Literary Analysis

In Sherwood Anderson’s “Hands,” the reader is treated to an example of minimalist writing that uses imagery and symbolism to help convey the meaning of the story. We learn that the main character, Wing Biddlebaum, has supposedly inappropriately touched the boys he teaches and is now suffering the consequences. Anderson’s effective use of imagery and symbolism seems to clearly demonstrate that Wing’s actions were sinful and he now has feelings of guilt for doing something wrong.

The most prevalent image in this story is Wing’s hands. They are constantly in motion. His hands are described as “little,” “nervous,” and “restless” (Anderson 16-17). Wing rubs them together often (in anticipation?) and is very expressive with his hands when talking. He gets his name from the image of the beating of the wings of an imprisoned bird, and Wing, like the bird, is imprisoned in a way. Because of his sin, Wing has placed himself in a situation that prevents him from socializing much with others, and more importantly, prevents him from continuing in the journey of life towards happiness and Heaven. His hands are described as having slender fingers, giving us a feminine picture of Wing, and telling us what his sexual preference may be. The boy, George Willard, describes the hands as “strange and hidden away” and the town of Winesburg sees them as “grotesque” (Anderson 16-17). These descriptions do not conjure an image of a typical male hero, so it is up to the reader to determine if these are the hands of a tragic figure or the hands of someone full of guilt, someone who has committed sin.

The images given in the detailed setting help us make this determination. Wing’s house is near the edge of a ravine surrounded by a field that had been seeded for clover, but instead produced yellow mustard weeds (Anderson 16). If Wing is a sinner, then the ravine which he lives so close to can be seen as hell. Through his actions, Wing has brought himself closer to hell, and while he hasn’t yet made the plunge down the ravine, his surroundings would indicate that he has not made any improvements by changing his thoughts or behavior either. We don’t know if Wing seeded the field for clover or not, but if the clover had grown in the field, we may feel that Wing has turned over a new leaf and is trying to change his thoughts and behavior. At the very least, we would believe him to be lucky and able to escape the ravine/hell.

Rather, we are told the field produces a dense crop of yellow mustard weeds. The weeds show that Wing is still living in a sinful state and he has not left himself any room for change (not a single clover exists, just a dense crop of weeds). I believe mustard weeds were specifically chosen for their yellow color and are symbolic of his lack of courage to change. Wing’s actions support this, as he is always nervous and frantic. He goes out and stands on the fence, looking down the road for George, and then hurries back to his house, frightened, a coward.

On the other side of the field is the public highway, which is symbolic of the journey of life already mentioned. The people of the town are making this journey down the highway, but Wing usually stays near his house, and when he does stray from his house, he quickly returns. Because Wing has not truly repented and changed, he is stuck near the ravine and cannot continue on the journey of life.

As Wing looks out towards the public highway, we are shown a boy and maiden from the berry wagon [who] are obviously flirting (Anderson 16). This is to show us and Wing how things are meant to be: boy/girl and man/woman, not man/boy. At the same time, the departing sun, symbolic of Wing’s happiness, Heaven, and the end of the journey, is obscured by the kicked up dust, symbolic of his sin.

In the flashback to the time when Wing was the schoolteacher known as Adolf Myers, we are given multiple descriptions of how Wing (for he is Wing Biddlebaum, not Adolf Myers) would stroke the shoulders and touch the hair of the boys he was teaching (Anderson 18). These images tell any parent that something inappropriate is going on, whether the parent is of today, 1919, or of the 1800’s (as demonstrated by the mob that attacks Wing).

Another theory is that Wing is misunderstood and is a tragic figure. His hands are constantly, nervously moving because he believes it was his hands that got him into trouble before. Anyone can understand that being punished without knowing the reason why may result in feelings of nervousness and insecurity.

It may also be argued that the ravine represents Wing’s own unhappiness and depression. The planted seeds of clover may be his talent for teaching that has been choked off by the yellow mustard weeds because he hasn’t used this talent for 20 years. The yellow in the weeds may still represent his cowardice, but this feeling comes not from guilt because he has sinned, but from insecurity because he did something wrong with his hands, though he doesn’t know what.

The picture made from the dream that Wing gives to George depicts an old man (Wing) sitting beneath a tree in a garden, talking to the young men who have gathered to hear him. The young men are described as clean-limbed, and some even arrive on horses (Anderson 17). Many would say that this is how Wing sees himself, or even how George sees Wing. The old man is a teacher and his students have come to have their minds set free. In the flashback, we have similar images of Wing with the boys until dusk, and once again, the boys begin to dream and their minds are freed from doubt and disbelief. Finally, we see Wing specifically tell George, “You must try to forget all you have learned,” and, “You must begin to dream” (Anderson 18). While some may argue Wing is being an inspiring teacher, I believe Wing is using tactics similar to many other predators who have preyed on others by convincing them to forget what they know and to set themselves free by opening their minds. We see this same tactic used in other stories, such as in The Phantom of the Opera, when the Phantom sings to Christine, for example (Webber).

It is the images given in the final paragraph of the story that set in concrete the fact that Wing is a sinner and feels guilt because of his thoughts and actions. We are reminded of the images in the setting: we are at Wing’s house near the ravine/hell, the sun has departed (Wing’s chance at Heaven is gone), and the road is obscured in shadow (Wing’s sin, preventing him from moving on in the journey of life). In the dark, Wing’s hands are quiet, meaning the temptation is gone for now, as George did not come. Finally, we see Wing kneeling and looking like a priest, picking up the breadcrumbs, and appearing like a devotee going through the rosary (Anderson 19). Without the temptation, Wing hungers for the bread of life and appears here in a repentant posture. He has sinned, he knows he has sinned, and he is asking for forgiveness now that the temptation has been removed from him.

Unfortunately, we know Wing hasn’t really changed. Tomorrow morning, there will still be no clover, the sun will once again be obscured by dust, the house will still be next to the ravine, and Wing’s hands will be active and restless, anticipating, once again, the arrival of the boy George.

Webber, Andrew Lloyd. “The Music of the Night.” The Phantom of the Opera.

Flannery O’Connor presents a lot of evidence to the reader that foreshadows the surprising events that later occur in “A Good Man Is Hard to Find.” Much of the evidence is shown through character attitude, opinions, verbal irony, setting, and symbolism. It is the task of the reader to connect all the clues and interpret what may happen in the end. However, with the amount and magnitude of clues in “A Good Man Is Hard to Find” I found that I did not have to struggle to guess how the story would end.

In the opening sentence of the story, we gloomily learn that the grandmother does not want to visit Florida. Although we do not know why, the very fact that she does not want to go hints that there may be a very significant reason. We are informed that the grandmother has the intention of visiting her home state of Tennessee. Bickering and complaining every chance she can, she attempts to persuade the family to visit a state that will more closely represent her true essence, a location that she feels more comfortable in, a safe, homey, southern state.

The grandmother is the most influential character in the story. Her family does not pay much attention to her, but I can’t help but notice that she seems to be calling the shots. She complains non-stop, and although it may seem that the children do not respect their grandmother, they also do not notice that she influences them greatly.

The family is on a road trip to an unknown destination. We know that Florida is the intended vacation spot, but the grandmother tries using whatever technique she can to persuade the family otherwise. She bluntly points out that a criminal, who calls himself The Misfit, has escaped from jail with the prospect of heading toward Florida. Stating that she wouldn’t take her children in any direction with a criminal on the loose, she implies that it would be wrong to visit Florida. This line is a pivotal foreshadowing moment because we fully understand that the grandmother has no intention of visiting Florida, and uses the supposed path of an escaped criminal to sway the opinion of her son, Bailey, from driving there. This conversation foreshadows the irony of the decision to stay away from Florida, the supposed destination of The Misfit. Little does the grandmother know that the choices she makes will eventually lead the family to trouble.

The grandmother is presented as a vain person. She cares greatly about her appearance and dresses very nicely. We are told that she does this, in part, on a road trip so that if they were to have an accident anyone who saw her dead would be able to tell she was a lady. The vanity that she possesses foreshadows the end events even more so. We begin to wonder if an accident may in fact occur.

As the family drives on, they move through an old plantation. The grandmother, once again, states something that acts as foreshadowing evidence. She oddly points out an old family burial ground on a plantation. I found it interesting that she distinctly mentions there being a graveyard when they, being the family, eventually decide to travel to an old plantation home. The sense of death begins to approach the story line slightly.

The most important conversation in the story that alludes to a shady event is the conversation the grandmother has with Red Sam at the restaurant. They began to talk of old times and reflect on the past. Red Sam explains that it is difficult to know who to trust nowadays. The matter of trust flows gently through the story, but at this point the reader questions who can and can’t be trusted. With the title of the story and The Misfit still in mind, we can only guess what will happen next.

The grandmother excites the children with wonder of an old house and buried treasure that she visited when she was a young lady. She mentions that specific attraction because she believes that they are near the home and desperately wants to persuade the family to travel there. The children, who have hinted to the fact that they appreciate money, want to visit the home on their vacation and try their luck at finding the riches. At this point, the story takes a drastic twist.

With the family all in a fuss, the father stops the car and proclaims that he will not drive any further if everyone does not quiet down. The persuasive grandmother quietly murmurs that it would be very educational for the children to see the old plantation home. Explaining to Bailey that he has just missed the turnoff and must go back and turn into the previous side road, the dangerous portion of their journey begins.

The road they enter does not look like it has been traveled in a long time. This should have hinted to them to turn back. The grandmother tells Bailey to keep driving up the road, for it is not much farther. At that moment, she conveniently remembers that the plantation home is in fact located in Tennessee, not Georgia! Also at this time they have a car accident, rendering them helpless and stranded. This is not a good scenario with The Misfit on the loose, as the reader must realize by now.

After the accident, the mother hopes that a car will come along and help them. Sure enough, they soon see a car approaching slowly, with three men in it. It turns out that all of the foreshadowing was in fact correct. The grandmother inadvertently led herself and her family to a death trap in Georgia. The predicament that they are now in can only grow worse.

I believe that it was O’Connor’s intention to use a massive amount of foreshadowing in this story to assist the reader in the understanding of the ironic ending. All of the clues and evidence that were presented in the short story caused me to evaluate what I was reading and wonder what would happen next. I enjoyed the fact that she used creative foreshadowing techniques to move the story along. I felt it made a great story even more captivating and interesting.

The grandmother was the motivation behind the events in the story. I find it very ironic that the family never listened to the grandmother, but still seemed to do everything she said. As strange as all of the twisted events in the story are, they all worked together to create an interesting and unusual account of an American family lead to death by an ironically forgetful grandmother. The story is not predictable, but if you notice the hints and reflect on the clues, you should be able to draw a reasonable conclusion from the foreshadowed evidence.

What was life like in the 1960’s? It was far different than life today. One of the most pronounced aspects of life then that seems so different from life today, and is distinctive of that era, is women’s lives -- the things they were expected to do, the way they were expected to act and dress, and how they were treated. In John Updike’s short story, “A & P,” the character Sammy’s description of and attitude towards the various women who visit the store where he works is a fascinating illustration of how women were viewed during the 1960’s. Sammy’s attitude, perhaps demonstrative of the general attitude of the era, is made clear through the somewhat derogatory nature of the descriptions.

For most people of my generation, myself in particular, there’s a distinctive picture that comes to mind when we think about life for women around 1960. We occasionally see some traits in our grandmothers and other elderly matriarchs, but mostly we only have the stereotypical picture presented in vintage films and television programs. Women then were generally less educated than those of today, so for most of them, the only career option they had was homemaking. They, I have found, were expected to be Barbie-doll-like wives and girlfriends who were model homemakers in frilly-edged aprons and patent leather high-heels. Sammy perhaps saw this in his own mother and other women in his life, so he didn’t expect much more from a girl than possibly a knack for housekeeping and good looks. Consistently, most of his thoughts regarding the women in the story involve their outward appearance. I find that quite annoying. Is a girl nothing more than her looks?

Sammy’s description of the lady whose groceries he is ringing up at the beginning of the story comes across as really quite nasty. “She’s one of those cash-register-watchers, a witch about fifty with rouge on her cheekbones and no eyebrows, and I know it made her day to trip me up,” says Sammy (Updike 922). It seems to be a sign of closed-mindedness on Sammy’s part to comment so rudely about this lady customer. He must know what her station in life probably entails because his mother has just such a station. He even alludes to this when he mentions that the white shirt he is wearing was ironed by his mother the night before (Updike 927). In 1960, women still had definite roles in life. In a household, they were exclusively expected to do the cooking, laundry, cleaning, and shopping, unless they were ill or totally unable. The lady at the beginning of the story is probably no exception. Sammy himself says that “she’d been watching cash registers for fifty years” (Updike 923). Imagine having to do the shopping for so many years! I’m sure it must become very monotonous. In addition to saving herself money (something every good housekeeper zealously strives to do), keeping a close watch on her cashier might be one way this lady has found to make her errand more palatable. Sammy’s ungracious depiction of her might stem partly from his youthful impudence, but I think it also has to do with the general attitude during that era of taking these housewives for granted. They were expected, even demanded to do what they did, and I think they were not given the level of respect that they deserved.

Another example of the housewives of the era and how they were viewed is the group of shoppers circulating through the A & P, referred to as “the sheep” by Sammy (Updike 924). “The sheep pushing their carts down the aisle–the girls were walking against the usual traffic . . . – were pretty hilarious,” says Sammy (Updike 924). It seems that, by likening them to sheep, Sammy considers them exploited and unintelligent. When people are called sheep, it usually means that they are considered weak, timid, biddable, and even stupid. It may be that they act dull and timid, but I find it somewhat unfair of Sammy to call them “sheep.” I think this group of shoppers is an interesting portrayal of the more conservative, middle-aged and elderly generation of that era. They have a definite pattern that they always follow, unspoken laws that everyone abides by; they are the “usual traffic.” Like the lady at the beginning, they have probably been doing the daily shopping for many years. Sammy goes on to say that the sight of the three girls in bathing suits shocks the shoppers, and that he bets “you could set off dynamite in an A & P and the people would by and large keep reaching and checking oatmeal off their list and muttering . . . But there was no doubt, this jiggled them” (Updike 924). It’s really fascinating that they would not have been surprised by dynamite, but three girls in bathing suits shock, even scandalize them. I imagine that they would consider dynamite a respectable, correct type of shocking event, but girls in bathing suits walking through a grocery store a very disreputable type of shocking event. They strike me as being very proper, intent on maintaining their integrity and pride, and conscious of what they consider right and wrong.

Later on, Sammy more specifically refers to the “houseslaves in pin curlers” (Updike 924). There’s a nostalgic feeling of “small town 1960” when you conjure up the image of these people in their pin curlers, probably always coming to this store and always traversing its aisles in the same way. And yet, there’s something savage and nostalgia-shattering about the term “houseslaves.” It’s surprisingly insightful that Sammy calls them “houseslaves” because that’s sort of what they were. For once, I have to agree with Sammy’s comment. Back in those years there was definitely more work to do. Just looking at it from the food angle, the work required back then for meal preparation was much greater than it is now. The selection of pre-cooked foods and instant packaged items was more limited and generally expensive (like most new innovations that haven’t quite caught on yet), so most housewives cooked entire meals from raw materials and home-canned foods. This takes a lot of time and effort. Also, there were no microwaves. Dishwashers had barely begun to appear in households. I can only imagine the amount of extra work that most women had. In Louisa May Alcott’s words, “Housekeeping ain’t no joke!” It was much less of a joke then than it is now. Sadly, I would have to agree that “houseslaves” are indeed what most home-making women in 1960 were.

The three girls in bathing suits represent a completely different group of women in the 1960’s. Perhaps the three girls were trying to break loose from the entanglements of society that demanded them to be submissive and to always follow the rules. Perhaps they were trying to overcome their feelings of suppression and define themselves in a new way. Whatever they were consciously or unconsciously trying to do, Sammy’s attitude toward them seems to be nothing more than that of an enamored teenager influenced by the sentiments of his era. I find some of his comments downright offensive. His true colors fly high in his descriptions of and judgments about them. By the way he describes and talks about them, it’s as if he considers them fluff-brained dolls that consist of nothing more than their outer shells. That might be the way most teenage girls were viewed in 1960. Sammy comments degradingly about girls’ minds when he asks, “Do you really think it’s a mind in there or just a little buzz like a bee in a glass jar?” (Updike 923). He never learns their names, but he gradually gives them nicknames based entirely on their appearance: “Queenie, Plaid, and Big Tall Goony Goony” (Updike 926). A characteristic of his that I find quite inappropriate and demeaning are his references to Plaid’s hind quarters: “a sweet, broad, soft-looking can with those two crescents of white just under it” (Updike 922). Even with Queenie, the one with whom he appears to be most enthralled, his infatuation seems to be mostly with outward appearance. Once again, is there nothing more to a girl than just her looks?

In Updike’s story, I see a depiction of how women were treated and what they were considered to be around 1960. Whether or not it truly is accurate, looking at it from my perspective, having been born and having grown up in only the last quarter of the last century, it seems that society treated women unfairly. Why were the housewives commented on in such a degrading way? Why were the girls looked upon as nothing more than pretty, brainless dolls? Perhaps Updike was trying to convey Sammy’s youthful impertinence, his nineteen-year-old train of thought. But I think that it was more than just his age; Sammy was influenced by the mentality of the era-- the general attitude of under-appreciation for what women could do and be.

In my opinion, women should not be put down or try to put others down in order to lift themselves up. I think that on all sides there should be acceptance, appreciation for everyone’s contributions and abilities, and respect for all, regardless of gender. I don’t see that kind of courteous coexistence in John Updike’s story, and it saddens me. Thank goodness that the scenario he portrays is in the past, where it most assuredly should be. With even mild consideration of others on everyone’s part, the future can be a bright one.

The realism of “A & P” is well presented. In his play-by-play account, Updike includes enough detail to allow the reader to draw some subtle conclusions about the characters and what motivates them. There seem to be forces acting on the characters in “A & P,” influences from superiors, and also from society appear to be at work. However, the most obvious force to me is peer pressure. It affects us all in some way, and seems to be clearly presented in the story. This force appears to affect several characters. From Sammy, the main character, to what he calls “the sheep” (924), Updike uses atmosphere, connotation, setting, and style to communicate motivation.

We’ve all experienced peer pressure at one time or another. Children and young people use peer pressure extensively to achieve their ends. The phrase “Aw, c’mon!” is a classic example of peer pressure. Most of the time, however, the pressure is non-verbal and somewhat imaginary. It’s something more often sensed than communicated.

In “A & P,” the first characters to seemingly exhibit peer pressure are the three girls that enter the supermarket. Through his imagery, Updike makes it appear that the girl Sammy calls Queenie is responsible for the other two girls’ involvement. This seems to be made clear when Sammy says, “She kind of led them, the other two peeking around and making their shoulders round” (Updike 923). When Sammy describes how they walk, saying, “they shuffled out of sight” (925), Updike seems to be portraying the girls as uneasy. Sammy appears to give his own analysis of the girl’s demeanor when he states, “you got the idea she [Queenie] had talked the other two into coming in here with her” (Updike 923). Somehow, these two seem compelled, though reluctantly, to participate. It appears as though Queenie has dared them to come with her.

Through these descriptions, Updike seems to be carefully leading the reader to the conclusion that the girls are trying to do something radical. As I read, I do not have the impression that these girls are careless out-of-towners, to whom entering a supermarket in a bathing suit might be perfectly normal. Instead, they seem to be locals who are trying to act normal, but appear, nonetheless, uncomfortable. This also seems to support my theory that the girls have talked themselves into doing what they are doing.

This is often the case. Kids dare each other to do something that they probably would not do, if they were on their own. We even talk ourselves into things that might not be entirely practical. I think this happens at the end of the story when Sammy says, “I quit” (Updike 926). It seems he says this because he wants to be a hero to the girls. Yet, even when he knows that the girls are gone, and that inside himself he doesn’t really want to quit his job, he still follows through. I think it is peer pressure that drives him to do this. He is probably afraid of what Stokesie or his other friends will think if he wimps out. Sometimes, when a person takes a stand in an effort to exert his/her personality, imagined ridicule prevents them from listening to their own better judgment.

Peer pressure is not limited to children, as I think Updike clearly shows in the character of Lengel. Sammy mentions that Lengel “teaches Sunday school and the rest” (Updike 925), which might distinguish him as an ethical and prominent citizen. Lengel appears to be a man with a good reputation to look after. When the girls come into the store, Lengel is not present, so he is probably shocked to find these half naked girls in the store he manages. Lengel clearly seems to have strong beliefs about what is decent and what is indecent. These are probably a result of the era in which he lives. The late fifties and early sixties were pretty traditional times, especially in a small town; there were things that were kosher and things that were not kosher. I don’t think Lengel is worried about the girls causing trouble or scaring away customers, but rather, he is probably worried about what other people will think of him if they see or hear about the incident.

Lengel probably has so many little rules and regulations by which he lives his life, that he has become respected for it, or so he thinks. I also think Lengel believes that any departure from these rules would be viewed by the public as moral degradation. He probably wants a perfect store; thus, he has made policies. These, however, require enforcing. I think this is why he stays in his office all day. At Lengel’s first appearance, Sammy notes “Lengel comes in … and is about to scuttle into that door marked MANAGER behind which he hides all day” (Updike 925). This way, he can’t blame himself if anything goes wrong because he wasn’t there. He could never hope to enforce all his policies, so being the perfectionist I think he is, he leaves it to his employees.

When Lengel sees the girls, I think his little fantasy is destroyed and he realizes that these sorts of things may be happening all the time. I believe the sight of the girls is a kind of awakening for him. He is most likely worried about what his peers will think, and maybe what they already know and think based on previous incidences he is unaware of. He may think his good reputation is already hanging in the balance. It is probably very embarrassing for Lengel to realize that he has slackened on the job, according to his own standards. This is, I believe, what causes him to say, “It was they [the girls] who were embarrassing us” (Updike 926).

Lengel may believe one of his inadequacies has been exposed. When Sammy quits, Lengel might be relieved to have the chance to recover, and be an upstanding, respectable mentor. Updike might be indicating this when Sammy says, “Lengel sighs and begins to look very patient and old and gray” (927). The dilemma with the girls caused Lengel some embarrassment. The issue with Sammy is possibly something on which he feels justified in urging his view. I don’t think Lengel wants Sammy to quit, but he is probably grateful for the chance to demonstrate to all bystanders that he is the one who is being wronged. I believe Lengel thinks he has recovered his good reputation.

The cases of pressure applied by peers, superiors, and society are, I believe, well incorporated into “A & P.” The peer pressure seems to manifest itself clearly in the characters of Sammy, the girls, and even Lengel. The pressure of superiors seems to be most noticeable when Lengel says, “Sammy, you don’t want to do this to your Mom and Dad” (Updike 927). Lengel seems to be trying to use the influence of the parents to prevent Sammy from quitting. The societal pressure is, I think, best exhibited by the shoppers in the supermarket. Sammy calls them “sheep” (Updike 924). Why does he do this? I think it's because, like sheep, people tend to go with the flow. They subconsciously feel that there is safety in numbers. It's human nature -- most people, despite their dreams of fame, don’t want to be conspicuous. The pressures applied by peers, superiors, and society affect us all, both positively and negatively.

If we don’t guard against peer pressure, we might become like the girls in the store. We will find ourselves bounced around from situation to situation as though we are in a pinball machine, never knowing where we will end up next. I think the message of this story is clear. It’s not a good idea to allow peer pressure to push us beyond our comfort zones or inhibit us from achieving our goals. It is important to keep our goals from being compromised by the whimsical "shoulds" of our peers, superiors, society, or even ourselves.