Short Stories

Oral Reproduction of Stories II Dr. Mehdi Nowruzi

[Type the abstract of the document here. The abstract is typically a short summary of the contents of the document. Type the abstract of the document here. The abstract is typically a short summary of the contents of the document.]

Gathered by: Mojgan Fathzadeh

UNIT 27: ALL THE YEARS OF HER LIFE Morely Callaghan "All the years of her life" was a short story about the love a mother had for her son. The son did not appreciate his mother until the night his actions caused her emotional collapse, as he realized the depth of her affection. As the story began, Sam Carr, the owner of a drugstore, asked his young employee, Alfred Higgins, if there might be some items in his pockets. Alfred immediately sensed that something is wrong. Mr. Carr claimed that Alfred Had taken two tubes of toothpaste, a compact and a lipstick, but Alfred denied stealing anything. Mr. Carr persisted in his calm tone, and eventually Alfred showed the stolen items and put them on the counter. Mr. Carr called Alfred's mother and explained the unfortunate situation for her. They waited in the quiet darkness of the store for Alfred's mother to arrive. Finally, Mrs. Higgins arrived. She bore an elegant composure in spite of the circumstances. She placed her hand on Mr. Carr's arm and asked what his intentions were. Mr. Carr had planned to phone the police, but Mrs. Higgins calmly requested Mr. Carr to choose advice instead of punishment. Mr. Carr who was impressed by the calm manner of Alfred's mother, relented and did not call the police and let Alfred go home with her. He and Mrs. Higgins parted as if they had been good friends. At home, Mrs. Higgins chastised Alfred for his bad behavior and sent him to bed with a warning not to mention the incident to his father. In his bedroom, Alfred could hear the sounds of his mother making tea in the

kitchen and he walked quietly toward her and was stopped by what he saw. His mother trembled as she tried to pour the hot water for tea she was so distressed. Her face was old and tired and so different from the brave countenance she displayed just a short while ago in Mr. Carr's store. Alfred now understood what his mother had endured and he saw all the years of her life reflected in her trembling hands. Point of view: limited omniscient. Theme: unconditional motherly love Characters: Alfred, Mrs. Higgins, Sam Carr Mrs. Higgins character: she is a clever woman. She displays a mother's devotion to her son and used her wiles to get her son out of troubles. She offers an unconditional motherly love. In the kitchen, it is clear that she is under great strain. She seems to be at a breaking point. It must have taken a huge amount of effort for her to control her emotion at the Mr. Carr's store. She seems to have two sides of personality. At the store she is calm, friendly and devoted to his son but once she and Alfred get in the car the cracks in her strong personality start to show and weakness becomes apparent. Mr. Sam Carr character: he was a shrewd man. Not easily fooled. He possessed some patience. He does not explode in anger at Alfred but remain polite. Climax: the moments the Mrs. Higgins attempts by changing her personality to save Alfred from jail.

UNIT 29: THE DOLL'S HOUSE Katherine Mansfield The Doll’s House was a story about the cruelty of children towards each other. Three middle-class girls of the Burnell family, Isabel, Kezia and Lottie, were given a beautiful doll’s house as a present by Mrs. Hay. The house was minutely described, with especial emphasis on a lamp inside of it. Everybody liked the house except Aunt Beryl because she could not stand the smell of the paint. Kezia liked the small lamp best. The next morning they could not wait to show it off to their school friends. Isabel, bossily, said she would be the one to decide who was allowed to come and see the house as she was the eldest. She boasted about their new doll's house and all the girls crowded around her and flattered her. But there were two sisters from a very poor family, the Kelveys, whom they despised and laughed at; they would not let them saw the doll’s house. The Kelveys' mother was only a washerwoman and their father was in prison. The parents of the other children told them not to talk with the Kelveys because they were lower class people. After showing the house to all of her school friends, Kezia pursued to show the house to the Kelvey girls. She asked her mother if the Kelveys were allowed to see the house, but her mother only said "Certainly not". Despite her mother's unjustified demands she invited them to come into their yard to see the doll's house. But before they could have a good view of the house, they were shooed out as if they were chickens by Aunt Beryl.

They were drawn in the purity of the light as Kezia. Point of view: dramatic or objective. Narrator just describes what was happening in the stories. None of the characters' thought had mentioned. Theme: class discrimination (blind faiths). The school was portrayed as a melting pot of all social classes, and the Kelveys as the lowest. The other children were discouraged from talking to them; they were outcasts. Major Characters: Kezia. Conflict: conflict is between Kezia's treats toward the Kelveys in comparison to other characters. Kezia offers an opposition to common ways of thinking. As the two children admire the red carpet, red plush chairs and gold frames of the house, Kezia takes an interest in the simple lamp. While others blindly follow the class consciousness, Kezia was against conformity when she invites the Kelveys to see the doll's house. She doesn’t see anything wrong in being friend with Kelveys. Metaphor: the appreciation of the lamp is a metaphor. Kezia and the Kelveys are drawn in the purity of the light to battle and ignore things based on blind faith.

UNIT 30: THE TELL-TALE HEART Edgar Allan Poe Plot Summary: "The Tell-Tale Heart" is a first-person narrative of an unnamed narrator who insists he is sane but suffering from a disease which causes "overacuteness of the senses." The old man with whom he lives has a clouded, pale, blue "vulture-like" eye which so distresses the narrator that he plots to murder the old man. The narrator insists that his careful precision in committing the murder shows that he cannot possibly be insane. For seven nights, the narrator opens the door of the old man's room, a process which takes him a full hour. However, the old man's vulture eye is always closed, making it impossible to do the deed. On the eighth night, the old man awakens and sits up in his bed. The narrator does not draw back and, after some time, decides to open his lantern. A single ray of light shines out and lands precisely on the old man's eye, revealing that it is wide open. Thinking he hears the old man's heartbeat beating unusually loudly from terror, the narrator decides to strike, smothering the old man with his own bed. The narrator proceeds to chop up the body and conceal the pieces under the floorboards. The narrator makes certain to hide all signs of the crime. Even so, the old man's scream during the night causes a neighbor to call the police. The narrator invites the three officers to look around, confident that they will not find any evidence of the murder. The narrator brings chairs for them and they sit in the old man's room, right on the very spot where the body was concealed, yet they suspect nothing, as the narrator has a pleasant and easy manner about him. The narrator, however, begins to hear a faint noise. As the noise grows louder, the narrator comes to the conclusion that it is the heartbeat of the old man coming from under the floorboards. The sound increases, though the officers seem to pay

no attention to it. Shocked by the constant beating of the heart and a feeling that the officers must be aware of the sound, the narrator confesses to killing the old man and tells them to tear up the floorboards to reveal the body. Point of view: a first-person narrative of an unnamed narrator Theme: exposing the dark side of humankind Major character: is an unnamed narrator. Since he tells the story in first-person, the reader cannot determine how much of what he says is true; thus, he is an unreliable narrator. Setting: the story is physically set in the home that the narrator shares with the old man, mainly in the old man's bedroom. It is also set in the narrator's twisted mind. Questions: Why does the narrator only talk about one of the old man's eye? One of the old man eyes is blind. What is the relationship between the narrator and the old man? The relationship is unclear. The narrator may be a servant of the old man's or his son. In that case, the "vulture" eye of the old man is symbolizing parental surveillance and possibly the paternal principles of right and wrong. What does show that the narrator is really mad? The narrator seems too anxious to prove that he is not mad which might indicate that he is. Secondly, anyone who would go to the trouble to take an entire hour to stick his head inside a door must be mad. How does the narrator defend his sanity? He is trying to prove that he is sane by talking about careful precision he processes to commit the murder.

UNIT 31: MIRIAM Truman Capote Mrs. H. T. Miller was a widow who lived alone in a small apartment near the East River in New York City. She dressed simply and wore no makeup. She spent her days cleaning her apartment, fixing her own meals, tending her canary, and smoking an occasional cigarette. One evening, she decided to go to the movies. While waiting in line at the box office, she became aware of a thin little girl standing nearby. Mrs. Miller was struck by the girl's old-fashioned clothes and her silverwhite hair. She introduced herself as Miriam. It was also Mrs. Miller's first name. The girl handed her some money and asked her to buy a ticket for her. When Mrs. Miller asked where Miriam's mother was, Miriam evaded the question. This was the first introduction Mrs. Miller had to the character that eventually consumed her thoughts and interrupted her lonely life. Miriam came to Mrs. Miller's house a few days later, late at night. Mrs. Miller was frightened and confused when she heard the doorbell ring; naturally, she was not expecting anyone. Miriam told Mrs. Miller she was hungry and asked for cake and candied cherries. Frightened by Miriam's gall, and suspicious as to how Miriam knew where she lived, Mrs. Miller begged her to leave and asked her to not come again. The next day, however, Mrs. Miller found herself buying the cake and cherries Miriam had wanted. For the first time in a long while, Mrs. Miller felt happy, though she was not quite sure why. Miriam once again came to visit Mrs. Miller. She was pleased to see

that Mrs. Miller bought the foods she requested. She insisted on staying there. As Mrs. Miller was scared of her, she asked her neighbor to help her to get rid of Miriam. When her neighbor went to her flat, he found nobody there. Mrs. Miler returned to her apartment and went to be bed to rest. Once she got to sleep, she heard Miriam’s voice again saying hello to her. Point of view: limited omniscient. Theme: loneliness (lack of human relationships) Major character: Mrs. H. T. Miller Conflict: Mrs. Miller has internal conflict. She, hardly touching others, tends to withdraw herself into her shell. For her the city is an enormous space and she feels only its threat. But there is another Mrs. Miller who is longing for freedom and possibilities hidden in space; she is Miriam. Questions: Who is Miriam? Miriam is a second self of Mrs. Miller. Discuss psychological condition of Mrs. Miller? She has a mental disorder. She escapes from the passionless reality. There are two scenes that describe the threat of space, explain them? Mrs. Miller goes to the movie, "leaving one light burning in the foyer: It is obvious that she is afraid of infinite space, darkness. Another scene is a snowy landscape before Miriam's visit. Snow causes a kind of madness to her, she cannot tell the day. Thus it is interesting that the threat of space is described by means of using two opposite colors, black and white. What's behind Mrs. Miller's 'unaccountable purchases'? The old woman is naturally attracted to the little girl somewhere in her heart. She goes around the shops, purchasing some things, roses, cherry, and almond cakes, which Miriam requested before her third visit. It is clear that she is unconsciously waiting for Miriam because she is lonely and is looking forward to seeing her.

UNIT 32: THE INTERLOPERS H. H. Munro (Saki) Plot summary: Ulrich von Gradwitz owned some forestlands on the eastern hills of the Carpathians mount. His family and Georg Znaeym, the neighboring petty landowner family, had had quarrel with each other for three generations for a narrow strip of worthless woodland. While the courts ruled in the Gradwitz family's favour, the Znaeym family had never accepted this ruling. Ulrich had guarded this piece of land more than any other parts of his land. At a winter night, Ulrich gathered a group of foresters to patrol the land in search of Georg. Separated from his men, he hoped to meet Georg alone and, when he stepped around a tree trunk, he got his wish. Each had a rifle in his hand and detested the other. Then the wind broke a beech three which fell on them. They were both seriously injured. While they were waiting for their men to come and help them, they decided to forgive and forget the quarrel and became intimate friends. But no one came to save them. Instead the wolves entered the scene to kill them. Point of view: third-person omniscient, meaning the narrator sees and knows all. Theme: Enmity and willingness to commit violence. Major character: Ulrich von Gradwitz and Georg Znaeym. Conflict: there are three conflicts in this story: man vs. nature, man vs. man and man vs. himself. There is an external conflict between Ulrich and George (man vs. man conflict) but the main conflict in this story is Ulrich and Goerg's conflict with nature. They regard one another as an interloper. Yet, they do not realize that they are the true interlopers in the wolves' wilderness, until they face death. And when Ulrich and George try to change their manner toward each other to diminish the feud we have a conflict of man vs. himself. Irony: Irony is expecting one thing to happen but the opposite occurs. Ironies in

this story: -

Enemies become friends (we didn’t expect this in the beginning)

-

The wolves at the end of the story.

Climax: The wolves entering the scene to kill the men. Questions: In what way does the title of the story contribute to its meaning? The two men regard one another as an interloper. Yet, they do not realize until they face death that they are the true interlopers in the wolves' wilderness. Why is this narrow strip of woodland so jealously guarded by the Gradwitz family? Because of a long-standing feud. What is poaching? (Stealing) How does it contribute to the story? The Znaeyms poached from the Gradwitz. What personal factors keep this feud going? The hatred of the two heads of the families. Why do these men not shoot each other when they come face to face? They find it difficult to kill in cold blood. Why do they think they will be rescued by their men? Their men are following them. Who makes the first overture of friendship? Explain what this is, and how it is received? Ulrich offers wine and is rejected. How is their feud resolved, as they lie pinned beneath the trees? They decide to end their feud. Why is each man hoping that his men will be first to arrive? So he can be the one to announce the end of the feud. What happens when they both call out together? They alert the wolves who come running.

UNIT 33: FORBIDDEN FRIES Giovanni Guareschi "Forbidden Fries" was a story of an Italian family who were struggling with some changes in their lifestyle. The father of the family was suffering from ailments in his stomach that were causing him trouble in his work. After trying every known remedy he could think of, he had finally come to the realization that when he ate fried foods his stomach got terribly upset and affected his abilities to work on Mondays. In response to his ailments he asked his family to help him reorganize the house and change their eating habits for Mondays. For six days of the week everybody was allowed to behave as they wished, but Monday belonged to the father. He needed absolute tranquility and adequate suitable food. His son, Albertino and his daughter Pasionaria seemed ok with the plan, however, his wife, Margherita, seemed to dislike this idea as she was constantly finding excuses to continue cooking the way she was accustomed. She was clearly having problems adjusting to the request not to fry on Mondays. So the father came up with a plan, he would not say anything about the frying of dinner for the next Monday, but would instead just order food from the local restaurant. This infuriated his wife who then undertook a series of responses to his solution, which included, cooking nothing, ordering out herself for the whole family (she called it taking a vacation from cooking). But on the sixth Monday she even ordered fried foods from the restaurant. She thought they needed a change once in a while. After the seventh Monday, the father realized that he was not able to change any of them, and that it was better to let life move in its natural direction.

UNIT 35: MY OEDIPUS COMPLEX Frank O'connor "My Oedipus Complex" was a story about five years old boy, Larry, who grew up in his own safe world with just himself and his mother. He was attached to his mother and wanted her to belong only to him. However, when his father returned from World War I, a man whom Larry hardly knew, it was a constant battle between the two for the mother's love and attention. Larry could not tolerate his father's presence at home. He considered his father a rival. He became upset, irritable and jealous. At one point, he even blamed God for brining his father back home. He whished God would create another war and take away his father. Larry was a creative and imaginative boy. He gave his legs names Mrs. Right and Mrs. Left and invented dramatic situations for them in which they discussed the problems of the day. They discussed what mother and he should do during the day and what presents Santa Claus should give a fellow for Christmas. Several times in the story, Larry often mentioned that his family was the only one on the terrace without a baby. Larry's mother complained that the baby would cost seventeen and six and that they couldn’t afford it. However, once the father returned home he got his wish. But Larry was not happy with the arrival of little Sonny. Sonny changed the interaction between the whole family. Larry found his father in his bed to escape the crying of Sonny. Now it was not only Larry who was second best in her mother's book but also Larry's father. Point of view: First person. Conflict: There is a constant battle between Larry and his father for the mother's

love and attention. Major character: Larry Questions: What's the significant tie of the title to the story? Larry represents Oedipus. Oedipus complex is a bizarre theory that Sigmund Freud created. According to Freud, all young males experience a sexual desire toward their mother but in fear of their father, hide this desire. Why does Larry associate his father to Santa Claus? Because his father is mysterious character who comes and goes unnoticed. What are things which Larry enjoyed before his father's arrival? He enjoys things like teatime and staring out the attic window.

UNIT 37: QUALITY John Galsworthy The story took place in London, West End. It was about two German brothers named Gessler. They made fine quality boots in two small shops which were adjoined. The two shops were like a "church" and it meant a lot to them. The elder brother had great industry, devoted to his work. He spent such an incredible amount of time preparing the shoes, in order to make them as perfect as possible. For him, boot making was an art and the leather was "the soul" of him. His dedication was shown through the fact that, he made only what was ordered, never taking ready-made shoes down from the shelf. He wanted each pair of boots to be fit to each individual and for every pair he made, he used a pattern taken from the customer's foot size. But new larger firms, with deceptive advertisements, caused the Gessler brothers to lose business gradually. The Gessler brothers were forced to give up part of their shop to a big business. This did not faze them, and they continued to make their boots for the same price and the same amount of painstaking work. A short time after sacrificing half of their shop, the elder brother passed away. The younger brother, however, continued to make the quality boots and refused to give up boot making as an art until he slowly passed away from starvation. The large firms took over and changed the name of the shop. At the end we can conclude that although quality is always admirable, it is often not enough to produce success. It is the pragmatist who often adapts to the changing needs of the customer, not the idealist.

Point of view: First person Theme: Although quality is always admirable but it is often not enough to produce success. It is only pragmatists who can be success, not the idealist because they adapt to the customer's changing needs. Conflict: There are internal conflicts if the Gessler brothers should give up their ideal? Should they compromise and make boots the way the big firm are doing? Should they continue making quality boots? Climax: the climax starts when the elder brother dies and the younger starts suffering. Symbolism: the author uses many symbolisms in this fiction such as "the church" to show how the two shops have a big value to the Gesslers. And the word "the soul" instead of the leather to show also that it is connected to them by their souls. Gessler's character: he is a perfectionist: -

He understands that to attain the highest quality one must make sacrifices.

-

He considers his craft an art. It gives him personal satisfaction to sell a pair of boots that fit his customer well and last for many years.

-

He believed that larger firms don't care about the customer. The shoes that large firms make are more fashionable than comfortable.

-

He personify his boots and referring to them as if they are animate.

-

The boots are his children and the purpose of his existence.

-

He lives and works at the same place, this also shows his devotion.

Logic of the moral: It is better to spend considerable time on an item of merchandise, perfecting it, than it is to work quickly and get cheap results.

UNIT 39: HOW MUCH LAND DOES A MAN NEED Leo Tolstoy The story "How Much Land Does a Man Need" was about a peasant named Pahom, who at the beginning complaining that he did not own enough land to satisfy him. A landlady in the village decided to sell her estate, and the peasants of the village bought as much of that land as they could. Pahom purchased some land too, and by working on the land was able to repay his debts and lived a more comfortable life. However, Pahom then became very possessive of his land, and this got him into discord with his neighbors. He began to impose fines on people who brought their animals onto his land and ruined his crops. People were very angry with him. Some people began to leave the commune. Pahom was content to stay until he heard from a stranger that the land was great were people were moving. So Pahom went to check things out, liked what he saw, and moved. Here, he could grow even more crops and amass a small fortune, but he had to grow the crops on rented land, which irritated him. Finally, he was introduced to the Bashkirs, and was told they were simple-minded people who owned a huge amount of land. Thus, he went to them to take as much of their land for as low a price as he could negotiate. Their offer was very unusual: for a sum of one thousand rubles, Pahom could walk around as large an area as he wanted, starting at daybreak, marking his route with a spade along the way. If he reached his starting point by sunset that day, the entire area of land would be his. He was delighted as he believed that he could cover a great distance.

His journey across the land illustrated his greediness. He tried to cover as much land as possible, not content with what he already had. As the sun nearly sat, he realized his error and ran back as fast as he could to the waiting Bashkirs. He finally arrived at the starting point just as the sun sat. The Bashkirs cheered his good fortune, but exhausted from the run, he dropped dead. They buried him in an ordinary grave only six feet long, Point of view: Omniscient. Theme: this story represents the greed that many people have and the outcome of that greed. The devil here is greed itself. Irony: at the end of story the narrator says that they bury him in an ordinary grave only six feet long, thus ironically answering the question posed in the title of the story.

UNIT 40: THE KITE W. Somerset Maugham Prison visitor Ned Preston was directed by the governor of the prison to meet with a new prisoner, Herbert Sunbury, who had been imprisoned for his refusal to support his wife after she destroyed his kite. Ned found Herbert an affable but stubborn young man and, curious, returned to the governor who told him Herbert's story: Years earlier, Samuel and Beatrice Sunbury presented their young son Herbert with a kite that soon became an obsession for the boy. Samuel also became addicted to kite flying and as Herbert grew into adulthood, father and son took to designing and flying kites on the commons every weekend. When Herbert began dating pretty Betty Baker, his mother repeatedly attempted to break up the relationship, but Herbert assured his mother that he would always remain close to his parents. Nevertheless, when Herbert announced his engagement to Betty, his mother insisted that if the marriage proceeded, she would forbid Herbert access to the super kite that he recently designed with his parents' financial support. Herbert nevertheless married Betty and gave up flying kites for a short time. Soon, however, Herbert's longing returned and he joined his parents back on the common for their weekly kite flying. Later at home, Betty scolded Herbert for his childish hobby and neglected of her, but Herbert announced his determination to resume his hobby. Over the next few weeks, Betty grew anxious over the time Herbert spent on kites and insisted that he gave it up once and for all. When Herbert refused, Betty demanded that he left the house. Herbert angrily returned home, declaring to his mother that he would never forgive Betty. Samuel

reminded Herbert that he was obliged to support Betty and his son agreed despite his mother's strong opposition. A few days later, Betty met Herbert to apologize and ask him to return home, but he refused. On the following day he went to the shed where they kept the super kite which they were working on. In a minute he rushed back, he was horrified to find the kite in shreds and angrily accused Betty. She admitted to destroying the kite, Herbert vowed never to give her a penny again. Theme: I think the theme is about learning to live with and accept a person's calling in life. The son's calling, his passion, was kite flying and his wife, I think, wanted his passions focused on her. In the end, she decided it was best to share the son's passion rather than lose it entirely. It is almost impossible to change what a person is passionate about in their lives, instead you need to figure out how you fit within that passion or not.