Choose two short stories written before 1900. Examine themes and issues, which preoccupy the writers, concentrating on similarities and differences in tone, style, characterisation and language.

The two short stories I have chosen for my answer are “The Parvenue” by Mary Shelley and “The Son’s Vito” by Thomas Hardy. In my answer I hope to address the themes and issues raised by both writers by focusing on their use of tone, characterisation, language and their overall style. Both stories were written before the twentieth century as shown through the views of the writers among other things. One important detail to note is that most if not all literature of the time concentrated on only a few different themes and issues, most of which were very much relevant to the society of that time. An example of this would be the theme chosen in these two poems, the theme of both social rank and the role of women at that time. The short stories of “The parvenue” and “The Son’s Veto” both demonstrate the plight of women at the time to maintain happiness in a match of social inequality.

Mary Shelley who is indeed famous for her Gothic Literature was wife to well-known poet, Percy Bysshe Shelley. It is often said that because she outlived her Husband and also her two children that she lived quite a lonely life and often felt dejected. It is most likely this reason also that portrays her as such a heavy feminist. Her situation and views may play a part in the way she portrays the female character, “Fanny” in the play.

Thomas Hardy on the other hand spent most of his time in the rural community of Dorset, and in adulthood, Dorchester. Always close to country life and people, Hardy was familiar with the varying lifestyles of the different classes, which is indeed significant when writing on such subjects. The differing backgrounds and up bringing of the two authors sanctions the comparisons between their two plots and allows us to recognise the reasoning behind them.

The word “Parvenue” from the title literally translates into a person that has recently raised in social rank, in this case Fanny. This epithet highlights the importance and relevance of society in the late 1800s and immediately reveals the main focus of the short story.

The story itself is written in First-Person perspective giving us the writers view on the matter. The solicitous nature of the introduction instantly intrigues the reader. We, the readers, are compelled to explore her “melancholy story”, whilst its purpose is disclosed. Fanny is writing to ‘prevent any other from …rising to a rank superior to that in which they are born. This opening line immediately sets the tone for the story with the metaphor, “I doubt not, in my position: the chalice has been poisoned for me alone!” The very much evocative image of a poisoned chalice to describe an undesirable situation is used to highlight the melodramatic aspect of this piece of writing. It is this statement that involves the reader and automatically interests them as they are invited to explore the characters story and compare whether the woman is indeed the “Outcast” that she claims.

The passage quite easily charts the narrator’s changing emotional state from childhood, through youth, marriage and emigration. These are all consequential in the final outcome of the plot as we compare her values and beliefs in the past and establish their links with her present situation.

This is a preview of the whole essay

From the introduction the question “Am I evil Minded?” stands out within the mind of the reader. However, her depiction of family life reveals she comes from a heritage of charitable people. The description of Fanny’s mother as I quote “An Angel on Earth” is greatly exaggerated, and similar to many of the characterisations used by the writer in the story, portrays an over-played extremity. Much as we accept the mother’s inherited “endowments”, we later witness flaws in this so-called “angelic” character.

Fanny’s past is briefly touched upon in a short but effective description giving us a quick insight into what her childhood and family life must have resembled. “He [My Father] married young, and had several children. He then lost his wife, and remained fifteen years a widower, when he married again a young girl, the daughter of a clergyman who died leaving numerous offspring in extreme poverty.” It is also shown when Fanny recalls how “all was toil, yet all seemed enjoyment. How happy my childhood was”. This is an invaluable comment as we compare this joyous emotion to the “miserable” existence she leads now after a life of uncomfortable association with money and society.

A common feature in both “The Parvenue” and “The Son’s Veto” is the raising of rank through marriage as a result of an unfortunate accident. This introduces the concept of destiny into both plots. Fate is a predominant issue, inspiring the belief that the women were the victims of fate, as opposed to the authoritative figures in their own lives. However, as it is the case in both stories, the husbands – once seen as their “preservers” – ultimately emerge as the destroyer of their happiness.

Although the similarity exists between the two, there are many contrasts that can be established in both content and stylistic features. In Shelley’s “The Parvenue” it is the woman who perceives the complications induced by mixed-society marriages, whilst providing significant insight into opinions of the time.

She confesses; “There is to me much obscurity in this part of my story. Lord Reginald loved me; why he loved me, so far as to forget pride and rank of ambition…I cannot tell.” Although this is no revelation in itself, her remaining words are consequential; “He later showed no tendency to disregard the prejudices and habits of rank and wealth” This statement implies that vast differences existed between the classes and that even love was not sufficient nor big enough to bridge these gaps.

Fanny’s mother’s initial instinct about the match was one of apprehension. Her insightful appeal “to Lord Reginald’s good feeling, not to make Fanny miserable for life, by implanting an attachment that could only be productive of unhappiness”, proved to be accurate. However, news of the engagement leads her to change her opinion as she anticipates “Long years of happiness for her child”. The announcement of the marriage to the remainder of the family offers interesting character insight. Fanny’s naiveté in relation to her family is most apparent in her interpretation of their emotion. She instantly assumes that their joy is for her future happiness, whilst we simultaneously suspect their greed. Why else would her father “Thank God with rapture” while the others were “transported with delight”?

“The Parvenue” provides us with detailed insight into the lifestyle and opinion of “high society” and its attraction for Fanny’s family. Immediately she reveals that the “Habits of the different sexes in higher ranks [were] so separate from each other”. Hailing from a humble background, she was astonished at the “thought of how the rich could spend so much on themselves, while any of their fellow-creatures were in destitution”. This is reiterated through her actions. “I denied myself a thousand luxuries, for the sake of feeding the hungry.” She affirms strongly, “I dislike the apparatus of wealth”.

Shelley’s use of language in describing Fanny’s emotions is rich in evocative metaphors, which give insight also into the reasoning behind her charitable deeds. Her refusal to “spend twenty guineas for a gown while [she] could dress many faces in smiles” almost commands admiration and respect. This, I believe, was the writer’s intention to make the reader sympathise with her. She effectively uses this comparison to highlight the expansive difference between the conscience of the poor and wealthy. The stark contrast even between her and her husband is startling. Lord Reginald viewed her ideas as “Sordid” and “Reproved” her severely, but she remained undeterred.

Dismissed initially, these “charities” eventuated in the separation of the couple. Fanny herself confesses, “I lost my husband’s affections because I performed what I believed to be a duty.” Her “duty” to her family also proved to be instrumental in destruction of her marriage. She is met with the ultimatum “remember the price you pay – either give up your parents and your family, whose rapacity and crimes deserve no mercy, or we shall part forever”. Family loyalty succeeds in the end, but to no avail.

Shelley’s story, like “The Son’s Veto”, demonstrates how devotion to family is not always beneficial. Fanny reveals in “The Parvenue” that the unconditional dedication and love she showed her family spoiled them and in return “they destroy” her.

The repeated outpouring of emotion shown by Shelley in “the Parvenue” is not featured in the narration of Hardy’s story. However, many prevalent issues surface from the plot of “The Son’s Veto”.

Hardy’s prolonged introduction is typical of the writing style of the time. This is most apparent in the writer’s fixation with the main character, Sophie’s hair. The exaggerated importance of the lady’s hairstyle is a literary device known as mock-heroism. Referring to “The long locks” as an “Example of ingenious art”, Hardy is elaborating on the importance of its significance, despite its triviality. The same artifice appears frequently in the passage, hence the long, complex sentencing.

The inquisitive bystanders, like the reader, remain unaware of the woman’s position in society until the flaw in her speech (“he has been…”). The exchange at this point between mother and son is much relevance to the progression of the plot. Her son, who at the tender age of twelve displays a distasteful harshness in his manner, makes the correction of her grammatical error with much “impatience”. The reader has previously been made aware that she was “A woman with a story”, and is now intrigued by “That question of grammar which bore upon her history”.

Hardy cleverly uses Sophie’s recollections as a mode of transporting the focus from the present to the past, where “The first event bearing upon her present situation had occurred”.

Setting proves to be an important issue in determining the atmosphere of the plot. In her recollection of the “pretty village”, Sophie remembers fondly her work there as a maid and her contentment with place and rank. However, as in “The Parvenue”, an unforeseen accident leads to a twist of fate and ultimately her removal from familiarity.

This accident too, induces the unnatural match between Sophie and Mr Twycott – The vicar, which provides us with an insightful glance into the unlikely match. Although written in the third person, it is Sophie’s perspective on the relationship which is conveyed; “[She] did not exactly love him, but she had a respect for him which almost amounted to veneration. She hardly dared refuse a personage so reverend and august”. The consequences of the union were recognised too by the husband, and, realising he had committed “social suicide”, Mr Twycott arranged “An exchange of livings”.

This “abandoning of their pretty home…for a narrow dusty house” is a significant development. This move is a veneer for the underlying meaning, almost anticipating the change in Sophie’s character. Her regret at leaving “Their fine peal of bells for wretchedest one-tongued clangour that ever tortured mortal ears’ rings out as a warning to the reader. Once again, Hardy’s extensive embellishment of trivial objects come to the fore, perhaps in asserting that life’s pleasures emanate from simplicity and not from the association of wealth.

This is not a view shared by Sophie’s son, who repeatedly exhibits an air of superiority over his mother, whose “mistakes and origin it was his painful lot as a gentleman to blush for”. As in “The Parvenue” social rank is a key issue in the plot. However, this scenario differs in that wealth is secondary to social status. Hardy’s depiction of the son’s fixation with rank and social supremacy illustrates how it consumes his every thought. On several occasions, Sophie reveals the effect of status on her son. “Somehow her boy with his aristocratic school-knowledge…and aversions” was losing the innocent qualities that she had “loved in him”. Again the effect of upper-class education is demonstrated in the disclosure that; “His education had…sufficiently ousted his humanity”. Despite this flaw in his character, Sophie continues to adhere to her son’s demands because “He being so educated, and [she] so little…[she] did not feel dignified enough to be his mother”, therefore was incapable of asserting her authority.

The issue of family loyalty and dedication is central to both stories with similar consequences for the lady in each. “The Son’s Veto”, however, continues this crux to extremity. The son’s audacity in “maintaining his ascendancy” in the issue of his mothers re-marriage is demonstrated by his forcing her to swear not to commit without his consent. Sophie’s surrender displays the subservient role women played in relation to men at that time.

Similarly, “The Parvenue” illustrates the passive role women were assigned with regards to the distribution of money. Fanny, despite her close relationship with a “Large allowance for [her] own expenses”, but once aware of her charities, Lord Reginald “peremptorily checked” them. This subject matter is conveyed also in “The Son’s Veto” where Sophie “Was left with no control over anything which had been her husbands beyond her modest personal income”.

Extensive analysis of the two stories has highlighted the similarities within the ploy, style and characterisations of each. However, as aforementioned, strong contrasts are apparent in the writers’ tone and language styles, These short stories allow the reader insight into the social opinion of the times, whilst engaging them in the traumatic upheaval in the characters; lives. Both serve as a warning of the potential destruction inherent in wealth and social status.

Word Count: 2, 262