Kate Chopin'S The Story: of An Hour
Kate Chopin'S The Story: of An Hour
Kate Chopin'S The Story: of An Hour
OF AN HOUR
Here are some common questions about Kate Chopin's "The Story of an Hour"
along with their corresponding answers:
The central theme of "The Story of an Hour" explores freedom and independence,
particularly in the context of marriage and societal expectations.
The main character is Mrs. Louise Mallard, and secondary characters include her
sister Josephine and her husband Brently Mallard.
What is the plot of "The Story of an Hour"?
The plot revolves around Mrs. Mallard's reaction to the news of her husband's death
in a railroad accident, her moment of realization and freedom upon believing herself
widowed, and her subsequent shock and death upon discovering her husband is alive.
The title refers to the brief duration of time during which Mrs. Mallard experiences a
range of emotions and revelations after hearing about her husband's death. It
highlights the intensity and transformative nature of that short period.
What is the significance of the setting in the story?
The story is set in the late 19th century, a time when societal norms dictated strict gender
roles and expectations for women. The setting helps to emphasize the constraints placed
on women during this period and provides context for Mrs. Mallard's internal conflict.
Through Mrs. Mallard's reactions to her husband's supposed death, the story explores the
idea of female independence by depicting her initial feelings of liberation and
empowerment at the thought of living life for herself rather than for her husband.
What role does irony play in "The Story of an Hour"?
The irony is present in the story through the dramatic twist of Mrs. Mallard's husband
being alive, contrasting with her initial feelings of freedom and joy at his supposed
death. This twist underscores the limitations of Mrs. Mallard's freedom and the societal
expectations she cannot escape.
The story addresses the theme of mortality through Mrs. Mallard's contemplation of
her own life and death in the wake of her husband's supposed demise. It also highlights
the unpredictable and fragile nature of life.
What is the significance of the ending of the story?
The ending, where Mrs. Mallard dies upon seeing her husband alive, underscores
the suffocating nature of societal expectations and the lack of true freedom
available to women in the late 19th century. It also highlights the tragic
consequences of repression and loss of agency.
The banker believes that the death penalty is more humane than life
imprisonment and argues that no one can stand being alone for a long time.
The lawyer, on the other hand, argues that the death penalty is more
inhumane than life imprisonment because you are depriving someone of
their life–something that you cannot give back. Therefore, life
imprisonment is preferable because you will still be alive throughout, and
there will always remain the chance that will be freed. This philosophical
disagreement motivates the bet; in fact, the bet itself can be seen as an
extension of this very argument.
2-Why does the lawyer extend the bet from 5 to 15 years?
Initially, the banker makes the bet for 5 years. He believes that the lawyer
would not be able to endure 5 years of voluntary imprisonment. In the heat
of the moment, the lawyer raises the stakes to fifteen years. He probably
does this to prove how serious he is, and how much he believes that he is
in the right. This is corroborated by the fact that he ultimately intentionally
loses the bet just 5 hours before he would have won it: he makes deliberate
choices to prove his commitment to his principles.
3-Is the narrator impartial? Why or why not?
No, the narrator imbues his opinion into his statements. When the bet is
first made, the narrator calls it a "wild, senseless bet" punctuating his
remarks with an exclamation point (7). The narrator is most decidedly
not impartial in his descriptions of the lawyer's imprisonment, too, for
he describes him with sympathy and empathy. Most deeply, the narrator
is not impartial because he sometimes provides us with insights into the
thoughts of the banker, which colors the overall narrative accordingly.
4-What does the lawyer do to take solace in his time of imprisonment?
How does his attention shift over the course of his imprisonment?
The lawyer plays the piano, reads a lot of books, and learns several languages.
Though he initially shies away from wine and tobacco, he later turns to them
for comfort. The piano sits silent after the first year of his imprisonment,
however; progressively, the lawyer focuses more on reading and the
acquisition of knowledge, up to the point at which he spends an entire year
reading the Gospel. Thus we could describe him as starting out focusing on
comforts and transitioning towards a total focus on enlightenment .
5-How does the lawyer decide to conclude the bet, and why?
At the end of the fifteen years, five hours before he would have gotten the 2
million rubles, the lawyer chooses to run away and revoke his right to the
money, leaving a letter explaining himself. He has come to hate people and
rejects the money on principle. This is the direct result of the learning he
undertook while imprisoned: with his newfound knowledge of the world,
material goods, including money, mean nothing to him, and he hates people
for confusedly valuing these things so much.