Both Stories Concentrate on How People Appear To Others. Discuss The Way Each Writer Uses Comic Elements To Achieve A Serious Effect.
Wide Reading
Mrs Turner Cutting The Grass & The Purple Pileus Comparison
Both Stories Concentrate on How People Appear To Others. Discuss The Way Each Writer Uses Comic Elements To Achieve A Serious Effect.
Both "The Purple Pileus" and "Mrs. Turner Cutting the grass" have many similarities, of which the most significant is the way both stories are concerned about how other people judge the appearances and values of the central characters. However, the authors differ, with regard to how they go about illustrating this theme to the reader. Carol Shield invites us to observe the process of pre-judgemental thoughts; she uses comedy to allow the reader to deride Mrs Turner's character, yet with a subtle twist, suggests that it is human nature to make snap judgments and possess negative prejudices about other people, but it's wrong. The devices she uses to achieve this are built within us; she manipulates our thought-process using subtle, light-hearted humour to make us form a negative view of Mrs Tuner, but then she exposes Mrs. Turner's history to us and that same comedy just doesn't seem funny anymore. For example, she provokes the other characters, such as The Sascher's and the High School girls to make these piss-taking judgements and, as readers we laugh with them, but in the end it is they who we see in a negative sense for being prejudiced. After we learn more about Mrs Turner's history, the humour the Professor uses isn't funny. She transforms the same negative view formed in the beginning into a positive one at the end, forcing the reader to agree by making us feel guilty about making the same prejudgements. This allows the reader to reflect on the contrast in the story and become aware of what Shields is trying to make us realise- that prejudices and snap judgements are wrong. In the end, we realise how easy it is to judge others unjustly and harshly, even though we are fully aware it's amoral.
However, I believe this story only works as successfully as it does because the central character, as with The Purple Pileus, is very strongly drawn. At their surface, they conform to a certain stereotype with which the reader can instantaneously recognize, and thus hold prejudices against. But their history is very atypical and the way the author conveys this aspect to the reader, in order to manipulate our character perception, is the tincture of both stories. Carol Shields reveals Mrs Turner history to us in the middle of the story causing us to reflect on it correspondingly, whereas Wells follows Mr Coombes through a period of time, forcing us to reflect on the account he's given, at the end. Writers in both stories manipulate our judgement of the central characters by including the judgements of other characters. We evaluate and readjust our judgement, by drawing on the judgements of other characters of the main protagonists
Thus far, we realise how Shields effort concentrates on making us question our judgements, yet HG Wells orchestrates an opposite strategy, reinforcing our judgements. He exploits our tendency to judge and condescend on certain stereotypes, in order to mock them altogether. The central character, Mr Coombes, is portrayed as a tight-fisted, pusillanimous character who cannot exercise enough control over his wife when expected to. Quite predictably, he endures enough of his loud, disobedient partner after she invites some raucous company over, and resolves to commit suicide. However, Mr Coombes stumbles over an intoxicating fungus which he consumes and then returns home, intoxicated, to discipline his wife. With a huge tantrum that involves some violence, which we perceive as in-your-face slapstick comedy, he frightens his wife and her guests into fearing him. Later, he lies to his brother, suggesting that he had enough bottle to scare his wife, although the reader is well aware that it was actually drug-induced. This is a typical device Wells uses to show how pathetic Mr Coombes really is.
However, HG Wells presents all the action in a way that mocks each character in turn. He draws up an idea of a hardworking, principled, yet a stingy and timorous Mr. Coombes who's desperately trying to earn money in order to raise his status in society- he seems very ambitious. Yet his wife is an uncomplimentary, loud, heedless individual that hinders his every attempt at saving the profits, from their business, in order to expand his small shop. Apparently, Mr. Coombes cannot control this monstrosity that is his wife! He seems pathetic and hopeless and she seems arrogant and boorish; Wells derives his comedy from this relationship.
Having said that both stories use a lot of humour to emphasise their point, the reader must also realise that the authors are ultimately trying to express intimately serious points: Shields criticises all prejudices, whereas Wells (a high-class citizen at the time) ridicules his lower-class citizens in the story.
The way other characters in "Mrs. Turner Cutting the grass" show their feelings about her through the things they say and do is the principal method Shields uses to formulate her comedy. However as the story begins, we see how Shields, herself, is already provoking and encouraging stereotypical judgments: "Oh, Mrs Turner is a sight." The word "sight" is an English equivocal suggesting either funny or unconventional. Hence, because it is such a term, we cannot accuse her of being explicitly judgemental, yet we can assume she is attempting to exploit our judgements of Mrs Turner in a negative way, so she can later accuse the reader of participating in the prejudices and work her toppling twist in the story effectively.
As the story progresses, Shields keeps her concentration on Mrs Turner's appearance by informing us of how "[Mrs Turner] climbs into an ancient pair of shorts...wedges her feet into crepe-soled sandals and covers her red-grey frizz with a baseball cap..." Shields is implying that Mrs Turner's "climb" into a pair of shorts is a struggle, which is a subtle way of saying she she's too fat for the shorts. It also indicates that Mrs. Turner doesn't care about this or about getting new shoes, which suggests she isn't in the least self-interested and certainly not very egotistical which leads on to my point about how its is the very vain or conceited persons that tend to be the most judgemental about others. I believe this is what Shields is trying to express by using this type of subtle, controlled language, where she does not insult Mrs Turner, nor does she give her opinion (her judgement) of the character. She merely sets up an image of an innocuous old lady that's just going about her business like everyone else, yet the difference Shields emphasises is: it is only Mrs Turner who seems oblivious to what other people think about her, and invites us, along with the other characters in the story, to judge her. Shields is aware we will judge Mrs Turner harshly- she controls the mechanics of this story very cleverly.
As the reader, we do judge even though Shields doesn't. From the beginning, we depict Mrs Turner as a comic personality and we are guilty of laughing at Shields' insinuating description of her.
The next piece of comic action comes from Mrs Turner's neighbours, the Saschers, view of her. They are disapproving of her and seem to be frustrated by her way of life! Shields' point, which is exposed through this piece of humour, shows how we are intolerant pf other people's habits and lifestyles. Not only are the Saschers critical of Mrs Turner's appearance but also ...
This is a preview of the whole essay
As the reader, we do judge even though Shields doesn't. From the beginning, we depict Mrs Turner as a comic personality and we are guilty of laughing at Shields' insinuating description of her.
The next piece of comic action comes from Mrs Turner's neighbours, the Saschers, view of her. They are disapproving of her and seem to be frustrated by her way of life! Shields' point, which is exposed through this piece of humour, shows how we are intolerant pf other people's habits and lifestyles. Not only are the Saschers critical of Mrs Turner's appearance but also of her habits. "Mrs. Turner's carelessness over the clippings plucks away at Sally..." This shows that they view her as an exasperating, tiresome figure that causes them hassle. This comment comes very early on in the story, and it gives an initial feeling that Mrs. Turner is not a particularly respected woman. It is as though they expect her to know about picking up grass clippings and the fact that she doesn't makes her someone to be looked down upon and pitied. It is the same with the way she uses the weed killer. Roy Sascher seems overly paranoid about the effects it is having on his vegetables and consequently his children, "...that hey should be touched by such poison makes him morose and angry." Yet, neither of them say anything as "...they're hoping she'll go into an old-folks' home soon or maybe die," As readers, we are shocked by this comment! We see the Saschers as eco-warriors but they are ironically harbouring evil intentions- they care more for plant life than they do for human life! Shields is teasing out a stereotype of Saschers. She reveals how they believe strongly in things, yet do not stand up for their beliefs. They are very two-faced. The final insult to Mrs Turner is her ignorance of this fact "...The things Mrs Turner doesn't know"- she speaks nicely to them, yet they despise her and hope she goes away or dies and "then all will proceed as it should"...!
As the High School girls wander along, walking past her house on their way home, share this disdainful view of Mrs. Turner. They are said to be "...momentarily repelled..." by her "shuddering display of cellulite " and are appalled by her apparent lack of knowledge about things essential to their lives such as skin care and the folk rock recording star, Neil Young. They criticise her physical appearance and are offended by Mrs Turner's display of "lapped, striated...thighs." This slow-chapped description amuses the reader as it defines quite clear images in our mind. They ask themselves why she does not bother to hide them, "doesn't she realise?" We would ask the same question if we were in their place. However, shields sides with Mrs Turner and explains that the girls are vain and Mrs Turner's display "makes them queasy; it makes them fear for the future" The girls continue to make cultural judgements about her ignorance of Neil Young. Shields responds with, "But Mrs. Turner is ignorant of that fact as the girls are that she, Mrs Turner, has a first name- Geraldine" which changes the poise of the story, but the point has been made that the girls are vain and are like the Saschers in most respects- they do not confront Mrs Turner with their views but harbour spurning thoughts inside. She also mentions repeatedly, "Oh, the things she [Mrs Turner] doesn't know!" We see humour in how the girls express their disgust and therefore we become complicit in these negative judgements, as we begin to think like the other characters.
Going back to her younger days there are various other characters who express opinions about Mrs. Turner. For example her father is mortified to find her having an affair with a married farmer, who seems much older. This is also funny to a point. Shields is narrating the story from a third person's view but seems to have adopted Mrs. Turner's blithe attitude as she tells the story exactly as I would have stereotyped Mrs Turner to do so. It's Shields' casual narration, a monotonous tone to every event which lends a comic tone to the whole story. She makes the joke, but there is no honing till the climax and we do not feel a subsequent fall-back.
However, Mrs Turner escapes to New York with her father's "...soppy-stern voice" ringing in her ears. It is evident that although her father is displeased and ashamed he is not really angry and although his voice is stern it is concurrently soppy. He seems very overprotective of his youngest daughter but this makes her feel stifled. When she returns he says, "Don't ever leaves us again," which only causes her to feel even more smothered by his forgiveness and she doesn't appreciate this clinginess.
However, we learn more about Mrs Turner's history and discover she actually travelled the length of America and settled in New York, where she had a relationship with a black man (a really radical thing to do at the time). Furthermore, she also had his child, but he could not bear the responsibility of his actions and left her "with a newborn baby and 50 dollars." She abandoned the child and returned home, though only for a short while. May be because she could not bear the way people would look upon her for sleeping with a married man, or maybe for other reasons- she always liked to travel.
Mrs. Turner then returned to her native town and married a man called Gord. They set up a home together and he obviously loved her very much. Once he "kissed every part of her body" which suggests that she had experienced the love of a true partner.
The writer portrays Mrs. Turner as ignorant and out of touch. At some points, Shields even implies that she was irrational and at others banal.
It is whilst travelling that Mrs. Turner comes across one individual that categorically doesn't like her. This person is the professor. He writes a poem about her and her two sisters, as he perceived them on a trip to Japan. The poem entitled "The Golden Pavilion", is what seems light-hearted on the surface, but it is really being used to belittle the women, Mrs. Turner in particular. He describes her as, "...a little pug of a woman..." who " ...particularly stirred his contempt..." This is profoundly offensive language and to say he doesn't like Mrs. Turner, or what he sees of her, is a great understatement. They are all being publicly mocked and their relatively brash, vulgar lifestyles and apparent tastelessness madden him incessantly. This blind hatred would seem funny, but now that the reader is aware of Mrs Turner's history, the poem is not amusing. Shields does not even have to include the poem to achieve this effect because she has controlled the mechanics that have preceded this event very proficiently. Thus, the professor comes across as an intellectual snob. His whole poem is based on prejudice and we know he sees himself as superior, so we judge against him altogether. We also appreciate that he was on the brink of failure and this poem reeled him out of danger. Yet, he chooses to repay the women who made him a success once more by insulting their appearances in the poem. It seems ironic, yet sad.
As readers, we realise all the other characters have been judging Mrs. Turner from a stereotypical viewpoint. Yet, as soon as we discover that she hasn't endured a past, in the least, which has been stereotypical, but quite exceptional, our view of her shifts completely. Shields has not developed her character (Mrs. Turner still thinks the same), but only revealed her past, which has made Mrs. Turner the most interesting character in the story and we immediately stop making snap judgements.
The phrase which Shields used quite freely, "Mrs. Turner doesn't know much", by the end of the story, has become subjective. We learn that she is narcissistic, not vain or egotistical like many of the other characters. Shields emphasises that Mrs. Turner would not boast or admit about her the events in her life: "Most of these secrets she keeps locked away in her mottled thighs or in the curled pinkness of her genital flesh." The author does not appear to condemn Mrs. Turner; she portrays her in a very positive way. Through her words and actions Mrs. Turner chooses, she often comes across as being a moderately simple minded woman, another of the author's opinions which I share myself. She seems to me a free spirited woman who cannot bear to be smothered, by her father for example. Although she may not appear very aware to the high school girls, she has seen many things and is a lot more worldly-wise than people judge her to be.
By the end, we look upon the whole story as an irony because although Mrs. Turner is harshly judged for her ignorance, the other characters ignorance and prejudice against her is yet worse. Shield effectively achieves her purpose of illustrating how misleading prejudices are by setting up a stereotype, only to elaborate on it in the most uncharacteristic manner. She exploits our judgement systems (stereotypes) in order to undermine them.
I will now propose to compare The Purple Pileus' bearing on the same theme of prejudice and stereotypes. Indeed, Wells implements the same form of comedy, inducing judgemental views from other characters to affect our supposition. Though, there is a distinct difference in objectives: HG Wells exploits our prejudices to reinforce our stereotypical views, whereas Shields challenges our prejudices.
In "The Purple Pileus" the other characters views about the protagonist, Mr Coombes, are fundamental to how we view him. His wife is, to start with, severely derogatory, referring to him as, "a little grub" and treating him with hardly any respect whatsoever. The language she uses against him reduces him to a pathetic wimp who hesitates even to respond in like terms to his overpowering wife. At the time of HG Wells, this would have seemed hilarious as society was overwhelmingly patriarchal. The opening works in an offset way to "Mrs. Turner Cutting The Grass." Instead of trying to gain a little sympathy for the central character, Wells pours scorn over Mr Coombes and mocks his role as a man and husband.
Action-wise, calling him a little grub is practically the only thing his wife says to him, suggesting that she cannot be bothered to speak to him at all, "The row had arisen about that beastly Jennie again." The fact that Mr Coombes is not even consulted about Jennie and Mr Clarence coming over to dinner highlights her total lack of respect for him. She obviously doesn't feel that he is a very strong willed man and appears to think that she can walk all over him. She doesn't notice, and certainly doesn't care, that he feels extremely uncomfortable at dinner in the presence of her friends. So whilst he, "sat dumb and wrathful at his own table," she "laughed aloud" with her friends completely ignoring her husband. Jennie, the "big, noisy girl" also treats her guest without much regard or consideration. They obviously don't consider him to be very dominating or commanding, that his views and opinions count for nothing. Jennie and Mr Clarence appear only to listen to what Mrs Coombes says, they don't seems to care about her husband and are offensive and condescending unto him. Furthermore, Mrs Coombes encourages this, by sanctioning it.
So far, we find this argument very amusing as the characters are pure ambitious, working-class stereotypes, playing their roles exactly as we expect them to. The women are loud, overpowering and Mr. Coombes is shaking in front of them, whilst Mr Clarence mocks him "smiling in a kind of pitying way." Then, Mr Coombes gathers his strength and stands up, at which point Mr Clarence remarks "No vi'lence, now," "whereupon they all began talking at once," indicating slapstick action was on its way. However, Mrs Coombes again calls him "a regular little grub" and so he finally asks his wife's guests to leave. They refuse! How rude of them! So, in a pathetic exit, he decides to walk away (out of own house) hanging his head in shame "with his face burning and tears of excitement in his eyes." If the author had written the story with some compassion to Mr Coombes' predicament, we may have felt some sympathy for him. Instead, we are left in flabbergasted at how pathetic Mr Coombes is, how uncouthly and monstrous Jennie is, how spiteful Mrs Coombes is and how devious Mr Clarence is!
As Mr Coombes contemplates committing suicide, he stumbles over narcotic fungi. He reckons it isn't such a bad idea to eat them and kill himself. However, the mushrooms have an unanticipated effect on him- he becomes intoxicated and resolves to return home and make up for his "enmity toward merriment." As with Mrs Turner, a little bit of Mr Coombes' history is revealed to us in the time he is contemplating suicide: "He now perceived...that his wife had married him out of curiosity and in order to escape from her worrying, laborious and uncertain life in the workroom." However, it does not change out view of him, in fact it compounds it. We see him as a gullible idiot as well as a feeble man, "And Coombes was such a harmless little man, too, nourished mentally on self-help" Mrs. Coombes is also belittled in former quote, branded as selfish by Wells. HG Wells creates his humour, by ridiculing Mr Coombes attempt at suicide. He certainly does not sympathise with the character if he can joke about the worst moment in their life, "Did he like it or did he not. His mind was curiously careless," and allow other characters to talk ill of him near his time of death. Before arriving at the decision of committing suicide, he had contemplated killing his wife, though we obviously know he does not possess enough courage for that, so this contemplation carries a certain irony which is amusing, "and that he thought of razors, pistols, bread-knives and touching letters to the coroner." Mr Coombes' reaction to the effects of the narcotic take him on an unexpected high, where his mood changes- he becomes completely intoxicated and the reader laughs at his antics, "he could not remember very well because of a steam roundabout which was beginning in his head"
The scene at home is truly played against Mr Coombes by his wife: "Economy, he says...he lies awake about it night, worrying about how he can screw me out of a shilling." Wells again plays humour to paint Mr Coombes as tight-fisted and stingy and his wife as whinging bitch! Each time Wells mocks and ridicules his characters, the reader feels ever more superior to them and joins in the art of mockery which has been so widely used in this story by Wells.
When Mr Coombes returns having eaten some of the mysterious fungus growing in the woods the attitudes towards him change dramatically. At the beginning of the tale Jennie speaks to Mr Coombes in a disrespectful almost flippant tone, however when he reappears she speaks "in a weak voice". Mr Clarence sits "petrified" his lower jaw dropping in disbelief, whilst Mrs Coombes shrieks at him. These actions highlight that they view him as bordering on insane, are fearful of him and basically do not know how to react. The reader is aware of why Coombes is acting like this. The narcotic has heightened his senses and dissolved his inhibitions. He is no longer that unconfident, pathetic individual; he will go back to his house merry as ever for "a jolly evening"
Clarence is said to act in a cowardly manner and was "unable to meet the mad fury in Coombes' eyes." It is as though the tables have turned, whereas Clarence held the power at the beginning it is now Coombes who is calling the shots. Jennie then also shrieks as she makes her escape showing a completely different attitude to earlier in the story Mrs Coombes and Jennie then flee terrified from the chaotic scene caused by Mr Coombes by locking themselves in the bedroom and shop respectively. Far from viewing him as someone they can walk all over they realise he is in full control of the situation as far as they're concerned. Clarence "...resolved to humour him..." when trapped in the scullery surrounded by knives and meat choppers, and ends up having his face scrubbed with a blacking brush under the sink. He now views Mr Coombes as a lunatic, someone who has gone completely mad and could turn violent at any time. In fact, Coombes "clutched him by the collar and tried to thrust the fungus into his mouth" The image of a grown man trying to forcefully feed another is raised in the readers mind and we see a lot of humour in this. However, that aside, Wells tries to suggest how drugs can reveal or unmask and unleash the real emotions people hide whilst they are abstemious and in control of their faculties. Both Mr Clarence and the two women are certainly now scared of him and have changed their view from previously in the story.
There is one more character introduced into the story right at the end. Mr Coombes is walking in the same woods that he found the mushroom in with his brother Tom. He is retelling his own version of the story and his brother is impressed both by his success in business and ironically the support he now receives from his wife.
"...you're jolly lucky, too, to have a wife who's willing to help like yours does."
"ah, it's the way with women. She didn't think I had it in me to be roused," he replies.
Tom views his brother as someone who has worked hard to achieve his success and does not appear to know how he was treated by a lot of people, especially his wife, before this. Yet, this just goes to emphasise how pathetic Coombes is- he cannot even admit to the fungus' part in the play. Thus, Wells achieves his purpose effectively.
The author's view of Mr Coombes is quite a disparaging one. He is described as "...a pale faced little man..." near the beginning of the story, not a particularly nice way to be depicted. He is portrayed by Wells as a weak little man who is far too obsessed about what the neighbours might think of week day tunes playing on a Sunday, amongst other trivial things. Wells is blatantly belittling him and there is a lot of evidence to support this. The comments made about him by Wells include, "...timid, nervous..." "...with a meagre ambition of self-denial..." "...little Coombes..." There is an overall sense that Wells doesn't like Coombes and views him as a pitiful man. He comes across to me as stuffy and lacking in self-control, respect and power. He also comes across to me as being melodramatic when he storms out of the house and into the woods, dreaming up ways to kill himself, "...he thought of razors, pistols, bread-knives..." These overemotional concepts of violence are short-lived and soon he goes back to feeling sorry himself in a less destructive way.
In both "Mrs. Turner Cutting the grass" and "The Purple Pileus" there are characters that show pity for the central characters. For example the professor who meets Mrs Turner certainly pities her for her lack of class or taste, and lack of knowledge about temples. He makes his feelings known publicly and makes money from the consequent poem that follows. The Saschers and high school girls show pitying feelings towards her also as they cannot understand how she manages to live without knowing about grass clippings, Neil Young and weed killer. The high school girls pity the way her "...striated flesh on her upper thighs..." is bared for the entire world to see. They all look down their noses at Mrs Turner and do not really have any idea what she has been through in her life. The high school girls appear to think her life has been rather boring, that they themselves would never be out mowing the lawn everyday when there is so much more for them to do, but she has actually seen many things in her life. However Mrs Turner seems unaffected by (if not unaware of) the comments made about her. Whether she is oblivious, naive or basically doesn't care is not made exactly clear until the end, "She cannot imagine that anyone would wish her harm." This suggests that she is not aware of the view many people hold of her, but Shields portrays this as one of her strengths. She has other strengths also in that she has had the courage to travel abroad to many exotic places. She may not do so in the manner the professor might appreciate, but she does it nevertheless. Furthermore she accepts situations, moves on and is content to make herself happy and not to adhere to other people's values and expectations. There are not many other characters who seem to appreciate these assets, only her sisters seem to stick with her and Shields does not go into much detail about their relationship. By dwelling on how Mrs Turner overcomes these judgements and misconceptions she is shown as a strong person.
Mr Coombes is also pitied very much, especially by his wife. She thinks he is good for nothing and pities his lack of a sense of humour and ability to have fun. She appears to view life as something to enjoy whereas he is preoccupied with personal opinion of himself and making sure his business does well. Jennie pities him, as does Mr Clarence for his stuffiness and apparent inability to socialise with them. They are impatient with him and do not listen when he tries to make a point. When he asks Jennie to stop playing the piano Mr Clarence challenges him and is said to enjoy "...the prospect of an argument..." and has no respect "...blowing a cloud of cigarette smoke and smiling in a kind of pitying way." Just as many people consider themselves to be better than Mrs Turner they look down at Mr Coombes only they do so publicly, not behind his back. It is a lot harder to see Mr Coombes strengths, as Wells does not write to make them evident in the way that Shields does with Mrs Turner. However he is shown to have good morals (he will not divorce his wife) and tries to be confident and stick to his points in the face of adversity. It is only after he returns from the woods that opinions start to change about him. When we next meet him in five years time he has the support of his wife and is respected by his brother. People no longer pity him as they once did. Yet, in the course of the story, Wells makes all the characters appear a farce.
The authors use different techniques to get their ideas about the central character across. Mrs Turner is often put into comical positions to show her as an almost happy go lucky person. When she is first introduced into the story she is said to be wearing "...an ancient pair of shorts..." and "covers her red-grey frizz with Gord's old golf cap...". These images of her present her in a funny light, but she has also been through some quite traumatic things in her life such as the affair with a married man and giving up her baby. Shields purposefully tries to show her in a good light about these situations; she doesn't dwell on her heartlessness when giving up her baby to strangers or how she betrays her family and sleeps with another mans wife. She also writes in the past a lot and is very reflective, she picks out certain events to highlight certain aspects of her personality.
Wells tends to do the opposite with Coombes, he shows him in situations where he looks feeble and incapable of controlling his wife, his emotions or his whole life. He is shown attempting to throw Jennie and Mr Clarence out of the house but fails and ends up looking terribly foolish. He is then forced to leave himself, however even this attempt at a dramatic exit fails,
"With his face burning and tears of excitement in his eyes...he struggled with his overcoat...and (Jennie) strummed him insultingly out of the house."
Wells uses this incident in particular to highlight how much Coombes is undermined. We are told that this is not the first time he has, "...fled his house in wrath and indignation..." so we can tell it is quite common for Mr Coombes to become upset and overemotional. This certainly makes him look like a weak man.
There are similarities between this story and " Mrs. Turner Cutting the grass" as it too uses comedy. The difference being that in this instance Wells uses it to belittle the character, whereas Mrs Turner is shown in a positive light. Another similarity is that both Mrs Turner and Mr Coombes manage to achieve equanimity in their lives. Each story chronicles times when the central characters have had to go through hardships and be looked down upon by others, but in the end they are happy with their lives.
It seems that each of the authors had a purpose for writing their stories. "Mrs. Turner Cutting the grass" is a story written by a woman and seems to express a lot of feminist ideas. The men in the story do not come off very well at all; she feels smothered by her father, Kiki leaves her with a new born baby, the professor is portrayed as judgmental and exploitive of Mrs Turner and only Gord seems to truly love her, yet it is a love she appears not to share. It is also a story that is used to show that we shouldn't judge other people, that just by looking at someone you cannot necessarily tell very much about their life. It is expressed that it doesn't matter if Mrs Turner doesn't understand the difference between a Shinto shrine and a Buddhist temple as, "She's having a grand old time."
Wells tries to show that people have a lot of possibility inside of them and demonstrates that it might take something extraordinary for them to realise their potential, but that they should continue to strive for this. He shows that no one need be weak and let themselves be walked all over. He obviously has no respect for people who do so. Though, I do believe Wells is looking down his nose at his characters and feels superior to them, holding prejudices about class systems (we can see Coombes is a working-class man by his accent) that are exposed in his writing.
Using comic ideas, both stories effectively convey the serious implications in the writing. As I have repeatedly mentioned, they achieve opposite ideas and thus make good literature for comparison. In summarising the two authors' ideas in the stories, I prefer Shields as she has produced a more eloquent literary piece and has shown to be capable of more using more elaborate devices in order to manipulate the reader, thus making our realisation that prejudices are wrong, more significant and understandable. Whereas, Wells has composed a simpler piece of writing with an opposite theme which I disapprove of, anyway, by principle.
Wide Reading - English Cswk Piece 5/5 -- 26/04/07
Mussadiq Khan | 5, 768 | Page 1 of 3
