The content of these pages of O Pioneers! left me feeling both extremely angry and sad. To begin, the conversation between Carl, Lou, and Alexandra regarding Carl was enough to make me want to rip the pages out of my book! Alexandra’s brothers are ignorant, ungrateful, sexist, and represent the prevalent opinions among men of this time period. Further, it is apparent that Alexandra’s heart is breaking as the men she truly loves — Carl and Emil — plan to leave her. Her unhappiness is demonstrative of the fact that despite her success in business, what she truly wants is to have a companion.
2 thoughts on “Pages 50-71”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
What I find interesting from this segment of reading is that idea that material wealth does not equate success. This is especially witnessed from Alexandra. After her disagreement with her brothers, Oscar and Lou, we see the immediate breakdown of her tough shell. Carl makes her happy. Alexandra wants to be happy and even lends herself to the idea of marrying Carl despite her age. Nevertheless, happiness (as Alexandra says hereself) “is always easier to lose than to find (70-71).” When Carl (after talking to Oscar and Lou) decides that he can’t be with Alexandra because he has made nothing of himself, their chance of happiness if forever ruined. There is an interesting dynamic between the balance of material wealth and internal happiness. Alexandra has wealth but no happiness, Carl has happiness (with Alexandra) but cannot be with her because he has nothing to “give” her.
Katie, your point about how “Alexandra’s brothers are ignorant, ungrateful, and sexist” represents the male’s perception of women during this time period; to add on to your above point, I think it is important to take note of the infective nature of Oscar’s and Lou’s diction when describing women. In response to Alexandra defending her long and hard efforts on the farm for the previous two decades, Oscar turns to Lou and reminds him that “the woman of” any conversation is when she claims that she has done something when she has not (Cather 66). Here, the word “woman,” utilized as an adjective, offers an almost infectious connotation. It is as if the situation has caught an ailment of distortion and tomfoolery that manipulates the truth. To supplement this belittlement, Oscar and Lou “scoff” at Alexandra, expressing an even greater sign of disrespect and ostracization. Overall, these pages relay a clear and infectious connotation of woman, especially during the early 1900s.