Wide Reading Assessment

AMERICAN PSYCHO *

The novel, American Psycho by Brett Easton Ellis is a satiric comedy criticising the high American society of the late 1980s. Our main character, Patrick Bateman is a representation of the dark nature that human beings possess but desperately try to suppress and is quite literally society’s greatest dream and darkest nightmare. As the novel progresses we witness the downfall of the main antihero and are exposed to many different emotions that he experiences including anger, doubt, confusion, lust and many more. The author uses the realist genre of writing to express the corrupt nature of human beings and the reality of a society that is devoid of all emotion and morality. The novel is set in New York City in 1987, where the charming and wealthy investment banker, Patrick Bateman lives out his double life as a serial killer during the nighttime. Bateman describes to the reader his daily activities which include dining out with friends, excessive alcohol and drug consumption at nightclubs as well as his relationship with other characters including his girlfriend Evelyn, his assistant, Jean and his mother and brother. He often makes random references to musical artists from the time and high fashion brands throughout the novel, which appear to be his method of control. It becomes clear that Bateman is mentally unstable as the novel progresses as he carries out murdering people with whom he barely knows, his methods becoming more brutal and torturous as he falls down a spiral of drugs and alcohol, eventually losing control and killing his co-worker, Paul. He ultimately proves to be an unreliable narrator and the novel ends by making us wonder whether it was all in Patrick’s head. This realist approach at critiquing society is the ultimate statement about the necessity that humans feel to conform to standards and the shallowness of human nature overall. 

To me it seems as if Brett Easton Ellis’ purpose in writing his novel in a realist style and presenting Patrick in such a startlingly impactful way is to show us that society is blind. That human beings are complex, just like Patrick, we all have our dark sides that do not show up unless you truly know someone. We often tend to conceal these dark notions from the rest of society so that we conform to other people’s standards, when in reality no human being is perfect. Patrick is simply an over exemplified version of ourselves. He is essentially the quintessential expression of what our society has produced in the modern era. He is hyper real, not an actual person, but rather a representation of the consumerist obsession, materialistic fixation and brutal rage that is the basis of our society. He, just like our society makes an effort to appear outwardly as a good “person” however, his closeted sexism and racism continue to express themselves during times of weakness when his all expansive rage shows itself. 

After reading the novel I think that this realist expression of society was used by the author to show us that we are all just as imperfect as each other. A quote which I think depicts this perfectly is “Each model of human behavior must be assumed to have some validity. Is evil something you are? Or is it something you do?”. Here Patrick ponders over the way that we act as people as well as questions himself as a person. He has some idea of what it means to wrong someone, to commit a ‘socially immoral’ act, however, being a psychopath and a schizophrenic, he has no empathy for the way that he treats someone. I think that Easton Ellis is trying to make us wonder whether or not our society itself is evil, or is it just certain people’s actions, such as murder that make it so. It made me question whether it has always been corrupt or have human beings corrupted it with materialistic desires, exploitation and denial. To me, this denial is the trustworthy nature of humans and our want to accept people as good as well as the lack of consideration that people can be bad, thus, the author’s purpose of showing us that society is blind is connected back here. 

We have no control over who we are, just like Patrick, just like we have no control over the way that we think and who we are. Because of his desire to suppress the true reality behind why he murders, Patrick ended up worse in the end of the book rather than the beginning. The longer he suppressed his dark notions, the more his obsessions and compulsions grew, his episodes of psychosis growing with each day until he eventually snapped. In a way I feel sympathetic to the way that he wants to fit into society. As human beings we try to fit in during social situations to avoid fears such as being judged for the way that we look or act. We create an alternative version of ourselves that we think will best suit the expectations of others, when in reality we lose ourselves along the way, we become what society deems desirable. I can relate this as I am a high school student, I have felt those insecurities of who I am, the way that I look etc, and so have every other human being in our society. The reality is that we are quite literally our greatest critic and it is in our nature to think very low of ourselves. We try to hide our insecurities beneath this mask that we have created for ourselves, but we cannot hide forever as they eventually shine through, just as Patrick’s murderous desires eventually did. 

Another aspect in which the author’s realist genre of writing is applied is through the different characters of the novel. Throughout the entirety of the novel, to me it seems as if Ellis is trying to prove a point about appearances. That everyone in our society is the same, regardless of looks. In the novel, this message is expressed through having all of the characters look so similar that they are barely decipherable from one another. No one, not even Patrick correctly recognizes anyone. After Patrick murders Paul Owen and confesses to his lawyer, the lawyer tells him only a few days later that he had lunch with Owen. This lawyer most probably had lunch with another Wall Street worker and was completely oblivious to who he was actually with. The same goes for everyone on Wall Street, mistaking everyone for another person, simply due to the fact that everyone looks, sounds and acts the same, conforming the standards set out for society. The concept of ‘everyone is everyone’ is shown through the quotation “The Chandelier Room is packed and everyone looks familiar, everyone looks the same” The way that this idea is applied to our society is in our behaviour as a species, we are too predictable in the way that we act to be ‘actually’ different from one another. With our prime motivation in life being money, we all desire the same reward and thus the way that we behave in the pursuit of this goal is the same for most of our population. Of course, in reality we do not all look the same like in Ellis’ novel, however, our behaviour follows the same pattern that looks do in American Psycho, showing that this necessity to conform to standards is present in many aspects of our society. 

“All it comes down to is this: I feel like shit but look great”. To Patrick, appearances are held with the greatest regard and I perceived this as being the only control that he can exert over his life. While he cannot control the way that he thinks and the way that he acts, he can exert control over his own appearance. He keeps up a good front, has great personal hygiene, dresses well, regularly goes to the gym and takes good care of his physique. However, I quickly realized that this sense of control that Patrick seems to have over his appearance developed into an obsession. For example, I noted that Patrick seems to be able to quickly tell the reader exactly which brand an article of clothing is from, the exact model of a stereo or the cost of any single item, his obsessions have developed into a materialistic form. This relates back to Ellis’ realist style of writing and the fact that our society is most dominated by materialistic desires. We focus on what we want more than what we actually need and our main focus in life is quite literally money, the source of all materialism. We live out our lives with a main focus, to gain as much money as possible, our capitalist society built on a foundation of materialism. This is the reality of who we are as a species, no better than another as we are all in search of the same thing, something that can never actually bring us happiness. This idea is also shown in the way that Patrick murders for no reason whatsoever, his actions ultimately prove to be meaningless just as our materialistic desires do.

“…there is an idea of a Patrick Bateman, some kind of abstraction, but there is no real me, only an entity, something illusory, and though I can hide my cold gaze and you can shake my hand and feel flesh gripping yours and maybe you can even sense our lifestyles are probably comparable: I simply am not there”. This quotation was very impactful for me upon reading it as it is startlingly true. It shows that Patrick is an entity rather than a person, serving as a reminder of the dark complexity of our human nature. Our society and the dark parts to the way that we behave as human beings is depicted through the entity of Patrick Bateman. We, as human beings are complex, just like Bateman, each having our good and bad traits, this is what makes us humans. Just when we think that we know someone, there is always more to discover, you can never truly know a person. Upon reading this quotation, I believe that Ellis is commenting on the fact that our trustworthy nature makes us not want to look beneath first appearances. The problem with our nature is that we have an instinct of war and violence inside of us that is often expressed during times of weakness, Patrick’s ulterior personality depicts this perfectly. We tell ourselves that we are civilised, that we are above each other, above other species, however, something deeply encoded in our DNA tells us otherwise, that we are still animals. Like Patrick, we desperately try to suppress these dark urges with materialistic pleasures, however, our future consequences are inevitably shaped by the decisions that we make in the present. The past will always dictate the future, and sooner or later our suppression of this nature will catch up to us. This is shown through Patrick’s character in the way that he murders for pleasure, there is no real meaning to his actions, it is just his true human nature shining through. 

Finally, after reading the novel American Psycho, I now question the people around me more than I did before. While I believe that it is good to be trustworthy, we must not completely let our guard down and at times question people’s behaviour. I think that this novel can serve as a reminder of what is considered to be a healthy relationship and what is not. As mentioned before, our trustworthy nature makes us rarely second guess others, often leading to people being exploited and abused, this is what can cause unhealthy relationships. Upon delving into the mind of a psychopath and a schizophrenic I now understand how easily it is to manipulate and deceive others in a society where people are indecipherable from one another. It made me question how easily people can manipulate their companions into thinking that they are good when everyone looks the same, let alone in our current society, where everyone’s behaviour is too similar and predictable. The novel made me realise that we should never disregard someone’s behaviour just because it is similar to everyone else’s and that overlooking things that people do can lead to bad consequences. Bad behaviour is often overlooked just like Bateman’s murderous rampages. His psychopathic tendencies became very obvious at times, however, the people around him didn’t care to question him. 

Upon reading this novel, my perspective has changed in the way that I view strangers out in the world. I now look around at the people who I see in everyday life, the people who I know well and those who are complete strangers wondering which of you thinks like Patrick Bateman? Which one of you is ready to snap? Which of you has already snapped?. The same applies to me, perhaps these strangers think that same thing when they look at me. I now wonder at times what people are hiding beneath their cleverly crafted facade, what it is that they deem unsuitable for people to know about them. This novel has proved to be very impactful and has shown me that you never actually truly know someone, do you?. That there is far more depth to a person than you think and that first impressions are the most useless judgement of a person that you can make. 

THE DOLLS HOUSE

The Doll’s House, a short story by Katherine Mansfield, depicts the necessity to conform to standards set out by society and how vital this is in being a part of society in both the past and the modern-day. The story uses a realistic genre of writing and is centred around a dollhouse given to the Burnell Sisters, a gift given to them by Mrs Hay. Mansfield’s story shows the innocence of small children and the cruelty of a society that draws a line between the rich and the poor. Isabel, the eldest sister is allowed to invite two children from school each day to simply view the dollhouse, they are not allowed to stay for tea or to come inside of the Burnell house. They are allowed to only view the dollhouse as Isabel describes each aspect to their visitors. The two younger sisters, Lottie and Kezia know the importance of being the eldest and sit back quietly, looking pleased as their older sister raves about the dollhouse. After all of the children at school have had their turn to view the dollhouse, only two remain, the little Kelvey’s. Lil and Else Kelvey, the daughters of a poor washerwoman and jailbird are shunned by the rest of the village, all of the adults telling their children to stay away from the Kelveys. However, Kezia with her youthful innocence does not understand why the Kelveys should be exempt from viewing the dollhouse so she invites them over after school without the permission of her family. Upon arriving, the Kelveys are told to run away and never come back by the Burnell sisters aunt, who scolds Kezia for having invited them over in the first place. Despite being shunned by everyone, the Kelvey sisters remain happy, for they have seen the dollhouse and forgotten all about Burnell aunt. 

Here materialism is the motivation of cruelty, this dollhouse given to the Burnell sisters, a representation of the strive for materialism is held at the highest regard by all of the children at school. This dollhouse is kept in the courtyard, not indoors, showing how it is regarded as worthless by the Burnell parents. However, because it is held at such a high regard by all of the village children, it can also be seen as a representation of childhood innocence and the cruelty of our society in instilling a materialistiic mindset into young children. When ideas that teach adolescents that materialistic possessions are more important than the relationships that they build in life are put into a childs mind, it only causes them to lust after something more. This teaches us to always want more and to never accept or be content with what we already have. This can be shown through the way that the Kelvey’s are given nothing, but are content with their lives and are able to be happy regardless of the fact that their mother has no money and their father is in jail. Lil and Else were given nothing, however, were taught to value what they have and make the best of their situation. So, when they finally got the opportunity to see the dolls house, they did not feel jealousy, but rather admiration, for they are content with what they have and do not lust after something that they can never have. 

I think that Katherine Mansfield’s intention on using an object as simple as a dollhouse, something that most children get to experience is to show the implication of materialistic desires into children’s minds at such a young age. The fact that this dollhouse is held at such high regard by all of the children shows just how corrupt our society is in the fact that we instil this motivation for materialism into children as soon as they are born. Even at a young age children are taught to value materialistic pleasures over everything else, we are taught that if we work hard we will make money and money can buy us merchandise which is supposed to make us happy. Every holiday adapting into an event dominated by materialism, eg: Christmas, Easter, Halloween, valentines day etc. This has created a society devoted to materialistic gain and wealth, instilling a motivation for money and what it can bring us in children at such a young age. Mansfield’s realist style of writing in the dolls house, I think is a critique of this corrupt motivation in human beings.  Having been given my own dolls house as a young girl, I know exactly what it feels like to always want more. As soon as web are given something, we have no filter, always lusting after the next best thing and will never be content with what we have. We see this today with addictions to shopping and various other things. As soon as you have experienced something that you did not have before, you lust after it until you have it. However, this is not enough, for you can never be truly happy or content with your life, always striving after the next best thing, demonstrating that materialism does not make us happy. 

In the story, Mansfield uses the character of Isabel to demonstrate this strive for materialism and ones desire to be popular. A point which I think depicts this idea perfectly is when the children at school only want to be friends with Isabel because she is wealthy. When she comes to school and tells her classmates of the dolls house, all of the children gather around her, everyone wanting to be friends with her for the sole purpose of viewing the dolls house. “Playtime came and Isabel was surrounded. The girls of her class nearly fought to put their arms round her, to walk away with her, to beam flatteringly, to be her special friend”. This idea of materialism is so predominant in children’s mind in this village and is shown in the way that Isabel is only wanted as a friend due to her family’s wealth and secrecy, unlike the Kelvey sisters who are shunned for being poor. To me it seems as if Isabel understands the importance of keeping a secret. The suspense of revealing to the children at the school of the dollhouse during playtime is used to build suspense and drag meaning to what she is to say. This only increases Isabel’s popularity at school as she is desired as a friend for what she can bring. This sense of materialism embedded in children even at a young age is very prominent in Mansfield’s story. I think that this is a very realistic example of what goes on in our society and how devastating the line between the rich and poor can affect people socially. I think that Isabel and her sisters are not at fault here but rather their parents and the rest of the adults in the village for instilling such toxic mindsets into their children at such a young age to where their motivation for forming friendships is solely based on wealth and materialism. 

Manfield uses her realist style of writing to convey an important point about first appearances being deceiving. The Kelvey sisters are immediately shunned by the rest of society because of what they wear, who their parents are and their lack of wealth. No one, except for Kezia, looks beneath first impressions in this novel, showing how easy it is for parents to deceive children when they are at their most impressionable. “But the line had to be drawn somewhere. It was drawn at the Kelveys. Many of the children, including the Burnells, were not allowed even to speak to them. They walked past the Kelveys with their heads in the air, and as they set the fashion in all matters of behaviour, the Kelveys were shunned by everybody”. To me, it seems as if the line drawn between the three wealthy Burnell sisters and the poor Kelvey sisters is an extended metaphor of lower-class discrimination and upper-class privilege in real life. “And the only two who stayed outside the ring were the two who were always outside, the little Kelveys. They knew better than to come anywhere near the Burnells.”

Upon reading the dolls house, many memories of my own elementary school experiences have resurfaced. Even in my days as a young girl, materialism was very prominent among school children. I always remember there being one girl who was more popular than the rest, who had wealthy parents and a large house etc. All of the girls wanted to be friends with her and the boys had crushes on her. However, it didn’t even matter that she was awfully mean to people who didn’t try to be her friend, for she was only held at such a high regard for her parents’ money. The fact of the matter is that we are taught at a very young age to value money and what it can bring us above everything else, whether it be presents on Christmas or chocolate on Easter, we value the materialistic gain of money far too much. Even when it comes to picking friends, my entire life I have picked up on the fact that children focus greatly on what they will gain from having a wealthy friend. This toxic mindset seems to only grow as we get older and spend our entire lives in search of money, we surround our whole lives around it, we cannot live without it. However, as I have been told many times by my elders who have spent their whole lives in pursuit of wealth, money cannot bring you happiness. 

I believe Katherine Mansfield’s, the doll’s house to be a very realistic approach to exposing the truth beneath this toxic mindset of materialistic gain. I have learnt a lot about how truly toxic this mindset can be when we instil it into children at such a young age, and how once you value money above all else, there is no going back to your once innocent mindset, that it has been corrupted forever. I have also realized that there is no escaping materialism, that it is the foundation of our capitalist society. I think that from reading this novel, people can understand that you are not what you own and that when you value a person because of their wealth, you lose your chance to create meaningful relationships with people that you actually connect with. I believe that the author’s purpose in writing the doll house is to depict the serious consequences of class differences and who gets to experience friendship and popularity and those who don’t. This sense of inequality that Manfield warns us of, only increases the entitlement of the upper class, and decreases the self esteem of the lower class, as both classes engage in social comparisons. Class division, which is prevalent even today, is an ongoing issue as society is stratified by income, wealth, inheritance, occupation and education into three tiers; upper, middle and lower. Through my own research, I have come to understand that since the 1970s, inequality between classes has increased drastically. However, since the beginning of human civilization there has been a division between those of the upper class and the lower class. Social class has always been determined by one thing: wealth. Being born into a wealthy family automatically ensures you are treated as superior to those who are not as lucky. Through reading the dolls house, I believe that people who form their views of a person on their status in society or family wealth, can learn that this mindset is one dominated by pettiness, arrogance and inequality. 

I would recommend for young parents to read this story before teaching their children of materialism. As the years have gone on, I have been around many children who are fixated on wealth and materialism, however, they do not realise is and neither do their parents. We are no longer taught the real meaning behind christmas unless we are religious, just told that we are to be given presents. Halloween, valentines day and easter are all centrered around chocolate and sweets, with us never being able to experience their true meanings in modern day society. As the upper class gains more wealth and the lower class are further shunned, our society will only become more materialistic, meaning that children will never be able to be able to grow up in a society where a persons character is valued more than their income. Children are quite literally the future, so as the sense of materialism in our society grows, so will the sense of entitlement and greed that future generations will have towards wealth and possessions.

FLIPPED

The novel, Flipped by Wendelin Van Draanen tells the story of Juli Baker and Bryce Loski as they grow up across the street from one another. The novel describes the perspectives of both protagonists as they go from early elementary school to junior high and gives a realistic depiction of the shallow way that human beings judge each other and the power of a persons appearance to deceive others. Ever since Bryce moved across the street from her the summer before second grade, Juli has had a crush on him. Bryce, on the other hand, has always wanted her to just “back off”. However, as the two protagonists enter junior high, their perspectives ‘flip’ in unexpected ways as Bryce realises that he has feelings for Juli and Juli realizes that Bryce is more than just a “pretty face”. This deceptively realistic novel utilises a technique of flipping perspectives as the two learn and grow over the course of 6 years. Beneath the series of missed opportunities and misunderstandings, the novel has an underlying theme of realism in which the characters learn to look beneath the surface of people, both figuring out who they are, who they want to be, and who they want to be with. 

Upon reading this novel, I realised the circumstances in which the two different protagonists grew up in and the people who raised them greatly influenced their outlook on life. Bryce Loski comes from an upper-middle-class family that looks down on Juli’s family based simply on the fact that they do not care for their yard. Bryce’s father regularly comments on “the state” of the Baker yard and how they ought to take more pride in their appearance, however, he does not know the circumstances that cause them to have no money.“The world would have more beauty in it if he’d fix up the yard instead”. In reality, the reason why Juli’s family appears to be so poor is because they spend all of their money on a private care facility for her mentally unstable Uncle, David. The fact of the matter is that he does not have all of the pieces and has based his opinion on an entire family on something that he does not truly understand. This idea is presented through the way that Mr Loski is very quick to pass this view onto his son. “Because your backyard is, like covered in turds! I mean, just look at it. It’s a complete dive” Is what Bryce says to Juli after hearing his father’s countless complaints against the Baker Family. I believe that the author is trying to communicate here that we should not base our opinions of others on the way that other people view them, most especially your parents. No matter who a person is to you, or how much you trust them, you should always form your own opinions, instead of believing the warped view of someone else. Our opinions of others are based on experiences, and we cannot form a fair view of another person based on the experiences of others, without it being not our own. We live in a society dominated by self preservation and insecurity. Because of this, we are insecure about who we are as a person and are quick to judge others in order to feel validated. I know how hard it is to form your own opinions on someone, especially when your family has influenced you into viewing people in a certain way. We are led to believe as children that our parents opinion is the correct one, that we should view people the same way they do. However, the views of our parents do not have to define the way that we think as an adult. If we do not care to form our own view of a person, then we are quick to judge and blame. I believe this to be a very prevalent issue in our society today as we are very quick to judge someone or pass them off as a burden. 

The author develops the theme of realism through the idea that people are not their looks and that we cannot base our opinions on a person taking only into account their looks. The author uses the character of Bryce to demonstrate this idea in the novel. Most often the personality of a person does not live up to the expectations that we have set for them. An example in the novel that demonstrates this message well is when Chet, Bryce’s grandfather tells Juli while the two are gardening that there is more to Bryce than just his looks. “Get beyond his eyes and his smile and the sheen of his hair—look at what’s really there.” For all of the time that Juli has known Bryce she thought of him as being a great person, however, she never truly got to know him as he never gave her the chance, always avoided her. It’s in Juli’s nature to assume the best of people, this is why she always disregarded Bryce’s rude behaviour towards her “Until recently I’d have said with absolute certainty that he was greater – far greater than the sum of his parts.” And while this innocence can benefit you through the years of your childhood, all it does is bring you pain as you grow older. When told by Chet that “It’s that way with people too … only with people it’s sometimes that the whole is less than the sum of its parts” Juli realises that people are not their looks, and like Bryce, the personality that lies beneath the persona often does not match up to your expectations.  

Another instance in which this realistic theme is developed, is through Bryce’s view on his father. At one point in  the novel, Julie’s family is invited over for dinner at the Loski’s. Before they arrive, Bryce’s father talks bad about the Bakers, however, when they arrive he acts as if he thinks very well of them. Through witnessing how cruel of a person his father can be, Bryce is able to realise that his father is not the honorable man he once thought him to be and comes to the decision that he does not want to be “the spitting image of his father”. “The sad fact is, most people don’t look beneath the surface until it is too late”. Through the implication of this idea of looking beneath the surface, the author communicates how it is a mistake to judge someone without knowing who they really are. Without knowing the reasons why someone acts as they do or behaves in a certain way we are always led to believe that people are good, when in reality cruelty lurks beneath the surface. I have come to understand this through my own family. As a child I was always blindsighted by the persona that my family put on in social situations, always led to believe that they were perfect, caring, compassionate and understanding. Most of the time, people only let you see what they chose to show you, glimpses of who they really are, are shown at times of weakness. In reality, no family is perfect and sometimes the people that you trust the most can hurt you the worst. I can relate personally to Bryce’s experiences with his father as I, myself have had a difficult relationship with my own father over the vast majority of my life. “Mr Loski was clean and smooth on the outside, but there was a distinct whiff of something rotten buried just beneath the surface.” As children we look up to our parents, they are our role models, however, every person has had their struggles, pain and flaws that define them. When we are at an impressionable age, we are led to believe that our parents do not have these flaws, however, I have come to understand that when you finally realize that they, in fact, do, it can hurt deeply. When we realise this it can be easy to blame ourselves, go into denial or seek to change them. Having seen the cruel way that my family treats one another, I used to believe that they would one day be better. However, the reality is that I cannot change the way that my loved ones treat one another, they have chosen to be that way. People all have their own flaws and when we finally gain a glimpse at what lies beneath their persona, we can fairly judge them, instead of simply focusing on what we have always known. In reality, people are not their looks, or their persona, they are not simply who they have led you to believe they are, they are much more, the personality and flaws that lurk beneath the surface. 

Upon reading Flipped by Wendelin Van Draanen I have come to realize that “A painting is more than the sum of its parts”. This idea, when put into context illustrates the fact that there is far more depth to a person than what meets the eye. Juli’s father, when describing a painting comments on how “a cow by itself is just a cow, and the meadow by itself is just grass and flowers, and the sun peeking through the trees is just a beam of light, but put them all together and you’ve got magic”. When it comes to human beings, this idea still applies in the fact that a person’s looks are just their looks, they give no indication of who a person is and have no influence on their personality. A person is the sum of their parts, not the singular aspects such as appearance or behaviour. From the realism theme in this novel, I believe that the author is trying to warn readers not to base your opinions on others off the way that other people view them. To seek the true personality of a person before judging them, as well as show how we are not our families 

I believe the purpose of this text is to warn readers no to judge someone’s worth by their appearance. In society today we see a lot of people’s self worth being defined by their appearance or social status. We see a lot of people not being given the same opportunities to succeed because of their background or social status. People who are given success or popularity do not have to work as hard as others to achieve their aspirations in life, because they are deemed desirable or worthy. However, as can be seen through Bryce, when you give someone wealth and popularity, it only encourages arrogance and self centeredness, as they begin to think of themselves as being above others. In our society today, the divide between the rich and the poor is a very prevalent issue. The wealthy have only a limited perspective into how life really is due to their privilege, because they are quick to judge the poor. Those who have inherited wealth often presume that they have earned their status, praise and opportunity, they assume that this status in society is achievable for anyone. However, in reality it is not as people born into poorer families are not given the same opportunities to succeed. The poor and the rich have been given specific places in society, they have not earned them. No one chooses to live a life without wealth, just like Juli’s family has not chosen to live the way they do. Yet, the poor are trapped in the same circumstances for centuries, as they are not given the same opportunities. They are often passed off as being a certain way due to their appearance and are unfairly judged by others who have no knowledge of the ways that they suffer. This idea is depicted through the Loski family’s unfair judgement and treatment of the Bakers, due to their appearance as a family in general. 

The Garden Party

The Garden Party, a short story written by Katherine Mansfield depicts the reality of social classes, stereotypes and the privilege of the upper class. The story has an underlying theme of realism weaved into it that is illustrated through the way that an upper class family behaves in light of a death in the lower class. The short story begins by introducing a wealthy upper class family that is preparing for their garden party that day. The events are depicted through the main protagonist, Laura, who is a sensitive, sympathetic and idealistic character. Laura, although from an upper class family, often gets glimpses of suffering in the real world throughout this story, that makes her reevaluate the way that her family lives. However, these realisations are often combatted with comments from her family about the unwillingness of the upper class to make sacrifices for those who are ‘beneath’ them, which as a result cause Laura to feel conflicted about the way she lives and the unjustified stereotypes of the lower class. 

Mansfield introduces to the readers the character of Laura in order to demonstrate the privilege and naivety of the upper class in society. Laura, having had a privileged upbringing, is very sheltered in the way that she lives, however, she has experienced enough in her life to realize her own privilege, as can be seen by the way that she reacts to a death, in a manner unlike that of her family. The way that Laura reacts to poverty and death, as well as her ability to be easily swayed in the other direction by her family demonstrates how privilege can cause one to evade the reality of our world and retreat back into a life of comfort instead of addressing a guilty conscience. Upon hearing of a death in the poverty stricken area near her home, Laura says “…we can’t possibly have a garden-party with a man dead just outside the front gate.” However, due to her youthful and innocent nature, Laura is easily manipulated by her mother into ignoring her own conscience. “Stop the garden-party? My dear Laura, don’t be so absurd. Of course we can’t do anything of the kind. Nobody expects us to. Don’t be so extravagant.” From reading the story in Laura’s point of view, I believe her to be a sympathetic character, who is naturally concerned about the world around her, especially how people of her social status treat the lower class. Despite her sense of compassion for others, I think that she is also very ignorant and naive when it comes to the reality of the world around her and how her family is perceived by others. We see this a lot in society, with the upper class being completely oblivious to the struggles that the lower class deal with on a daily basis. While those with money will donate to charities or try to sympathize with the lower class, they do not completely understand what it is like to worry about money, bills and food, so can never truly empathize with them. I have seen this a lot in my own family, as a lot of them donate to charities and volunteer at homeless shelters. My grandmother, herself, has a lot of sympathy towards people who are poor, as she once was when she moved to America from Italy after WW2. I myself, can resonate with Laura, as I have grown up privileged with parents who support me and a comfortable lifestyle. Having seen the poor conditions that my grandmother and her brother had to grow up in, I feel very grateful for the life that I have and sympathetic towards her. However, I know that I can never truly understand what it was like, and while I can be sympathetic, I do not understand what it is like to worry about money. I think that the reaction Laura has to the workmen is very similar to what we see in society today. Having lived in a city near Los Angeles when I was younger, I have seen a lot of homeless people living in terrible conditions along freeways and begging outside of storefronts. Because of this, I always naturally assumed that they were bad people, whom I should never even look at. However, this is not the case, and oftentimes, they are not bad people, just have made bad decisions or grew up with bad role models that led them to their current situation. I think that we can be more sympathetic towards people who have to grow up in worse situations than us, but we also need to understand that we cannot empathize with them if we have not gone through the same thing. There is no point in pretending, like Laura does, that we understand what it is like to struggle with money, however, we have to be more accepting of others when they have not grown up the same way. 

I additionally believe that Mansfield is trying to show us the blind nature of stereotypes through the character of Laura and her reaction to the workmen. The Sheridan’s, at the beginning of the story appear to be very cold and distasteful towards the workmen who are putting up the marque. However, Laura’s realisation of how nice they truly are, demonstrates how believing in stereotypes makes one blind to the reality of people. “How very nice workmen were!”. If we learn to look beyond the stereotype of a person, we can learn that there is far more depth to a person than how rich or how poor they are, how they dress and who their family is. “It’s all the fault, she decided … of these absurd class distinctions.” I think that the way that we grow up dictates how we view people and the stereotypes that we believe in. “Laura’s upbringing made her wonder for a moment whether it was quite respectful of a workman to talk to her.” I think that in the case of Laura, her family has influenced her into thinking that the lower class are beneath them, are ‘scoundrels’ or ‘nasty’ and that she should not waste her time interacting with them. “I felt just like a work-girl” is what Laura says while thinking of these class distinctions. By saying this, she is putting herself into the same category as the workmen, breaking down this barrier between social classes and their defined stereotypes. For me, this line is very significant in proving how stereotypes are not the reality as it shows how Laura, although from the upper class can connect with the workmen by disregarding their stereotype of being lazy and uneducated. I think that ultimately, this idea of the blind nature of stereotypes is used by Mansfield to make us think about the unnecessary stereotypes that we judge someone from and how easy it is to overcome them if we get to know a person. 

Lastly, the young man who died in the village, is used by Mansfield to illustrate how the poor often have to make sacrifices for the rich and the death is a universal equaliser. The theme of realism is developed here as it shows how much injustice is done to the lower class, even though they are already treated so poorly. Mrs Sheridan’s reluctance to help after the death of the young man demonstrates just how much injustice is done to the lower class. Even though they have enough money to help, or the power to call off the garden party in order to be respectful, she believes that they do not expect her to. It is not about what people expect us to do, it is about what we chose to do. “People like that don’t expect sacrifices from us. And it’s not very sympathetic to spoil everyone’s enjoyment as you’re doing now”. I have noticed that there is a lot of injustice done to the lower class, even in modern-day society. For example, people who have to work two jobs to support their family are taxed more. People who are rich are able to evade being taxed, going to prison etc because of their access to money and connections. Whilst, those with less money are treated worse, not given the same opportunities to succeed. Oftentimes the poor have to sacrifice their own lives and happiness for the rich, as they have no other way. We see this through the way that generations of poor people are unable to go to university, succeed or get a good job because those in their family that came before them experienced the same thing. I additionally think that the death of this young man is used by Mansfield to demonstrate how death can act as a catalyst for someone to evaluate the way that they think. This is illustrated through the way that Laura reacts to seeing the dead man’s body. Here, death causes Laura to reevaluate her life, her values and what she deems important. “What did garden-parties and baskets and lace frocks matter to him?”. Through this, she understands that life is not about wealth, or garden-parties or new hats, that death is answerable to no one and that her life is frivolous and sheltered. I believe that the ultimate message proved here is that the upper class cannot avoid the realities of life with extravagance and expenses, as well as that death does not answer to social class distinctions. 

Upon reading, “The Garden Party” by Katherine Mansfield, my knowledge of this divide between the upper and lower classes has been strengthened. I have learned that the upper class is not always completely clueless about the harsh reality that those who are poverty-stricken have to live in, however, they cannot ever empathize if they have not gone through the same thing. I also believe that the author is trying to tell us that we should not succumb to stereotypes and try to look beneath the surface of a person before judging them. From ‘boys will be boys’ to ‘dumb blondes’ we all face stereotypes everyday. They are embedded into our minds from what we see on television and what people have told us. We all have multiple identities, it seems, because of the stereotypes placed upon us by society. However, we should not judge people based on their stereotype, is what I believe Mansfield, is ultimately trying to tell us. I also think that she warns us not to be naive when it comes to our own privilege and to realise that others have it much worse than us. 

While I myself have not dealt with the struggles of class divides, I do recognise my own privilege in that I have parents who are able to financially support me and the lifestyle that I live. I think that in 1922 when Katherine Mansfield wrote this short story, there was a more stark divide between the social classes. In the story, this is conveyed through the way that Laura and her brother Laurie were warned not to go into the slums because of the “revolting language and of what they might catch”. However, in the modern-day, we are now taught to not judge people based on their wealth, but rather their character. While there definitely is still a divide between wealth and poverty, we are now much more self-aware of our own privilege and many people who are in a position of power will try to help out those who are not so fortunate through things such as charities and financial aid.

My final thoughts on this short story is that it gives a larger perspective into two ways of life and how they cannot ever completely see eye to eye. The Sheridans are of the upper class and the Scotts are poverty-stricken and while they may try to fathom or sympathise the issues that each-other face, they can never truly understand the viewpoints of one another and remain ignorant to the true reality of each other’s lifestyles. Themes of realism are the underlying foundation of this novel and their subtle placement in very mundane activities such as talking to workmen or throwing a garden party communicate a very important message about the reality behind social classes and the ignorance of human beings about each other in regards to stereotypes. 

The Yellow Wallpaper

The Yellow Wallpaper, a short story written by Charlotte Perkins Gilman uses a theme of realism to illustrate the reality behind our fears and how we, as human beings can become them if we begin to overthink. As well as this, the author implies messages about the domestic life many women are confined to and how the structure of our society in regards to family, medicine and tradition can trap people and prevent self expression. The story begins by introducing the narrator, an unnamed woman, as well as her husband John and his sister, Jennie. The events of ‘The Yellow Wallpaper’ take place in a rented house, where the characters are to be living for the next three months. It becomes predominant in the beginning of the novel that the narrator has underlying mental health issues that concern her husband. John, concerned for his wife’s wellbeing, begins to restrict the narrator’s access to certain activities, from taking a walk outdoors, to working and finally confining her to the room with the yellow wallpaper. Out of boredom and lack of engagement with the outside world, the narrator begins to obsess about the patterns in the wallpaper, trying to find deeper meaning in an inanimate object. The story illustrates the descent of human beings from depression into psychosis, when the mind is forced into inactivity as well as how the mind can deteriorate when plagued with the anxiety and depression that comes from being confined to live a certain way. 

This descent of the mind into a state of psychosis is first presented through the setting in which the story takes place. The narrator is forced by her husband to spend three months in a secluded house, as a ‘rest cure’, which is a form of medical treatment where the brain is forced into inactivity. In the nursery, where the narrator spends the majority of her time is a wall covered in yellow wallpaper. Lacking any social interaction and deprived of all her interests including writing and reading, the narrator begins to fixate upon the yellow wallpaper, each day her mind becoming more fascinated with the intricacies of the pattern. Each day, more patterns emerge that she did not see before, until one day she begins to think she is seeing a woman hidden within the patterns. At first she feels fear, but begins to feel more connected to the design of the yellow wallpaper as her husband continues to confine her. “But in the places where it isn’t faded and where the sun is just so – I can see a strange, provoking, formless sort of figure, that seems to skulk about behind that silly and conspicuous front design”. The narrator’s descent into insanity is part of Gilmans critique of the atrocities that come from male restrictions placed upon women. Here, insanity is the narrator’s only possible mode of escape from the constraints of her husband. Forced to accept that she is unwell, the narrator is plagued with hysteria and nervous depression, which she reacts to by descending into a state of psychosis.

I believe that Gilman is trying to warn of the dangers that can happen when a person is confined to living in a way set out by another as well as illustrate what can happen to the mind when it begins to deteriorate as a result of this. When we force a person to accept their diagnosis, they believe that is the one thing that defines them, they begin to lose themselves, let their mind deteriorate, to where the only thing they are defined by is their illness. In the story this is illustrated through the way that the narrator becomes the very person that she fears the most, her illness. Gilman uses the narrator’s discovery of the ‘woman’ in the wallpaper to represent the transition from a person when they literally become their illness. At the beginning of the story, the narrator fears the woman in the wallpaper. “It is like a woman stooping down and creeping behind that pattern. I don’t like it a bit – I wish John would take me away from her”. The fear of the narrator is an illustration of the fear experienced by those with illnesses that affect their mental state. Like the narrator, they fear both the illness itself, and the person that they can become because of it. As a result, they try to escape it, as demonstrated by the narrator’s attempt to get John to take her away from the wallpaper. However, this fear will eventually develop into obsession, and obsession will eventually cause you to become the thing that you originally feared the most. “But now I am used to it. The only thing I can think of that is like is the colour of the paper! A yellow smell”. The narrator, once scared of her condition and the woman in the wallpaper, believes that she has literally ‘become the woman in the wallpaper’, and quickly loses touch with reality. 

I am able to relate to this on a personal level having seen my great Uncle with Parkinson’s Disease deteriorate into someone whose only defining trait, was their illness. In 2017, my great Uncle was diagnosed with parkinsons, which is a progressive nervous system disorder that causes memory loss and affects vital brain functions. This disease develops very slowly, however, upon being diagnosed, my uncle allowed this to define who he was, and once we believe something about ourselves, we begin to become the thing that we are otherwise scared of becoming. He was scared of losing his family and being a burden, however, as his mind began to deteriorate and he sank into an abyss of self-pity, he began to abuse his illness and family, and became the very person that he feared the most. Just as the narrator in this story feared the person that she may become, my great uncle feared how his illness would come to define him. The result of this is that they both became the very thing that they feared the most, illustrating how obsession can cause deterioration. 

Another message in the theme of realism that I believe is presented by the author is the suppression of women’s rights in 1892 as well as in the modern day. This idea is presented through the narrator’s character. We are told the story from the point of view of a nameless narrator, we only know who she is because of her relationship with men described in the story such as her husband, John. The very notion that we never come to know her name represents the toxic nature of women in abusive marriages. She is treated as if she is John’s property, as shown through her ‘rest cure’ treatment, which does not take into account her concerns, but rather focuses on the opinion of her husband. However, due to her fears of what John may do to her if she were to not obey him, she conforms to his ideals and does not question his motives. I believe that John recognises that she will never leave, as he slowly begins to restrict her access to the outside world, until she is forced to sleep for most of the day, engages in limited social interactions and is not allowed to pursue her own interests. “The fact is I am getting a little afraid of John.” The narrator’s eventual fight against her husband is depicted through the ripping of this wallpaper. She believes that it represents her own suppression, and does not want to go back to the confinement of her husband. “I’ve pulled off most of the paper, so you can’t put me back!”. The narrator comes to realise her own suppression and begins to feel overwhelmed by the increasing restrictions put in place by John. In response to this, she desperately tries to rip the wallpaper off the wall, for she does not want to see it anymore, representing the struggles by women for equal rights and the fight against patriarchy. 

I believe that this idea is also presented through the woman hidden beneath the wallpaper. The woman in the wallpaper is both a metaphor for the suppression of women and self expression in toxic marriages. She is literally and figuratively trapped beneath this yellow wallpaper, beneath a series of patterns and illusions that draw the mind away from what is actually beneath it. She is unable to ‘escape’ representing the long history of patriarchal suppression in our society that is still prevalent today. “The faint figure behind seemed to shake the pattern, just as if she wanted to get out.”. When the narrator spends days describing the new patterns that she discovers each day, we can see that these patterns that cover the ‘woman’ hidden beneath the wallpaper, are used to conceal her from the eyes of viewers. The fact that she is ‘concealed’ means that she is being hidden from view, just as the suppression of women’s rights was exempt from judgement due to it being deemed ‘traditional’ or a ‘necessary’ part of society. I also noticed that John is unable to see this woman hidden beneath the wallpaper, all he sees is the overlapping patterns, nothing more.The fact that John thinks of the wallpaper as nothing more than an ugly pattern, shows how he does not truly understand the impacts of his suppression of the narrator. In society, this is shown through the way that back in 1892, men did not realise what they were doing was wrong, as the suppression of women had been a part of society for centuries. They did not question what they were doing, just as John does not question his treatment towards his wife. However, the fact that he did not understand the true impact of what he was doing, does not make his behaviour justifiable, which is why I believe Gilman is commenting on the suppression of women in this way. “I don’t like to LOOK out the windows even – there are so many of those creeping women, and they creep so fast”. All of these women are the countless women forced to confine to the lifestyle that their husband deems ‘appropriate’ for them. However, as shown through the creeping, patriarchal suppression cannot last forever, all of these women cannot be ‘hidden’ beneath the wallpaper, for there will come a day where they choose to escape. Gilman’s, the yellow wallpaper, was written in 1892, in a time where women were forced into marriages, not for love, but rather for the gain of wealth and social status for the families of both parties. Whilst, this is not commonly the case in our society today, women are still forced to remain in toxic marriages because they feel obliged to commit to their partner. Although, women have far more rights than the women in 1892 did, there are still issues regarding gender inequality today, such as the pay gap and arranged marriages that are very prevalent and affect millions of people worldwide. There is a social pressure that I have observed through my own parents divorce of staying loyal and that there is a stigma in leaving your partner that is not often addressed. Because of this, women such as my own mother feel obliged to stay in an abusive relationship, because they are scared of what their partner may do to them if they leave. This, as a result creates a controlling environment, where the husband knows that the wife will never leave, or vice versa. This is represented through the way that the narrator is scared of her husband, and how he becomes more controlling as the story progresses. Having gained this insight into toxic marriages at such a young age, I am lucky enough to be able to recognise unhealthy relationships in both my family and friends. I have seen many people who I grew up with become involved in an abusive relationship, where one person fears the other and ultimately lets them control their every action countless times. Because of my own experiences, I believe that this short story should be read by young girls so that they are able to recognize when a relationship becomes abusive. 

I believe Gilman’s ‘The Yellow Wallpaper’ to be a very thought provoking and influential story. Although, it is a small story, it is very powerful, showing the terrible effects of the suppression of women’s rights as well as the deterioration of one’s mind when forced into a state of inactivity because of this. The circumstances of the narrator, including her being forced to confine to her husband’s ideals slowly led to the deterioration of the narrator’s mind into a state of psychosis. Gilman illustrates here, through the character of the narrator, the woman beneath the wallpaper and the setting of which she is confined to, how the repression of feelings and the pressure to conform to another’s ideas, can lead to them self deteriorating.

Upon reading Gilman’s ‘The Yellow Wallpaper’, I believe that the author is commenting on the unfair treatment and suppression of women and the terrible effects that it can cause on the mind. I believe that she is warning us of what can happen to one’s mind when they are suppressed and lack self expression. This idea, to me, is most prominently depicted through the treatment of the narrator by her husband. Her mind, already plagued by anxiety and depression deteriorates and preys on itself, when it is forced into inactivity and ‘rest’. This form of treatment, issued by her husband is based on an idea that her condition is due to her feminine nature, and passes her off as an object of treatment. Here, it seems to me as if John treats her as his possession, taking full control over everything that she is able to do. In society, during Gilman’s time, women, like the narrator, were very limited on what they were allowed to do by their husbands. I think that the narrator reveals some very fundamental truths about women in society. Even though women were regarded as being more than objects in the 1800s, many had aspirations that went beyond being a homemaker such as working a job or receiving a higher education. However, as depicted through the treatment of the narrator, these women’s aspirations came at a cost, with their humanity being eradicated and being deemed mentally unstable. I think that Gilman ultimately shows us through the story that in this patriarchal society, no one can escape the gender roles placed upon them. While it is vastly different from today’s society, as females are allowed to work and fulfill other roles in society, many people still feel obligated to confine themselves to gender roles, with the male working and the female looking after the children. 

I believe that Gilman depicts these warnings of patriarchal oppression very well through her writing, in a very provoking way through the narrator’s slow descent into insanity due to suppression. From reading this story, my first response to people is to not assume that all marriages are perfect. I think that from this, I can understand that there is always going to be troubles in relationships, that it is never going to be perfect. I think that we have the idea of the ‘perfect’ relationship in our heads, however, we should not expect this from people as ‘perfect’ can never be attained, regardless of what aspect of our lives we strive to achieve it in. I also believe that we should never feel obligated to fulfill a role based on our gender and never let go of our aspirations just because we feel we have to because of our gender. Just because you are a female does not mean that you need to be a homemaker, nor give up your job to look after children. 

An ideal family 

An ideal family, a short story written by Katherine Mansfield exposes the reality behind the facade that people put on in order to feel accepted by society and draws attention to the fact that when human beings spend their life in pursuit of wealth, they miss out on the many experiences that life has to offer. The story begins by introducing Mr Neave, the character whose point of view the story will be told through. The narrator, Mr Neave is a successful businessman who is reluctant to leave his life’s work to his son, Harold as it is the only source of his true identity. Having worked for so many years, accumulating wealth to give his family the life they wanted, he prides himself on his sense of determination and commitment, however, begins to feel tired and weary as the effects of his facade begin to catch up with him. His wife, Charlotte and daughters beg him to retire, but we come to understand that they do not know the true extent that he worked to provide them with a comfortable life. The story ends by Mr Neave describing how he no longer recognises the people that his daughters have become, and realises that he has wasted away all of his life and never got the chance to watch his family grow up. The regret that Mr Neave feels towards how he has chosen to spend his remaining years, demonstrates the necessity for human beings to build meaningful connections with their family and friends instead of in the pursuit of wealth, and is used by Mansfield to show the effect that that a facade can have on a person, when they chose to cover up who they are for the pleasure of other people. Mansfield’s ‘An ideal family’ 

Mr Neave as a character himself is used to demonstrate this idea of false facades and their effect on a person, in a human context. “He hadn’t the heart to stand this gaiety and bright movement any longer; it confused him”. In the world today, we are very quick to put up a facade, to make us seem ‘ideal’ to others, or perfect in a sense. “You’re an ideal family, sir, an ideal family. It’s like something someone reads about or sees on stage.” The reality is that nobody or no family is perfect. As we can see, Mr Neave is putting up this false pretence to create an illusion that he has an ‘ideal family’. However, beneath the facade lies an unhappy man and naive children. Because they are seen as desirable in the eyes of others, people are likely to only judge this family by their successes such as “the townhouse and the seaside bungalow, and their horses, and their golf, and the sixty-guinea gramophone in the music room for them to dance to.” Because naivety lies in our human nature, we do not often take into account the failures or the darkness that a person has, even when it is evident and the facade begins to slip away. I think that the use of the quotation “It’s like something someone reads about or sees on stage” is used to highlight by the author the fictional nature of this family. Just as something you would read about or see on stage is fictional, cleverly crafted by a writer to appeal to an audience, so is Mr Neave and his family. They are an illusion, a facade to seem desirable, to make others envious, to obtain social status. However, all this does is bring Mr Neave misery when it begins to slip away.

I believe that we all used to think that our own and other people’s families were perfect when we were younger. When we are so young, we lack the life experiences that tell us otherwise. This is because our parents hide from us, the dark parts to our family in order to preserve our sense of innocence. However, when we do finally realise, it can come as quite a shock to what we have come to know. When I was younger, I used to believe that my family was perfect, that everyone was loving and sweet. When I look back on that time through photos, where I was still so innocent, I was truly happy, for my entire family ‘appeared’ to me as being loving and kind. Just last week, I was looking through an old photo book from my childhood, and began to reminisce of those days when I was able to fully trust my family, for they seemed to be perfect in my eyes. However, I have come to realise that when we grow older, our family loses their grip on that ‘facade’ that they put on for us when we are children. It is no longer needed, as we are old enough to understand that every family, and every individual person has their own flaws, that no person is truly perfect. In society, I believe that when we are in the public eye, as we all are, that we feel a need to put on this facade for others, in order to feel accepted or desirable. It’s in our human nature to be insecure of our flaws. However, just like Mr Neave, when our facade begins to slip away and we become tired of always pretending to be perfect, we can end up disappointing ourselves and others, for we have come to know ourselves being the person that this ‘facade’ depicts. 

Another instance where characters are used to portray this theme of realism, is through the naivety of Charlotte, Mr Neave’s wife as well as his own daughters. I believe that Mansfield uses these specific characters, Charlotte, Ethel, Marion, Lola as well as Harold to demonstrate the naivety of the upper class to their own privilege and the amount of work involved in gaining wealth and social status. Upon reading this story, I believe that Mr Neave’s family does not appreciate him. Despite providing them with a very comfortable lifestyle, they do not appear to have any sort of understanding or appreciation for all they have been given. It appears to me as if they do not understand that they live as they do, due to their father’s hard work at his career, suggesting that he retire and let Harold take over the family business. “Here’s this huge house and garden. Surely you could be happy in appreciating it for a change. Or you could take up some hobby.” However, what the girls fail to understand is that they may not live as comfortably if he were to retire, as it is clear that Harold has no idea of what it is like to work hard for appraisal. I get the sense that Lola specifically does not understand the practicalities of life when she suggests this, as the entire family is reliant on him working in order to continue living the comfortable lifestyle they are so accustomed to. Due to having been given wealth, social status and a comfortable lifestyle, Mr Neave’s family has never had to work hard for what they want, have never had the responsibility of supporting an entire family lying on their shoulders. “Where would Lola and her sisters and Charlotte be if he’d gone in for hobbies, he’d like to know? Hobbies couldn’t pay for the town house and the seaside bungalow, and their horses, and their golf, and the sixty room for them to dance to.” I believe that we often do not stop and think about all that our families have provided us with, without them, life as we know it would be a lot different. I think that upon reading this, I have a lot more appreciation for how hard my parents have worked to provide for me. Everything that they buy me, the food that they put on the table at night is a result of their own hard work and dedication. Thinking about the amount of work that it requires for someone to provide their family with a comfortable lifestyle, I think that I can be more appreciative for what I have, instead of contemplating what I could have had.

Another character that I think develops this message throughout the story is Mr Neave’s son, Harold. “Ah, Harold was too handsome, too handsome by far; that had been the trouble all along. No man had a right to such eyes, such lashes, an mother, his sisters, and the servants, it was not too much to say they made a young god of him; they worshipped Harold, they forgave him everything.” I believe that Mansfield uses the character of Harold to demonstrate how looks do not determine our ability to succeed, nor should they ever. Harold is worshipped by everyone, however, he is described as being lazy and unable to work hard. Having no understanding of the necessity to work hard when you have nothing, Mr Neave believes that Harold is unable to provide the same work ethic that he has put into his company. “A man had either to put his whole heart and soul into it, or it went all to pieces before his eyes…” I believe that through the use of Harold as a character, Mansfield comments on the ability of those whose worth is defined by their looks to achieve the same amount of appraisal as someone who has worked for it. We see this to be very prevalent in our society today, as people who are defined by their looks are treated differently. The majority of the time, those who have a more attractive physical appearance are treated with higher regard. This is shown through everyone’s belief in Harold to uphold the same success as Mr Neave. However, in the long run this only holds temporary as treatment and belief in a person will change according to their personality. I believe that Mansfield is trying to tell us here that when we are not blinded by someone’s looks we can see them for who they are as a person and not the facade that they have created in order to deter people from their true personality and ability. 

Mansfield lastly uses these characters to portray the reality behind the pursuit of wealth instead of building meaningful relationships and its dominating presence in our society today and in the past. Having spent most of his life in pursuit of wealth, so that he can provide the ‘perfect’ life for his family, Mr Neave has never been able to witness the growth of his daughters and wife as people. When he comes to realise this, he feels regret, and I believe that he has come to understand that money has no meaning when you have no one to enjoy it with. While he has been able to provide his family with a comfortable and lavish lifestyle, he no longer recognises who they are as people, only remembers the way that they were as little girls. I believe that is realisation of Mr Neave, is used to highlight the fact that the pursuit of wealth will ultimately prove meaningless. “What had all this to do with him and Charlotte, the girls and Harold—what did he know about them? They were strangers to him. Life had passed him by. Charlotte was not his wife. His wife!”. For me, it seems that despite the outwardly appearance to others, Mr Neave and his family live a life very different from what is deemed ‘ideal’. Not only does he not recognise one of his daughters, but he seems to forget what he is being taken care of by a servant, Charles instead of his own family. By using Mr Neave’s realisation of having not witnessed the growth of his family, it seems to me as if Mansfield is suggesting that family life is not as ‘ideal’ as the outwardly appearance that Mr Neave puts on for others. 

Having a father like Mr Neave, who was always in the pursuit of wealth, I understand what this is like to have a parent that does not truly know who you are. Always working and fixated on other projects, my father was unable to see my brother and I grow up as people. As a consequence of this, he no longer knows who we are, what our interests are, just assumes that we are still the same people that we were as young children. However, I believe that he regrets wasting his time, just as Mr Neave has and wishes to have spent his time building more meaningful relationships with his children. Our society is built on the basis that we must work to provide, to live and to be successful. Sadly this will never change, as the only way for us to survive in the modern world is by money, which we can only gain through work. We have this idea that the more money we have, the more comfortable we are, and the happier we become. However, in a sense this is true, as with money we are able to provide for ourselves and others, however, without people to share it with, money does not bring us happiness. The problem is that this pursuit of wealth is time consuming and we will spend most of our lives working because of it. With more time spent working, there is less time to build meaningful relationships with those around us. And because of this, when we finally achieve the money that we desire, we have not had the time to build relationships with people, with whom we can share it with. So when we finally reach our goals when it comes to finance, we realise that we have wasted our lives away, as we are less happy than we were to begin with. 

As well as this, when we dedicate our entire lives to work, we lose the relationships that we had already built, just as Mr Neave did. He had a family and wife with whom he was very close with to begin with. However, the pressures put upon him by society, to provide his family with the perfect life, ultimately led to him losing these relationships and as a result, he no longer recognises the people who his family has become. They are now completely different people from when they were younger, but he never got to witness this development from adolescence to adulthood, having spent his entire life in the office. 

I believe that Mansfield uses these ideas around realism in our society to convey a message to readers that meaningful relationships are more important than wealth, as well as that no individual person is perfect. That looks do not define our ability to succeed, as well as that we need to have more appreciation for the things that our families provide us. Through the use of characters, I believe that Mansfield conveys these realistic ideas with an underlying sense of realism that we can all relate to. We have all experienced that realisation that our families are nor perfect, we all have that family member that everyone deems perfect simply because of their appearance and in many families we are extremely lucky to have a comfortable lifestyle that our parents have provided for us. 

In addition to this, I think that I have learned through this story, that no matter how perfect a family or a person seems, in reality they are not. I think that we can all learn to not pass someone’s struggles off as being petty because they are deemed ‘perfect’ or ‘ideal’, because we all have our own flaws that define us, sometimes we just try very hard to not let others see them. I have certainly learnt not to judge people so quickly and to understand that everyone puts up a facade so that they can fit in with our society, that this is normal, but it is not who the person really is.