Assignment # 1 "20/20" and "Story of an Hour"

The first assignment we have been given was to read three short stories, choose two of them, and put them into some kind of conversation with one another. I chose to focus on gender issues even though the only thing these two stories really have in common with each are gender issues, and the vivid visuals that accompany and "illustrate" some of the symbolism. 

Both "20/20" and "Story of an Hour" center around gender issues, yet they are from different periods of American history and thus focus on different aspects of gender oppression and equality. Kate Chopin wrote "Story of an Hour" in 1894, from a time before women even had the right to vote in the United States. The issues Chopin felt strongly about involved voting equality, the right for a woman to choose her partner freely, to not be bound by her choice (divorce rights) and just generally to become an equal partner in both society and marriage. If Chopin were to read "20/20" by Linda Brewer and then take from that some understanding of the advances that society has taken towards equality, she would be disappointed. Sure, women can now vote and have equal protection under the law, but they have not achieved true equality in the eyes of their male peers. Why? That's a difficult question to answer, but when looking at "20/20" one can perhaps attain a clearer understanding. 

"20/20" by Linda Brewer is a revealing story, not due to it's length (it's only about five paragraphs long), but due to what Linda is trying to say in those five paragraphs. "20/20" is a snapshot of everyday male/female relations in the United States. It is assumed by science that men, in general, think more logically than women who think more emotionally than men. Bill and Ruthie are on a drive across and the country and when the story begins, Bill comes to the conclusion that Ruthie is "incapable of theoretical debate" as "she refused to argue" and "stuck to simple observation, like 'Look, cows.'".Right away you can tell that Bill is annoyed with her and continues to be annoyed with her throughout the story. Ruthie takes over the driving duties and continues to make observations, one such observation "Indian paintbrush. A golden eagle." causes Bill to frown, as he believed that there were no indian paintbrush near Chicago. This can be interpreted to mean that he thought she didn't know much about the world, being a girl from rural Ohio after all. She continued to make observations and the last one was a comment on a handsome man that looked like Bill, and he "let it ride". 

For me this story this story is both about the perceived ignorance and ambivalence of women (due to...their perceived emotional state?), and how we struggle everyday to communicate with one another effectively. The man in this story is solely focused on logical thought, and as such misses the excitement that a trip across the country can bring to someone who maybe doesn't travel very often. To be fair Bill does touch upon that as a possibility, however he asks to drive after she "mistakes" a tree stump for a bigfoot. It is obvious to the reader that the woman is imagining these things to add to her sense of adventure yet the man mistakes her for being silly and tired. The sentence "Her eyes were big, blue, and capable of seeing wonderful sights." hits the nail on the head and convinces me that I'm right, or at least on the right path. Also, the fact that bill doesn't "get" Ruthie despite their three days on the road together further highlights the breakdown in communication between the sexes. 

I apologize if this seems rambling, but as I was writing more and more ideas came to me.