infer pressure without an explanatory speech from the narrator. Brief evaluative words such as "brightly" and "reasonably" remain, so describe selective omission rather than claiming the prose contains no adverbs. Its central subject, an abortion, is never named; it exists only as "an awfully simple operation", the tip of Hemingway's iceberg, whose seven-eighths — the couple's history, the girl's fear, the relationship's probable end — stay underwater. What little description there is does symbolic double duty: the junction's two rail lines, the valley split between barren hills and fertile fields, the luggage labelled with all the hotels of a rootless life. Even the ending withholds resolution — "I feel fine" can be surrender, decision or anaesthesia — proving that in minimalism omission is not absence of meaning but its engine.
Extra: "What does the title contribute?"
"White elephants" names the story's method as well as its subject: a white elephant is a gift too burdensome to keep and too precious to discard, which is exactly what the unnamed pregnancy is to this couple. The comparison is Jig's, and the man's flat "I've never seen one" instantly maps the gap between her imaginative, life-facing mind and his literal one. As she looks again and half-retracts the simile, the hills register her wavering — the landscape does the emotional narration the narrator refuses to do. The title thus points at the one thing the dialogue never says, in an image only the woman is capable of making.
Extra: "Does Jig agree to the operation in the end?"
The text refuses to say, and a good answer demonstrates why both readings are available rather than picking one as fact. For consent: she says "Then I'll do it. Because I don't care about me", and her final "I feel fine" can be read as numbed capitulation to a man who has repeated "I don't want you to do it if you don't want to" until it means its opposite. Against it: she has seen through him ("That's all we do, isn't it…"), her smile at the barmaid and at him can signal a decision already made about the relationship rather than the operation, and the luggage moved to the other side of the station may hint at a changed direction. The iceberg leaves the outcome below the waterline; what is above it is the power struggle, and that the story does resolve — in our clear sight of it.
Related topics and texts
9. Bernard Malamud — "Armistice" (written 1940; publ. 1989) — short story; Jewish-American home-front realism
¶-
What it is: One of Malamud's earliest stories, written in mid-1940 in immediate response to the fall of France; unpublished in his lifetime, it appeared posthumously in The People and Uncollected Stories (1989, ed. Robert Giroux; now also in The Complete Stories, 1997).
- Setup: Morris Lieberman, a Jewish widower who owns a small grocery-delicatessen in a Scandinavian neighbourhood of Brooklyn, saw as a fifteen-year-old in Russia a peasant crush a fleeing Jewish sexton's spine with a wagon wheel during a pogrom; thirty years later, the Nazi conquests revive that terror. He lives glued to the radio through May–June 1940 — Sedan, the Belgian surrender, Dunkirk, the fall of Paris, Pétain's request for "peace with honor", Hitler receiving the French in Marshal Foch's railway carriage at Compiègne — praying for a French victory in what he calls "this righteous war". His anxieties are watched over by his thin, studious fourteen-year-old son Leonard, who minds the counter while his father naps and begs him to stop listening. The menace has a local face: Gus Wagner, the meat-delivery man — American-born, an AEF veteran of 1918 — who keeps a scrapbook of German victories, worships the Panzer divisions, and needles Morris daily ("You better get used to it, Morris. The Germans will wipe out the Frenchman."). Gus and Morris have done business for nine years and were nearly friends after Morris's wife died; Leonard, who checks Gus's error-ridden bills, has driven them apart.
- The armistice and the confrontation: The night the armistice is announced Morris cannot sleep; he dreams of falling from a Paris ledge as the Nazis close in, then of Gus in the crowded store waving Father Coughlin's Social Justice and crying "The Protocols of Zion!" until the customers leave. Next afternoon the two men collide: Morris asks "What great cause has died?", Gus sneers at Leonard ("your skinny kid", the bill "signed by a certified public accountant"), and when Morris retorts that Gus will never hear "good mathematics student" said of his own children, Gus explodes — "What the hell's the matter with you Jews? Do you think you own all the brains in the world?" Morris: "Gus, you talk like a Nazi." Gus: "I'm a hundred percent American. I fought in the war." When Gus claims the French "deserved to lose" and are only defended because they protect "the Jews — like that lousy Leon Blum", Morris shouts "You Nazi, you… You don't deserve to live in America!" — and Gus shoves the intervening Leonard aside ("Mind your own business, you little bastard").
- The ending: The boy's sob stops everything: Gus sees "that he had gone too far"; Morris, white-faced, embraces and kisses his son, promising "No more, Leonard… I give you my word. No more." Gus — mainly afraid of losing the account — leaves the meat ("Pay me tomorrow") and drives off. The story ends inside Gus's head: the sight of the weeping boy and embracing father only confirms his contempt ("It was always like that with the Jews. Tears and people holding each other. Why feel sorry for them?"), and he fantasises that his truck is a tank rumbling through Paris boulevards, the French cowed on the sidewalks — "He drove tensely, his eyes unsmiling. He knew that if he relaxed the picture would fade."
-
Themes & motifs:
- The continuity of antisemitism across continents — pogrom Russia → Nazi Europe → a Brooklyn delivery man (the wagon wheel of the pogrom quietly rhyming with Gus's fantasised tank wheels).
- The home front as a miniature battlefield: the war is fought over a delicatessen counter.
- Mediated suffering — the radio as Morris's wound and lifeline: "in listening he shared the woes inflicted upon his race".
- Jewish history as "an interminable exodus" — Morris's night-thought of long lines trudging with bundles.
- Father–son tenderness as the story's moral centre and its answer to force.
- The fragility of fascist self-intoxication — Gus's empowering "picture" must be gripped or it fades.
- Commerce as armed truce — Gus censors himself "because he considered his business first".
-
Form & devices:
- Compact third-person realism, focalised through Morris for most of its length and then — crucially — handed to Gus for the final paragraphs, so the story closes inside the mind it condemns.
- Historical montage: the real timeline of May–June 1940 structures the plot.
- Two dream sequences doing psychological exposition: the persecution nightmare, and the Social Justice / "Protocols of Zion" dream (Coughlin's antisemitic weekly, which really did circulate the Protocols).
- Dialogue as duel, with the era's slogans ("a hundred percent American") deployed as weapons.
- The title's double irony: the Compiègne armistice of 22 June 1940 was staged in the same railway carriage as the armistice of 11 November 1918 — the war Gus fought in; and "armistice" also names the false peace Morris and Gus resume at the end ("The meat's on the table… Pay me tomorrow"): not reconciliation, only a ceasefire that business requires.
-
Context & significance: Malamud (1914–1986), Brooklyn-born son of Russian-Jewish immigrant grocers — the store in the story is his parents' world, and it prefigures The Assistant (1957). Read "Armistice" in two contexts: WWII reflected in American fiction (with Heller, Mailer, Roth) and Jewish-American literature's "Remembering Europe" strand (with I. B. Singer): a pogrom survivor, "relatively safe in Brooklyn", listening to Europe collapse by radio. Written when the events were weeks old, it is that rarity — American fiction of the Holocaust's prologue composed inside the moment, before hindsight. Malamud's later career: The Natural (1952), The Assistant (1957), The Magic Barrel (1958; National Book Award), The Fixer (1966; Pulitzer + NBA), his classic novel of European (Russian) antisemitism. Leon Blum, whom Gus slurs, was France's Jewish former prime minister — the reference dates the prejudice precisely.
-
Remember:
- Written mid-1940; first published posthumously in The People and Uncollected Stories (1989).
- Morris Lieberman, Jewish grocer-delicatessen owner, widower, Scandinavian neighbourhood, Brooklyn; witnessed a Russian pogrom at fifteen (wagon wheel, dying sexton).
- Son Leonard, 14, studious, won a five-dollar mathematics prize; minds the store; "Pa, don't fight."
- Gus Wagner, meat deliveryman; American-born AEF veteran of 1918; scrapbook of German victories; Panzer worship.
- Historical spine: Sedan (May 1940) → Dunkirk → Paris falls → Pétain, Compiègne, armistice 22 June 1940 in Foch's railway carriage.
- The ending belongs to Gus's tank fantasy, which fades if he relaxes.
-
Quotable:
- "Gus, you talk like a Nazi." — "I'm a hundred percent American. I fought in the war."
- "He knew that if he relaxed the picture would fade." (final line)
Exam angles
Bank Q8: "Choose one war-related reading that seems to be endorsing pacifism and explain why." (Malamud option)
"Armistice" never shows a battlefield, yet it is an argument about war because it shows what war-worship does to people: Gus's militarism is rendered as a scrapbook fetish and a compensatory fantasy — his truck imagined as a tank terrifying Parisians — which he must grip tensely "or the picture would fade", exposing fascist power-feeling as willed self-intoxication rather than strength. Against it the story sets everything gentle: Morris's grief for people he has never met, and the father kissing his sobbing son, which even the story's aggressor recognises as a limit ("he had gone too far"). The narrative's sympathy lies wholly with mourning and tenderness, and its irony falls on every martial pose, including the slogan "I fought in the war" used as a licence for bullying. One must concede Morris is not strictly a pacifist — he prays for a French victory in "this righteous war" — so the story's pacifism is of the humanist kind: it hates what war does and what loving war makes of men, rather than claiming no war may ever be fought. (If a purer choice is wanted, Twain's "The War Prayer" is the explicit option; among the American fiction texts, Salinger's "Bananafish" pairs well with this one.)
Extra: "What is the significance of the title?"
Literally it names the Franco-German armistice of 22 June 1940, whose radio announcement structures the story's sleepless night and whose staging — Hitler receiving the French in Marshal Foch's railway carriage at Compiègne — deliberately reversed the armistice of 1918. That reversal matters because Gus is a veteran of the earlier war: the man once on the winning, democratic side now worships the force that avenges his old enemy's defeat, showing how grievance ("they starved the German people") curdles into fascism. Finally the title describes the ending between the two men: nothing is resolved, Gus leaves the meat and says "Pay me tomorrow", and commerce resumes as a mere ceasefire. Peace in this story — international and personal — is only an armistice: hatred intact, hostilities suspended.
Extra: "Why does the story end in Gus's point of view rather than Morris's?"
Handing the final focalisation to Gus refuses the comfort of ending on the father-and-son embrace; instead the reader is locked inside the antisemite's mind at the very moment pity is available to him and he declines it ("Why feel sorry for them?"). The move shows prejudice as an act of continuous will: Gus must reinterpret tenderness as weakness and must hold his tank fantasy by force of tension, because relaxing would let reality — and sympathy — back in. It also universalises the warning: the story ends not with the victim's grief but with an ordinary American driving a delivery route while dreaming of occupation. The last line's fragile "picture" is Malamud's diagnosis of fascism's psychology, made in 1940, before the word for its endpoint existed.
Related topics and texts
10. J. D. Salinger — "A Perfect Day for Bananafish" (1948) — short story; postwar New Yorker fiction
¶- What it is: The New Yorker, 31 January 1948; the opening story of Nine Stories (1953) and the foundation of the Glass family saga. In a Florida resort hotel, Muriel Glass — nails lacquered, reading a women's-magazine article called "Sex Is Fun—or Hell" — reassures her panicked mother by long-distance phone that her husband Seymour, a veteran recently released from an Army hospital, is fine, despite "the trees" business with the car and the rest ("Miss Spiritual Tramp of 1948," she reports him calling her). On the beach, Seymour talks with a small girl, Sybil Carpenter ("See more glass"), and tells her the fable of the bananafish: ordinary-looking fish that swim into a banana hole, gorge — "as many as seventy-eight bananas" — swell with banana fever, cannot get out, and die. They wade in, he kisses the arch of her foot, returns to the hotel, accuses a woman in the elevator of staring at his feet, enters the room where Muriel sleeps, takes an Ortgies calibre 7.65 automatic from his luggage, "looked at the girl, aimed the pistol, and fired a bullet through his right temple."
-
Themes & motifs:
- The unassimilable war veteran in booming consumer America — a WWII veteran who cannot adjust to the consumerist America of the late 1940s.
- Materialism as spiritual disease — the bananafish fable as a parable of glut: gorge on the world and you cannot get back out.
- Childhood and adult relationships contrasted: Seymour talks playfully with Sybil, but the story also shows jealousy, unease and miscommunication around that encounter.
- Incommunicability: the phone call and the beach dialogue never touch.
- The difficulty of interpreting Seymour: the affectionate beach conversation, reports of alarming behaviour and abrupt ending resist reduction to either a saintly outsider or a single diagnosis.
-
Form & devices:
- Rigorous scenic construction in two halves — Muriel's phone call (the adult, acquisitive world discussing Seymour in his absence) and Seymour with Sybil (his own world) — hinged by the elevator scene and detonated by a one-sentence ending with zero interiority.
- Salinger withholds diagnosis and motive entirely — an omission technique in Hemingway's line.
- The fable-within-the-story as the interpretive key the characters themselves don't use.
- Brilliant dialogue mimicry: Muriel's mother's anaphoric worries; Sybil's "see more glass".
- Symbols: bananafish (glut), the sea (childhood, depth), Seymour's pallor and robe vs. the tanned resort crowd, the "seventy-eight bananas" of terminal consumption.
-
Context & significance: Salinger (1919–2010) landed at Utah Beach on D-Day, fought through the Hürtgen Forest, worked in counter-intelligence and was hospitalised for combat stress in 1945 — this biographical context makes a war-trauma reading relevant, but does not give readers direct access to Seymour's motive or establish that his experience is identical to Salinger's. The story made Salinger's name, led to The Catcher in the Rye (1951), and seeded the Glass family cycle (Franny and Zooey; Raise High the Roof Beam, Carpenters; Seymour: An Introduction), which retro-fits Seymour as guru and saint. Salinger can also be compared with the Beats in his revolt against postwar consumerism.
-
Remember:
- The New Yorker, 31 January 1948; opens Nine Stories (1953).
- Names: Seymour Glass, Muriel, Sybil Carpenter; Florida resort hotel (room 507).
- The weapon: Ortgies calibre 7.65 automatic; death by a shot through the right temple, beside sleeping Muriel.
- Fable numbers: 78 bananas; banana fever.
- "Miss Spiritual Tramp of 1948" = Seymour's name for Muriel.
-
Quotable:
- "Then he went over and sat down on the unoccupied twin bed, looked at the girl, aimed the pistol, and fired a bullet through his right temple." (final sentence)
- "Miss Spiritual Tramp of 1948"
Exam angles
Bank Q10: "'Bananafish' came out in 1948 — can it be read as a social reflection of that era?"
The resort setting places Seymour beside a world of fashion, leisure and consumption, while the opening telephone conversation mentions his Army hospitalization and worries about his behaviour. These details support a reading of difficult postwar readjustment. His bananafish fable can then be read as an image of appetite turning into entrapment, set against the apparently comfortable holiday. But the narrator never enters his thoughts at the ending, so consumerism or wartime trauma should be argued as interpretive connections rather than a complete explanation of his death. The 1948 publication date supplies the postwar context; the telephone call and ending provide the textual evidence.
Bank Q8 (pacifism option — Salinger):
A reading critical of war can begin with the references to Seymour's military service and hospitalization, then consider how distress persists beneath the resort's peacetime leisure. The contrast between the lively conversation with Sybil and the abrupt final scene denies an easy story of successful homecoming. Those details make war's aftermath a defensible focus, but the story neither states that war alone caused his death nor argues that this was his only possible future. Its withheld interiority is part of the literary method. For an answer about pacifism, explain how this evidence supports an antiwar reading while acknowledging that it is not an explicit rejection of every war.
Extra: "What do the bananafish mean?"
Within the fable, bananafish are ordinary fish that swim into a hole, gorge on bananas until they swell, and die of banana fever because they can no longer get out — a parable of appetite that destroys the capacity to escape. One reading connects the appetite in the fable with the material comforts and consumer objects surrounding Muriel at the resort. Another reads entrapment alongside the story's references to Seymour's military experience and hospitalization. These are parallels a reader can argue from the details; the narrator does not reveal that Seymour himself makes either connection. The fable invites these parallels, but Seymour does not identify its characters with himself or explain his later action. The apparently cheerful title becomes unsettling when reread after the ending; its irony should remain an interpretive question, not be treated as his endorsement of the outcome.
Related topics and texts
11. Shirley Jackson — "The Lottery" (1948) — short story; modern American gothic
¶- What it is: The New Yorker, 26 June 1948. On the clear, sunny morning of June 27th, the three hundred villagers of an unnamed American town gather in the square between the post office and the bank for an annual event that takes "less than two hours". Mr. Summers administers a shabby black wooden box of paper slips; boys have already stockpiled stones. Heads of households draw; Bill Hutchinson draws the marked slip, and his wife Tessie — who arrived late, joking — begins protesting the procedure. In the second, family round, Tessie draws the slip with the black spot. Her neighbours and her own children close in: "'It isn't fair, it isn't right,' Mrs. Hutchinson screamed, and then they were upon her."
-
Themes & motifs:
- Ritual scapegoating — an ordinary community's institutionalised human sacrifice (the sample MC's key: the "lottery" entails a ritual sacrifice).
- Collective cruelty normalized as civic routine: familiar neighbours joke and exchange news before taking part in a stoning. Ordinary manners do not make their conduct innocent.
- Tradition emptied of meaning yet lethal: the chant and salute long lost; the box "grew shabbier each year" yet cannot be replaced.
- Superstition and agriculture — Old Man Warner's "Lottery in June, corn be heavy soon".
- The victim's selective conscience: Tessie objects only when it strikes her family — she even wants her married daughter included in the draw.
- Violence latent in the mundane: children gathering stones as play.
-
Form & devices:
- Objective, matter-of-fact third-person narration — flat reportage of a village fête, withholding all judgment.
- The horror effect is produced by tone–content dissonance and by retrospective foreshadowing (the stones, the box, the nervous humour) that reads innocently on first pass.
- Economy of detail with allegorical openness — no place, no era, no explanation.
- Names doing quiet work: Summers the cheery administrator, Graves the postmaster beneath him, Warner the warner, Delacroix — "of the cross" — whose owner picks a stone "so large she had to pick it up with both hands"; little Davy Hutchinson is handed pebbles.
- The final line as one of the most famous cut-offs in American fiction.
-
Context & significance: Jackson (1916–1965), the mid-century mistress of domestic unease (The Haunting of Hill House, 1959; We Have Always Lived in the Castle, 1962), modelled the village on North Bennington, Vermont. Publication produced the largest mail response The New Yorker had ever had — cancelled subscriptions, demands to know "where these lotteries are held"; the story was reportedly banned in the Union of South Africa. Three years after the camps and at the dawn of Cold War conformity, its scapegoat mechanism read — and reads — as a diagram: ordinary neighbours will stone one of their own if the box tells them to.
-
Remember:
- The New Yorker, 26 June 1948; the story is set on June 27th; ~300 villagers, under two hours.
- Officials: Mr. Summers (conducts), Mr. Graves (postmaster); the black box, older than Old Man Warner (his 77th lottery).
- Victim: Tessie Hutchinson; husband Bill draws first for the household.
- Record mail response in New Yorker history; readers cancelled subscriptions.
- Sample-MC key: the lottery = a ritual sacrifice.
-
Quotable:
- "Lottery in June, corn be heavy soon." (Old Man Warner)
- "'It isn't fair, it isn't right,' Mrs. Hutchinson screamed, and then they were upon her." (final line)
Exam angles
Bank Q9: "Is 'The Lottery' effective as a modern gothic tale? Why?"
Yes — precisely because it relocates gothic horror from the haunted castle to a sunlit village square: the genre's machinery of ancestral curse and fatal ritual survives intact in the black box, the inherited rite and the doomed victim, but the setting is Main Street America on a June morning. The effectiveness comes from Jackson's flat, reportorial tone, which treats a stoning like a raffle; the dissonance between manner and matter produces the gothic shudder without a single supernatural element. Foreshadowing (boys stockpiling stones, the villagers' odd hesitations) is planted so naturally that the ending forces a re-reading, and the unnamed village and absence of a specified historical year let readers connect the ritual to other communities and periods. The community's conduct supplies the horror: the same neighbourly setting that seemed reassuring becomes the mechanism of violence. Explain that change from the narrative details before invoking the story's later reception.
Bank Q10: "'The Lottery' came out in 1948 — can it be read as a social reflection of that era?"
Globally, three years after the liberation of the camps, the story anatomises exactly what the world was struggling to explain: how ordinary, neighbourly people participate in atrocity because procedure, tradition and everyone-else-is-doing-it stand in for conscience. The mechanism is bureaucratised — lists, households, officials, a box — evil as administration rather than passion, which is the era's darkest lesson. Domestically, it invites a reading about conformity and inherited authority: Old Man Warner dismisses the news that other villages have stopped their lotteries, while Tessie objects only after her household draws the marked slip. She is not selected because she dissents; the sequence exposes how someone who accepts an institution can discover its injustice when it harms her. The strong response from first readers shows the story was disturbing, but does not establish one shared reason for their reactions.
Extra: "How does Jackson achieve the shock of the ending?"
By narrating everything from the outside in a genial, civic-minutes tone, Jackson deprives the reader of any interior warning; we know only what a bystander would see, and bystanders see a fête. Every sinister detail is dressed as wholesome — children "gathering stones" reads as play, the box as quaint Americana, the crowd's nervousness as small-town shyness — so the evidence hides in plain sight until the stones fly. The two-stage draw defers revelation while tightening focus from village to household to one woman, and the story ends on the first blow's brink, making the reader's imagination complete the violence. The final effect is complicity: we realise we, too, attended the lottery without objecting.
Related topics and texts
12. Tennessee Williams — A Streetcar Named Desire (1947) — play in eleven scenes; poetic realism / "plastic theatre"
¶- What it is: Premiered 3 December 1947 (Ethel Barrymore Theatre, New York; dir. Elia Kazan; Marlon Brando as Stanley, Jessica Tandy as Blanche); Pulitzer Prize for Drama 1948; film 1951 (Vivien Leigh's Oscar). Blanche DuBois, a former English teacher from Laurel, Mississippi, arrives in the French Quarter of New Orleans — having ridden "a street-car named Desire", transferred "to one called Cemeteries", and alighted at Elysian Fields — to stay with her pregnant sister Stella and Stella's husband Stanley Kowalski. The family plantation, Belle Reve, is lost; so, gradually, is Blanche's cover story: a marriage that ended when her young husband Allan Grey shot himself after she discovered his homosexuality and told him he disgusted her; the Hotel Flamingo; dismissal over a seventeen-year-old student. Stanley — poker-playing, bowling, radio-hurling, wife-striking — investigates and demolishes her courtship with his friend Mitch, gifts her a bus ticket back to Laurel at her birthday dinner, and, on the night Stella is in hospital giving birth, rapes her ("We've had this date with each other from the beginning!"). Stella chooses not to believe it; in the final scene, during another poker game, Blanche is led away to a state institution on a doctor's arm: "Whoever you are — I have always depended on the kindness of strangers."
-
Themes & motifs:
- Desire and death as terminal stations — the allegorical streetcar route Desire → Cemeteries → Elysian Fields.
- Illusion vs. brute reality: Blanche's "magic" and what ought to be truth vs. Stanley's naked bulbs.
- The fading Southern belle (question 7) and the death of the plantation South — Belle Reve ("beautiful dream"), lost to generations of "epic fornications".
- Class and ethnicity in the new urban America — the Kowalskis' polyglot, working-class New Orleans vs. Blanche's genteel pretensions.
- Sexuality as life-force and weapon; madness as refuge; the complicity of the ordinary (Stella, Mitch, the poker circle).
-
Form & devices:
- Eleven consecutive scenes, no act division — a long fuse rather than classical acts.
- Williams's "plastic theatre": expressionist stage resources render Blanche's inner state — the Varsouviana polka (heard only by her, always ending in the remembered gunshot), the "blue piano" of the Quarter, the Mexican woman crying "Flores para los muertos", jungle voices and shadows as the rape approaches.
- Central stage-prop symbols (question 6): the paper lantern over the naked bulb (illusion shading harsh light; Mitch tears it off, Stanley hands it to her as she leaves), Blanche's endless hot baths (purification), the trunk of costumes, white dress and moth-likeness (fragility drawn to flame).
- Names as irony: Blanche DuBois — "white woods"; Belle Reve; Elysian Fields — resting place of the dead.
- Poetic Southern rhetoric colliding with Stanley's demotic prose.
-
Context & significance: Williams (Thomas Lanier Williams, 1911–1983), with O'Neill and Miller one of the three canonical American dramatists (American drama developed against a history of Puritan hostility to the stage, then post-Revolutionary suspicion of British theatre). In a typology of delusional characters, Streetcar presents Blanche as delusional victim under the belle's double pressure — fading youth/beauty that makes her fish for compliments, and a squandered inheritance that leaves her destitute — driving her into lies that Stanley's "domineering nature" punishes in the "ugly climax" of rape. Kazan's production made Brando's Stanley era-defining; the play (with The Glass Menagerie, 1944/45, and Cat on a Hot Tin Roof, 1955) fixed Williams's territory: the collision of Southern romanticism with American appetite.
-
Remember:
- Premiere 3 Dec 1947, dir. Elia Kazan; Pulitzer 1948; film 1951 (Leigh, Brando).
- Stanley was NOT born in Poland: in Scene 8 he erupts that people from Poland are Poles, not Polacks, "But what I am is one hundred percent American… born and raised in the greatest country on earth" — he is US-born and insists on it.
- Known sample-test MC: "Stanley Kowalski… a) hates bowling b) was born in Poland c) plays cards a lot" → key: c) plays cards a lot (the recurring poker nights; he also likes bowling, so (a) is false too).
- Route allegory: streetcar Desire → Cemeteries → Elysian Fields.
- Belle Reve = the lost plantation (Laurel, Mississippi); Allan Grey = the young husband who shot himself.
- Eleven scenes; poker frames the play (Scene 3 "The Poker Night", and the final scene).
- The Varsouviana polka + gunshot = Blanche's guilt heard by the audience.
-
Quotable:
- "Whoever you are — I have always depended on the kindness of strangers." (Blanche, Scene 11)
- "What I am is one hundred percent American" (Stanley, Scene 8 — his self-definition; quote with care or paraphrase)
Exam angles
Bank Q6: "Give at least two examples of literary symbolism in A Streetcar Named Desire."
The title itself is the play's first symbol: Blanche reaches her sister by taking a streetcar named Desire, transferring to one called Cemeteries and getting off at Elysian Fields — an allegorical itinerary announcing that desire, ridden to the end of the line, arrives at death and the afterlife of the dead. The paper lantern Blanche puts over the naked light-bulb is her illusion-making in objective form: she cannot stand "a naked bulb" any more than "a rude remark", so when Mitch tears the lantern off to see her age, and Stanley later thrusts it at her as she is led away, her protective fictions are being stripped in stage action. Further examples: her compulsive hot baths as attempted purification of the Laurel past; the Varsouviana polka with its terminating gunshot, audible only to Blanche and the audience, symbolising the guilt that plays in her head; and the recurring poker game, the men's brute world of chance and appetite, which frames the play and deals Blanche out.
Bank Q7: "Illustrate the Fading Southern Belle typology with reference to Streetcar."
Blanche DuBois is the typology's defining case: a plantation-bred Southern woman raised for gentility, beauty and male protection, stranded in a world where all three have lost value. The type's double pressure operates through appearance and wealth: her youth and looks are fading — hence the paper lanterns, dim lights and compulsive fishing for compliments — and the family estate, Belle Reve, has been squandered by her ancestors, leaving her penniless and dependent. Denied real security, she manufactures it out of illusion: aristocratic manners, a rich suitor (Shep Huntleigh), "magic" instead of realism — lies that are less deceit than survival strategy. The type requires a destroyer, and Stanley — the new, unsentimental urban America — exposes her past, blocks her escape via Mitch, and completes her ruin in the rape; her exit on a stranger's arm marks the belle's terminal stage, where the protecting gentleman has shrunk to an institution's doctor. Emily Grierson (§7) is the same figure a generation earlier, armoured in Gothic horror rather than chiffon.
Extra: "Is Stanley simply the villain of the play?"
Stanley is the play's aggressor — wife-beater, investigator, rapist — but Williams complicates simple villainy in ways an answer should register. He has genuine grievances: Blanche moves into his tiny flat, drinks his liquor, ridicules him to his wife ("Stella, he's an ape!" is her speech, and he hears it), and Belle Reve's loss legally touches him through Stella; his demolition of her lies proceeds by facts. He also represents a class and ethnic vitality the play refuses to despise — the sample question's answer "plays cards a lot" points to his world of poker, bowling and appetite, which Stella chooses over her sister twice. Yet the final scenes remove ambiguity: the rape line "We've had this date with each other from the beginning!" claims inevitability for a crime, and his calm resumption of poker afterwards is the play's coldest image. He is best described not as a stage villain but as brute reality given a body — which is precisely what makes him lethal to Blanche.
13. Philip Roth — "Defender of the Faith" (1959) — short story; Jewish-American realism, first-person retrospective
¶- What it is: The New Yorker, March 1959; collected in Goodbye, Columbus and Five Short Stories (1959; National Book Award 1960). May 1945: Sergeant Nathan Marx, a decorated Jewish combat veteran rotated home from Germany, becomes first sergeant of a trainee company at Camp Crowder, Missouri. Trainee Sheldon Grossbart — with sidekicks Fishbein and Halpern — immediately works their shared Jewishness: passes for Friday-night services, an engineered letter-campaign (written by Sheldon over his father's signature) about kosher food, a Passover pass to a St. Louis "aunt" that turns out to be dinner and an egg roll — each favour framed as solidarity, each refusal framed as self-hatred. Marx, moved and manipulated by turns, draws lines late. When orders ship the whole company to the Pacific, Grossbart alone has wangled a reassignment to Fort Monmouth, New Jersey through a connection; Marx, enraged at the final exploitation, phones a contact and has the orders changed back — Grossbart will go to the Pacific with everyone else. Accused by the weeping Grossbart of anti-Semitism, Marx says what he did was done "for all of us", and ends resisting the "impulse to turn and seek pardon" — accepting, like the trainees, his own fate.
-
Themes & motifs:
- The melting pot vs. the salad bowl (question 11): assimilation into a common American identity vs. retention — and leverage — of ethnic distinctness.
- Group loyalty against universal fairness: what do coreligionists owe each other inside an institution built on equal treatment?
- Manipulation of identity — Grossbart wields Jewishness as a tool ("defender of the faith" is his pose), forcing Marx to police it.
- Conscience and vindictiveness — Marx's final act is justice and revenge, and the story lets it be both.
- The army as America in miniature; the war's moral residue (Marx has "changed" in Europe and is re-learning civilian feeling).
-
Form & devices:
- Retrospective first-person narration by Marx — a scrupulous, self-doubting voice whose judgments the reader must audit (is he fair? seduced? cruel?).
- Realist scene-building with courtroom-like accumulation of Grossbart's exploits.
- The title's layered irony: "Defender of the Faith" is a papal/royal honorific (England's Fidei Defensor), here attaching to a sergeant whose defence of "the faith" consists of refusing to let it be merchandised — and equally, mock-attaching to Grossbart's self-image.
- The closing symmetry ("their fate… my own") converting an army anecdote into a moral verdict.
-
Context & significance: Roth (1933, Newark – 2018) debuted with Goodbye, Columbus at 26; this story ignited the first of his career's scandals — rabbis and community organisations accused him of supplying ammunition to anti-Semites, an attack he answered in the essay "Writing About Jews" (1963); the charge would echo through Portnoy's Complaint (1969) to The Human Stain (2000). Read the story through assimilation in Jewish-American literature, with Israel Zangwill's play The Melting Pot (1908) supplying the era's founding metaphor, and under WWII reflections (question 8's list) — though note the war itself stays offstage.
-
Remember:
- The New Yorker, March 1959; in Goodbye, Columbus (1959); National Book Award 1960 (Roth was 26).
- Sgt. Nathan Marx (narrator) vs. trainee Sheldon Grossbart; also Fishbein & Halpern, Captain Barrett; Camp Crowder, Missouri, May 1945.
- Grossbart's ladder: services pass → kosher-food letters (father's signature, his hand) → Passover pass (the egg roll) → Fort Monmouth reassignment.
- Marx's counterstroke: orders changed back — Grossbart ships to the Pacific with the rest.
- Melting pot metaphor: Zangwill's play The Melting Pot (1908).
-
Quotable:
- "And then, resisting with all my will an impulse to turn and seek pardon for my vindictiveness, I accepted my own." (final sentence)
- Marx on undoing the reassignment: it was done "for all of us."
Exam angles
Bank Q11: "Discuss the 'melting pot' and 'salad bowl' concepts with reference to 'Defender of the Faith'. Which main character represents which principle?"
The melting pot describes assimilation into a shared national identity; the salad bowl describes coexistence with cultural differences retained. Marx initially emphasizes common duties as American soldiers, while Grossbart invokes Jewish distinctness to request religious and dietary accommodations. That makes them useful starting points for the comparison, but neither character simply embodies a pure principle. Marx is moved by remembered worship and remains conscious of his Jewish identity; Grossbart exploits solidarity for personal advantage, especially when he obtains an assignment different from his companions. Distinguish legitimate religious difference from that manipulation. Marx restores the shared assignment but calls his own motive vindictive, so the ending tests both impartiality and group loyalty rather than declaring one cultural model good and the other bad.
Bank Q8 (pacifism option — Roth):
"Defender of the Faith" is the trickiest choice on the list, and saying so is part of a good answer: the story is war-related — set in May 1945 between V-E Day and the invasion everyone expects — but its combat happens entirely between conscience and loyalty in a Missouri training camp. It does register war's costs pacifistically in the margins: Marx returns emotionally numbed by two years of European fighting, and the trainees' terror of the Pacific hangs over every scene, so no one in the story treats war as glory. Marx's climactic act sends Grossbart toward the fighting and is entangled with admitted vindictiveness. Depicting this decision does not automatically endorse it; its moral uncertainty makes the story an awkward fit for a simple pacifist thesis. For the exam, the stronger picks are Twain, Malamud (§9) or Salinger (§10); if Roth is chosen, argue "pacifism" only as the story's unillusioned, grief-adjacent view of soldiering — and expect to defend the reading.
Extra: "Is Marx's final act justice or revenge — and does the title mock him or crown him?"
Both, and the story is engineered so they cannot be separated: procedurally Marx restores equal treatment (no one should buy his way off a troopship), but the narration confesses the motive is also rage — he calls it "my vindictiveness" and must resist seeking pardon for it. The title carries the same doubleness: Grossbart poses as the faith's defender while merchandising it, whereas Marx defends the faith precisely by refusing to let it be used — yet his defence takes the form of possibly sending a fellow Jew to die. Roth's point is that moral life inside institutions offers no clean position: Marx ends accepting his own fate, meaning both the consequences of his act and the identity he can neither exploit nor escape. That refusal of comfort is what enraged the story's first critics — and what has kept it read.
Related topics and texts
14. Toni Morrison — The Bluest Eye (1970) — novel; African American feminist protest novel with Modernist/postmodern narration
¶- What it is: Morrison's first novel (Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1970), set in her hometown Lorain, Ohio, in 1940–41. Eleven-year-old Pecola Breedlove, poor, dark-skinned and daily taught her own "ugliness", prays for blue eyes. The novel tracks her destruction: temporary fostering with the MacTeer family (narrator Claudia MacTeer, nine, and her sister Frieda are the story's witnessing children); her parents' histories — Pauline, lamed and starved of beauty, who finds order only as the perfect servant of a white household, and Cholly, abandoned as a baby and sexually humiliated by white hunters as a boy — converge when the drunken Cholly rapes his daughter, leaving her pregnant. The fraud-mystic Soaphead Church "grants" her blue eyes (via a poisoned dog); the baby comes early and dies; Pecola goes mad, conversing with an imaginary friend about her beautiful eyes. Claudia and Frieda plant marigold seeds as magic for the baby that never blooms — "Quiet as it's kept, there were no marigolds in the fall of 1941."
-
Themes & motifs:
- Internalized racism and the white beauty myth — blue eyes, Shirley Temple, Mary Jane candy as a machine that teaches black girls self-hatred; read it as a feminist protest novel criticising domestic violence and the black adoption of white aesthetic and behavioral norms.
- The community's complicity — Pecola as the scapegoat on whom everyone off-loads ugliness.
- Family catastrophe traced to root causes: the Breedloves' "ugliness" as internalised verdict, poverty, Cholly's own violation.
- "Outdoors" as the terror of total dispossession.
- Seeing vs. being seen — the eye of the title; Pecola's invisibility to the shopkeeper.
- Nature's refusal — marigolds, the unyielding earth — as moral index.
-
Form & devices:
- The famous Dick-and-Jane primer prologue — a basal-reader paragraph printed three times, first punctuated, then unpunctuated, then run together without spaces: the white-family norm degrading into claustrophobic nonsense, after which its phrases caption the Breedlove chapters (an example of intertextuality).
- Double narration — Claudia as child and as remembering adult, alternating with an omniscient voice for Pauline (with first-person inserts), Cholly and Soaphead.
- Seasonal structure (Autumn–Winter–Spring–Summer) ironically inverted — spring brings the rape, summer the madness.
- The second, italic prologue gives the ending away ("there were no marigolds…"), so the novel proceeds by how rather than what: "since why is difficult to handle, one must take refuge in how".
- Rich figurative prose set against brutal matter.
-
Context & significance: Morrison (Chloe Ardelia Wofford, 1931–2019), then an editor at Random House, wrote it questioning what a 1940s black girlhood did to self-regard — the germ was a Lorain classmate who wanted blue eyes. It ushers multicultural, postmodern protest fiction into the canon; Morrison went on to Song of Solomon (1977), Beloved (1987; Pulitzer 1988) and the Nobel Prize 1993, the first Black woman laureate. An early rave famously called her "the D. H. Lawrence of the black psyche" — the blurb is from New York magazine, not the New York Times (a detail worth having exactly right).
-
Remember:
- 1970; set Lorain, Ohio, 1940–41; seasons structure; Dick-and-Jane primer ×3.
- Narrator family: MacTeer — Claudia & Frieda (note: the official exam paper itself once misspelled it "McTeer" — recognise the question and answer about the MacTeers).
- Pecola Breedlove; parents Cholly and Pauline; Soaphead Church (Elihue Micah Whitcomb); Maureen Peal, Geraldine, the three prostitutes upstairs.
- Props of the beauty myth: Shirley Temple cup, Mary Jane candies, the blue-eyed baby dolls.
- "The D. H. Lawrence of the black psyche" = New York magazine blurb (NOT the NYT).
- Nobel 1993 — first African American woman laureate.
-
Quotable:
- "Quiet as it's kept, there were no marigolds in the fall of 1941." (opening of the italic prologue)
- "I had only one desire: to dismember it." (Claudia, on the white baby doll)
Exam angles
Bank Q12: "Why does Claudia dismember the dolls in The Bluest Eye? How does it relate to the main theme(s)?" (the paper may spell her "Claudia McTeer" — it means Claudia MacTeer)
Every Christmas Claudia receives the "big, blue-eyed Baby Doll" that adults treat as every girl's dearest wish, and she takes it apart — "to see of what it was made, to discover the dearness, to find the beauty, the desirability that had escaped me, but apparently only me." The dismembering is thus not childish spite but investigation: she is dissecting the white beauty standard itself, trying to locate the magic that makes "all the world" — adults, shops, magazines — agree that a blue-eyed, yellow-haired, pink-skinned object is lovable while she is not. It marks Claudia as the novel's not-yet-indoctrinated consciousness; the truly frightening sequel, she admits, was transferring "the same impulses to little white girls", and the sadder one was her later "adjustment without improvement" — learning to worship Shirley Temple like everyone else. The scene is the novel's theme in miniature: internalised racism is manufactured and taught, Pecola shows its perfected, fatal form (worshipping the very icons Claudia attacked, praying for the doll's blue eyes), and Claudia's brief resistance measures how total the machine's victory usually is.
Extra: "What is the function of the Dick-and-Jane primer?"
The novel opens with a school-primer idyll — pretty green-and-white house, smiling Mother, strong Father, playing Jane — printed three times: punctuated, then stripped of punctuation, then compressed into an unreadable block. The degradation performs typographically what the novel will show socially: the official, white, middle-class norm of family repeated at black children until it becomes senseless noise — and fragments of the run-together text then serve as bitter chapter headings over the Breedloves' anti-idyll. The primer is a textbook case of intertextuality: an allusion every American reader was drilled on, redeployed so the reader feels the gap between the taught ideal and lived reality. It also announces the book's postmodern edge — meaning made by collision of texts, not by a single authoritative narrator.
Extra: "Trace the tragedy of the Breedlove family to its origins."
Morrison refuses a single villain and supplies a causal chain instead: the Breedloves live as if ugly "because they believed they were ugly", a conviction handed them by every mirror the culture holds up. Pauline, lame since childhood, absorbs Hollywood's beauty scale in the movie houses, ranks herself and her family by it, and pours her care into the white Fisher household where order and praise are available, becoming "Polly" to a pink-and-yellow girl while her own daughter fears her. Cholly, abandoned on a junk heap and forced as a boy to perform sexually under white men's flashlights, converts humiliation into free-floating violence; his rape of Pecola is presented — unforgivably yet intelligibly — as the last twist of tenderness deformed by powerlessness. Around them the community completes the work, using Pecola's ugliness to feel beautiful; the marigold earth that will not nurture certain seeds indicts the soil, not the seed.
Related topics and texts
15. David Guterson — Snow Falling on Cedars (1994) — novel; courtroom drama + love story + Bildungsroman
¶- What it is: Guterson's first novel (1994; PEN/Faulkner Award 1995; film 1999). San Piedro Island, Puget Sound, December 1954: Japanese American fisherman Kabuo Miyamoto stands trial for murdering fellow fisherman Carl Heine, found drowned in his own net with a head wound after a night of thick fog. The trial — prosecutor Alvin Hooks, aged one-eyed defender Nels Gudmundsson — opens onto flashbacks: the pre-war strawberry-farm friendship and the seven acres Kabuo's family was buying from the Heines when Pearl Harbor came; the island's Japanese community deported to the Manzanar internment camp (where Kabuo and Hatsue, née Imada, marry) while Etta Heine sold the land out from under them; Kabuo's and Carl's war service; and the secret adolescent love of Hatsue and Ishmael Chambers — the local editor's son, who came back from the Pacific without his left arm (lost at Tarawa) and without his idealism, and who now runs his dead father Arthur's San Piedro Review alone. During the trial's great snowstorm Ishmael discovers, in the lighthouse's radio logs, proof that a freighter's wake — not Kabuo — knocked Carl from his mast at 1:47 a.m.; after a night of temptation to suppress it and reclaim Hatsue, he surrenders the notes, the boat is re-examined, and the charge is dismissed. His closing insight: "accident ruled every corner of the universe except the chambers of the human heart."
-
Passages to focus on:
- Excerpt 1 — "a crucial discovery": Ishmael in the coast-guard lighthouse finds the radioman's shorthand transcripts: a freighter (the S.S. West Corona) ploughed through the shipping channel at 1:42 a.m., five minutes before Carl's watch stopped. Note the comprehension check's point: he finds it half by accident while researching storm records for the paper — and then pockets it ("Those records would stay in his pocket").
- Excerpt 2 — "Ishmael's dilemma": his mother's kitchen ("You went numb, Ishmael… And you've stayed numb all these years"), the memory of his father Arthur — Belleau Wood veteran, principled newspaperman honoured by the Japanese community — and Hatsue's wartime break-up letter from Manzanar, signed "Hatsue Imada", which he re-reads before choosing. The pack asks why the long reminiscence about his dead father at exactly that point — because Arthur's example is what tips Ishmael from blackmail-fantasy (making Hatsue "beholden to him") to integrity.
- Excerpt 3 — "the internment camp": Manzanar's half-finished tar-paper barracks and dust; Hatsue's mother Fujiko intercepts Ishmael's letter (false return address via Kenny Yamashita) and Hatsue writes the good-bye letter; giri — the grandmother's word Fujiko translates as doing what one must "quietly, with an entirely stoic demeanor"; Kabuo courts Hatsue by building the Imadas' furniture in the camp.
- Excerpts 4–5 — "introducing Kabuo": the Miyamoto samurai lineage and kendo training ("zenshin!" — constant awareness of danger), his enlistment as a matter of honour, Hatsue's answer to his proposal ("It's my character… It's my destiny now to love you"), his guilt over the Germans he killed and his Buddhist sense of deserved suffering; then Sergeant Victor Maples's courtroom testimony that Kabuo (attached to the 442nd Nisei regiment) was "eminently capable" of killing with a gaff — kendo helped him survive the war and now helps convict him.
- Excerpt 6 — "Hyphenated Americans": the true night encounter at sea: Kabuo rescues Carl (dead battery), Carl confesses his own prejudice ("I'm a big Hun Nazi son of a bitch" — and he kept Kabuo's bamboo fishing rod all these years), Kabuo answers "I'm an American… Just like you or anybody", and they shake hands on the seven acres at $1,200 an acre, $800 down. Comprehension check: the Heines remain free while the island’s Japanese American community is forcibly removed. Historically, individual Germans and German Americans were also detained or interned; the crucial distinction is that people of Japanese ancestry faced broad West Coast exclusion and incarceration on an ancestry basis. The novel’s local contrast should not become a false claim that no German Americans were interned. See the National Park Service’s distinction.
-
Themes & motifs:
- Prejudice as the real defendant — the trial repeats in miniature what internment did wholesale.
- War's long damage: Ishmael's arm and cynicism, Kabuo's "blood on my soul", Carl's hardened silence — the excerpt pack's "common denominator" of all three men.
- Love across a racial boundary and its costs — the hollow cedar tree; Hatsue's giri-shaped renunciation.
- Fathers and inheritance: Arthur's newspaper ethics; the Miyamoto sword.
- Chance vs. will — the snowstorm and the freighter's wake against the one thing not ruled by accident, the human heart.
- Land as identity: seven acres of strawberry ground.
-
Form & devices:
- Courtroom-drama frame (three December days of trial) opened by long flashbacks — testimony as trapdoor into memory.
- Omniscient narration circling among Ishmael, Hatsue, Kabuo and the islanders.
- Dense atmospheric realism — fog, cedars, the storm as moral weather.
- Withheld-information plotting that makes the reader re-try the case.
- Symbolism: snow (blind, indifferent accident covering everything), cedars (shelter and secrecy — the lovers' hollow tree), the lighthouse (the record that sees what men don't).
- The mixed genre deliberately engineered — see question 14.
-
Context & significance: Guterson (b. 1956, Seattle) wrote the novel over about ten years of early mornings while teaching English at Bainbridge Island High School — where he taught To Kill a Mockingbird (question 15); Bainbridge Island's real interned Japanese community underlies San Piedro. Published 1994, PEN/Faulkner 1995, a phenomenon of the decade's book clubs; the 1999 film (dir. Scott Hicks, Ethan Hawke as Ishmael) kept the courtroom-memory structure. The novel mainstreamed the internment — Executive Order 9066, Manzanar — for a mass readership within a page-turner's architecture.
-
Remember:
- 1994; PEN/Faulkner 1995; San Piedro Island, Puget Sound, December 1954.
- Kabuo Miyamoto tried for Carl Heine's death; Hatsue, maiden name Imada; Ishmael Chambers lost his left arm at Tarawa.
- Manzanar internment (E.O. 9066); the seven acres of strawberry land; Etta Heine's betrayal.
- The exculpatory fact: the freighter's wake at 1:47 a.m. (Carl's stopped watch), recorded in the lighthouse logs.
- Guterson: ten years teaching at Bainbridge Island High School, wrote mornings; taught To Kill a Mockingbird.
-
Quotable:
- "I'm an American… Just like you or anybody." (Kabuo to Carl)
- "…accident ruled every corner of the universe except the chambers of the human heart." (the novel's closing insight)
Exam angles
Bank Q14: "Can Snow Falling on Cedars be regarded as (1) star-crossed lovers à la Romeo and Juliet, (2) a courtroom drama, (3) a Bildungsroman? Which character is at the intersection?"
Yes to all three, by design. Ishmael and Hatsue are the star-crossed lovers: childhood sweethearts meeting secretly in a hollow cedar, divided not by feuding houses but by the racial line their communities enforce — and finally by the war that deports hers to Manzanar. The courtroom drama supplies the skeleton: three December days of Kabuo's murder trial, with testimony, exhibits and a snowstorm for atmosphere. The Bildungsroman is Ishmael's: from island boyhood through the amputation at Tarawa and years of bitterness to the night he chooses his father's integrity over the fantasy of regaining Hatsue. Ishmael Chambers stands at the intersection — he is the surviving star-crossed lover, the reporter (and decisive evidence-bearer) of the trial, and the one who grows; the three genres meet in his final walk to the Imadas with the lighthouse notes.
Bank Q15: "Guterson wrote the novel while teaching To Kill a Mockingbird. Does it show?"
Unmistakably, and Guterson has acknowledged the model. Both novels put a small community's racism on trial through the case of a dignified minority defendant — Tom Robinson, Kabuo Miyamoto — whose guilt the town assumes for reasons that have nothing to do with evidence; both give the defence to an upright elder (Atticus Finch; the aged, half-blind Nels Gudmundsson, seconded by the memory of Arthur Chambers's wartime editorials), and both filter events through a maturing consciousness shaped by a principled father. Both are also atmospheric regional novels in which place — Maycomb's South, San Piedro's fogbound Northwest — is itself a moral actor. The instructive difference is the ending: Lee's jury convicts the innocent man and the novel indicts the system, while Guterson lets individual conscience (Ishmael's) rescue the verdict — a 1990s revision in which the bystander, not the lawyer, is the story's moral hinge.
Bank Q8 (pacifism option — Guterson):
A pacifist reading can build on the novel’s emphasis on war’s damage: Ishmael loses his arm and his openness at Tarawa ("The Japs did it," he says bitterly, in the very idiom the war taught him), Kabuo carries the faces of the Germans he killed as a guilt he thinks deserves punishment, and Carl returns hardened into silence — the excerpt pack's "common denominator" of the three men is precisely what the war did to each. Behind the combat stands the home-front war on civilians: the internment of the island's Japanese Americans, presented as pure racial injustice (the Heines, equally "enemy"-descended Germans, stay free). No character gains anything by violence; the plot's murder turns out to be no murder at all, but an accident that prejudice nearly converted into a judicial killing. Together these details support an antiwar interpretation. They do not establish that every character rejects every war, so distinguish the argument you build from a doctrine explicitly stated by the novel.
Extra (from the excerpt pack's follow-up questions): "How long did Ishmael wait before sharing the freighter information, and why? What would the verdict have been without it?"
He sits on the notes for roughly a day and a night — finding them during the storm, folding them into his coat pocket, and even planning to use them privately to make Hatsue "beholden to him" — before his mother's household, his father's example and a final re-reading of Hatsue's Manzanar letter break the temptation, and he brings the transcripts forward the next morning. The delay is the novel's whole moral argument in miniature: the war-wounded man must choose between nursing his injury and acting like his father. Without the evidence, the signs point to conviction — the jury's deliberation is running toward guilty with a lone holdout — or at best a hung jury and retrial, since prosecutor Hooks had assembled motive (the seven acres), means (the kendo testimony of Sergeant Maples) and opportunity, and invited the jurors to read Kabuo's stoic face as the enemy's. Which is to say: absent one man's conscience, prejudice finishes what the storm began.
Related topics and texts
16. Michael Cunningham — The Hours (1998) — novel; postmodern triple narrative after Mrs. Dalloway
¶- What it is: Farrar, Straus & Giroux, 1998; Pulitzer Prize 1999 (and PEN/Faulkner 1999); film 2002 (dir. Stephen Daldry; Nicole Kidman's Oscar as Woolf). After a prologue rendering Virginia Woolf's 1941 suicide in the River Ouse, the novel braids one day each of three women across the century, in rotating chapters: "Mrs. Woolf" — Virginia in Richmond, 1923, beginning to write Mrs. Dalloway, managing headaches, voices and servants, receiving Vanessa, burying a dead thrush, fleeing toward London, deciding her heroine will not die — "the poet" will; "Mrs. Brown" — Laura Brown, Los Angeles, 1949, pregnant, reading Mrs. Dalloway in bed on her husband Dan's birthday, baking the cake with little Richie, kissing her neighbour Kitty in the kitchen, checking into a hotel where she contemplates death and chooses against it — "She will do all that's required, and more"; "Mrs. Dalloway" — Clarissa Vaughan, New York City, late 1990s, nicknamed "Mrs. Dalloway" by the poet Richard, her first love, now dying of AIDS, for whom she is giving a party on the day he receives the Carrouthers Prize; Richard, quoting Woolf's suicide note, lets himself fall from his window before the party. The strands fuse at the end: the old woman who arrives that evening is Laura Brown — Richard's mother, who after her second child abandoned the family (Toronto, a library job), the "monster" of his poems — and Clarissa serves the party food to her.
-
Passages to focus on:
- Extract 1 — the cake-baking scene: Laura and three-year-old Richie measuring flour; the cake imagined as art, "comfort and safety"; Richie's terrified adoration — study it for the mother–son bond that will become Richard's wound.
- Extract 2 — the prologue: Virginia's walk to the river, the stone into the coat pocket, the fisherman, Leonard finding the note ("She herself has failed. She is not a writer at all, really; she is merely a gifted eccentric.").
- Extract 3 — the opening "Mrs. Brown" chapter: Laura reading the first line of Mrs. Dalloway — "Mrs. Dalloway said she would buy the flowers herself" — while "trying to lose herself… trying to keep herself by gaining entry into a parallel world"; Dan resurrected from a false Anzio death report; "So now she is Laura Brown" — the reader-in-the-text.
- The context sheet frames it all with the status of women: Zinn on the 18th–19th centuries, Barbara Welter's "cult of true womanhood" (piety, sexual purity, submissiveness and domesticity), and above all Betty Friedan's The Feminine Mystique on the 1950s suburban wife's silent question "Is this all?". The seminar's central task: is Laura's dilemma related to these concerns? (Answer: it is their fictional case study — see below.)
- Seminar questions to have ready: what do "hours" mean to Richard, to Laura, to Clarissa; the fine line between sanity and insanity (Richard vs. Virginia vs. Laura vs. Woolf's Septimus — is madness tied to creative gifts?); how Richard's childhood wounded him; and why Virginia and Laura, prisoners of their eras, contrast with Clarissa, who has every liberty yet lives as "a fairly conventional wife and mother" — what does that say about society's restrictions?
-
Themes & motifs:
- The ordinary day as the container of a whole life — one day × three women.
- Time as "the hours" that must each be got through — Richard's dread of the hours after the party, "and the hours after that".
- Sanity/insanity and creativity: Virginia’s voices, Richard’s visions and Laura’s alienation, as represented in the fiction; distinguish those descriptions from an independent clinical diagnosis.
- The suburban feminine mystique — Laura as Friedan's housewife, who chooses escape over self-erasure and is judged monstrous for it.
- Queer desire across all three strands: Virginia and Vanessa's kiss, Laura and Kitty's, Clarissa and Sally's settled partnership.
- Suicide and the choice to live — Woolf dies, Laura doesn't, Richard does.
- Reading and writing as survival technologies — author, reader and character distributed across the three women. Context precision. Welter’s historical account identifies four ideals: piety, purity, submissiveness and domesticity. The local context sheet omits one; use the full list when describing that framework. It concerns a historically specific ideal, not every woman’s lived experience. Welter, “The Cult of True Womanhood: 1820–1860” (1966), p152.
-
Form & devices (the grounds of question 13):
- Intertextuality: the novel rewrites Mrs. Dalloway — Clarissa Vaughan = Clarissa Dalloway with flowers, party and city walk; Richard = Septimus, the mad visionary whose window-death interrupts the party; Louis ≈ Peter Walsh; Woolf's sentences quoted in italics. The very title is Woolf's working title for Mrs. Dalloway ("The Hours"), and Laura's chapters are named after Woolf's essay figure "Mrs. Brown" (from "Mr. Bennett and Mrs. Brown").
- Metafiction: the author (Virginia writing the novel), a reader (Laura reading it) and a character (Clarissa living it) share one book, so the fiction openly contemplates its own making and consumption.
- Pastiche: Cunningham imitates Woolf's lyrical free indirect style and one-day structure.
- Blurred fact/fiction: a documented historical figure moves among invented ones, framed by her real suicide.
- Rotating tripartite structure with a prologue; recurring objects (flowers, cakes, kisses, water) stitch the strands.
-
Context & significance: Cunningham (b. 1952) wrote the novel as an open homage — Woolf for the 1990s, with AIDS in the Septimus position and the plague-era party still insisting on celebration. Pulitzer + PEN/Faulkner 1999; the 2002 film (screenplay David Hare, score Philip Glass) re-canonised both novels — the sample MC asks which text The Hours is intertextual with: Mrs. Dalloway. For a postmodern reading, focus on metafiction and intertextuality.
-
Remember:
- 1998; Pulitzer 1999 (also PEN/Faulkner 1999); film 2002 (Kidman's Oscar).
- Three strands: Virginia Woolf, Richmond 1923 (writing Mrs. Dalloway) — Laura Brown, Los Angeles 1949 (reading it) — Clarissa Vaughan, NYC late 1990s (living it); prologue = Woolf's suicide, 1941, River Ouse.
- Title = Woolf's working title for Mrs. Dalloway; "Mrs. Brown" ← Woolf's essay "Mr. Bennett and Mrs. Brown".
- Richard = Laura's son Richie: poet, AIDS, Carrouthers Prize, window-fall (the Septimus role); Clarissa's partner Sally, daughter Julia.
- Compare Laura's dilemma ↔ Friedan, The Feminine Mystique ("Is this all?"); Welter's cult of true womanhood.
-
Quotable:
- "Mrs. Dalloway said she would buy the flowers herself." (Woolf's opening line, read by Laura in the novel)
- "She is trying to keep herself by gaining entry into a parallel world." (Laura reading)
Exam angles
Bank Q13: "On what grounds can The Hours be perceived as a Postmodern novel?"
Its intertextuality, metafiction and pastiche support a postmodern reading. The novel is built on and out of another text: it borrows Woolf's working title, restages Mrs. Dalloway's plot in 1990s New York (Clarissa's flowers and party; Richard dying Septimus's death by window), quotes the novel in italics, and even imitates Woolf's one-day structure and lyrical free indirect style — homage conducted as rewriting. It is metafictional in distributing the whole circuit of literature across its three heroines: Virginia writes the book, Laura reads it, Clarissa unknowingly lives it, so the novel continuously reflects on how fiction is made, consumed and inhabited. It further blurs the line between biography and invention by making the historical Woolf a character among fictional ones, framed by her real suicide. Finally, its meaning arises from montage — three periods rhyming across a century — rather than from a single authoritative narrative, which is the postmodern signature.
Seminar question: "Is Laura's dilemma related to the concerns of Friedan's The Feminine Mystique?"
Laura Brown is virtually a case study for Friedan's 1963 diagnosis, backdated to 1949: a capable, book-hungry woman installed in a suburban house with a kind husband, a child and every prescribed satisfaction, who still wakes to the "silent question — 'Is this all?'". Her guilt-ridden reading in bed, the ceremonial cake meant to prove her adequacy, and her sense of performing a role she was cast in rather than chose ("She is trying to keep herself by gaining entry into a parallel world") dramatise the mystique's central claim that the housewife role demanded self-erasure and called it fulfilment. Welter's "cult of true womanhood" — piety, purity, submissiveness and domesticity — supplies the longer genealogy of that script. Laura's hotel afternoon poses Friedan's problem at its extreme — disappearance by suicide or disappearance into the role — and her eventual third choice, abandoning the family to work in a Toronto library, is the era's unforgivable exit: the novel asks us to weigh the "monster" against the alternative, which the prologue has already shown us in Woolf's pockets full of stones.
Seminar question: "What does the novel imply about sanity and insanity?"
The novel juxtaposes Virginia’s and Richard’s distress with Laura’s apparently ordinary domestic life, asking readers to examine what families and societies notice or suppress. Its links with Mrs Dalloway invite comparison with the different responses to Clarissa and Septimus, but analogous narrative roles do not make their conditions identical. Virginia in The Hours is a fictionalized historical person, and Laura’s distress should not be assigned a clinical label merely because the narration renders it vividly. The presence of suffering artists can support a discussion of creativity and vulnerability within this novel; it is not evidence that mental illness causes creativity or that illness is only social nonconformity.
End of guide. Sixteen entries; use the comparisons above for further practice.