As I mentioned in class, I find it interesting how Anderson seems to liken ambition to a disease. It is referred to as something “incurable” that can take “possession” of people, and the way in which Anderson starts his piece (“My father was, I am sure, intended by nature to be a cheerful, kindly man.”) indicates that ambition brought about this negative change in his father. How does Anderson’s framing of ambition as a vice compare to the other works we have read thus far, and do you think this is something we will see in future texts?
2 thoughts on “Ambition in Anderson”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Anderson’s framing of ambition reveals that being ambitious is not a problem but the genuine of the ambition is all that matters. Although the father was once kind, because he was not the one who originally wanted to be ambitious, things did not turn around for him and affected him negatively. His wife, on the other hand, who wanted to be ambitious did not have a character change because she wanted to be ambitious from the start. The father was dragged along into the idea. Full dedication is necessary to be successfully ambitious.
I’ve begun to draw some parallels between Anderson’s conception of ambition and the ways in which we’ve seen ambition in the works of other authors thus far. I do agree that ambition was the reason for the father’s dissatisfaction with life and eventually, the hardening of his personality in “The Egg,” but only in the sense that it ultimately resulted in his feeling that he had in some way failed himself, or fallen short of his intended goals –– of running a successful farm, and later, a restaurant, and then being an entertainer. Ambition, then, is often a product of one’s environment, and I’m inclined to say that it is not inherently “incurable,” deceitful, or fragile, as Anderson makes it out to be. While clearly relevant, ambition does not always directly relate to the measure of one’s success, and I think that is an important distinction to make. An example that comes to mind is the self-defined success of “Crazy Ivar,” in O Pioneers! Of all Cather’s characters, Ivar seems to be the most balanced, predictable and untroubled by the end of the novel. He comes away seemingly content within himself, not discouraged any or prevented by his losses. He was, from the very beginning, the man who walked gently on the land –– who never imposed any material ambitions on it. In this sense, Cather proves that there can be exceptions; while Ivar is only one of so many, his notion of fulfillment has little to do with his enterprises.