In preparation for the discussion of the stories for our discussions, I prefer to read a story several times, form my own vision about it, and only then read articles that analyze this text in order to consider the story from my own subjective point of view and not be attached to the thoughts of scholars. After reading this story, I fixed three thoughts: the first is terrible violence, but not in the form we are used to, but in a verbal one, the very concept of which curdles the blood. Secondly, this is a gender issue: in particular, the exact delimitation of the role of a woman in this story is noticeable on the basis of two sisters. Either you are an exemplary family woman, a housewife, etc. (remember the cult of femininity) and the second is our protagonist, also a rather stereotypical girl who is more interested in appearance and boys than any other issue. As well as the dialogue between Koni and the Friend, he really reminded me of modern gender realities, including today’s one. And the third is something terrible and supernatural, invisibly present in this story.
There are a number of interpretations of this story in Corb’s article, such as initiation or inverted fairy tale, the diabolic motives, feminist allegory.
I would like to note that the story is quite creepy, provided that there is not a single scene of violence or physical rudeness here. The author in this case refers to symbolic violence. According to wiki “symbolic violence describes a type of non-physical violence manifested in the power differential between social groups”, but why does the author use this phenomenon in the story. What does it describe? I believe that the main message of the author is a feminist message, symbolic violence between gender groups in this case, which took place in the 60s of the 20th century, and which is certainly happening now. I would also like to note that some of the interpretations are not ruled out by the assumption that this is a feminist allegory. The author can use the demonic motifs of this story to show the depravity of this gender interaction. Also, an inverted fairy tale, where the princess is joined, not by the handsome prince, but by the Prince of Darkness. Perhaps the author intentionally draws a man as such a prince?
In the course of the story, small details hint at gender stereotypes. For example: most of the dialogue between Connie and Friend takes place in the following setting: Connie is in the kitchen, and Friend is near the car, isn’t it very stereotypical?
Further, the dialogue itself is an allusion to the life of a woman. She could have her own desires, dreams, albeit very stupid ones, but still. And having come to her, Friend invades her personal life and takes her, takes everything. Her whole life is not her personal one, everything is for show. Friend knows everything, and we don’t know anything about him. His life remains his property, he is free to do what he wants, unlike Connie.
Even the house, in which she was supposed to feel like a fortress, causes terrible feelings in her. Even fatal, she wants freedom. It reminds me of the heroine in The Story of an Hour. However, the end of the two works is equally dramatic.
