The story of an hour 英文鉴赏

AFeministPerspectiveThe story The Story of an Hour, written by Kate Chopin is a short but powerful story. The ending of the story of an hour halts sharply, without much space between the climax and the ending. The ending reveals the themes of the short story, epitomizes the writing techniques the writer used, reinforces the plot and the ironic relationship between characters, makes the elementheart disease a clue throughout the whole story, and leaves us readers much margin to think about such as the nature of the protagonist. The story begins with two nonperson subject sentences. “Knowing that Mrs. Mallard was afflicted with a heart trouble, great care was taken to break to her as gentle as possible the news of her husbands death.” This tells us the situation with Mrs. Mallard: troubled with heart disease, fragile, unable to bear any shock and carefully protected. The protection is restriction as well. In the first sentence the narrator revealed Mrs. Mallards heart trouble. And there are several repetitions of the disease in whole story. The second place is “Josephine was kneeling before the closed door with her lips to the keyhole, imploring for admission. Louise, open the door! I beg; open the door-you will make yourself ill. What are you doing, Louise? For heavens sake open the door.” The third place is “Go away. I am not making myself ill. No; she was drinking in a very elixir of life through that open door.” The fourth is “She breathed a quick prayer that life might be long. It was only yesterday she had thought with a shudder that life might be long.” The fifth is in the ending “when the doctor came they said she had died of heart disease-of joy that kills.” The first revelation is at the very beginning of the story. The last one is at the end. Mrs. Mallards heart trouble is an important clue that goes though the whole article. Its the center of the story. But these are not simply repetition. The point of view and the way of presenting are different. The first place is narrated from the limited omniscient point of view and centers on how people regard the disease and how will they treat her. The second quotation is from the perspective of Mrs. Mallards sisters and shows her concern. The third and the fourth are from the protagonist herself. The third one is stated through dialogue and the fourth contains a compare showing Mrs. Mallards attitude toward life before and after the news. The repressed marriage makes her life wearing on rather slowly and she does not want to live a long life with this condition. But the news brings her hope and imagination. Each repetition carries with it some other related information which enriches the plot of the story.“He had only taken the time to assure himself of its truth by a second telegram, and had hastened to forestall any less careful, less friend in bearing the sad message.” Richard is Mr. Mallards friend. He knew about the disease and he is also the one trying to protect Mrs. Mallard. His hastiness is because of the disease. These two are closely related. In a hasty he came to tell the bad message. That why the mistake was made. He was not even sure of the husbands death. This chain of events-Richard came back hastily, they happened to tell Mrs. Mallard before they saw the body and it was only an hour before her husband came back-might be coincident. This hastiness makes the reappearance of the husband possible and reasonable. In the end the doctors said Mrs. Mallard died of joy that kills. But actually it is not hard to think that the reason for her death is not joy but sorrow that kills. She was shocked to see her husband came back. In the shattering disappointment and sorrow the heart disease as repeated previously killed her. She was very joyful when she carried herself out of the room, like a goddess of victory. But no one knows. There is a conflict between Mrs. Mallard and society. All they knew were she had heart disease and she supposed to be sad at the news of her husbands death. But no one thought it weird that she did not die of sadness but joy. They guessed the reason according to the traditional moral principles and from the perspective of man. While the reader know whats happening. But the characters in the story dont. The ending seems to be reasonable but actually is a fallacy. This presents us a dramatic irony, sharpening the surprise ending and lending us a lot to think. The end of the story leaves us enough margins to think about why is Mrs. Mallard so happy at her husbands death? and so sad at his return? Is she really a vile woman that curses her husband to die? If the answer is affirmative, what makes her so cold-blooded? Does the couple really love each other? Mrs. Mallard lived superficially a happy life in other peoples eyes according to the conventional and secular criteria. Her husband was gentle. When the door opened, “it was Brently Mallard who entered, a little travel-stained, composedly carrying his gripsack and umbrella.” This was the only direct description of Mr. Mallard. He should be a considerate gentleman. Mrs. Mallard had “two powerless white slender hands”, so she did not have to work very hard to live. She is not impoverished in material life, but her ego is swamped in the then patriarchal society. She is not equally treated as man. “And yet she had loved him-sometimes. Often she had not. What did it matter! What could love, the unsolved mystery, count for in face of this possession of self-assertion which she suddenly recognized as the strongest impulse of her being.” This sentence answers the question whether she loves her husband or not. She loved him to some degree. But compared with freedom and self-assertion, love does not count for much. She is deep inside inhibited. She lived a two-facet life. But she is not vile or cruel, becau