Things Fall Apart Essay 2

The last five chapters in part one gave a sense of balance, unlike the first 7 chapters. The first 7 chapters focused on the main character Okonkwo and how he interacted with his family and people in his village. One wouldn’t go as far to say Okonkwo was demonized but certainly there was a negative trace associated with him. Despite the negative aspect you got from Okonkwo you easily could sympathize or justify why he was this way, and reason being, his father. Okonkwo early in the book had the ability to make the reader indecisive and combative with their opinion on him. Reading the last 5 chapters displayed a positive aspect with both the main character and village as a whole. The reader was deeply submerged in the culture and practices of the village from the way they handled disputes, marriage, funerals and other ceremonial events. All of practices showed the richness and unity within the village. As the balance mentioned earlier is seen, we also saw a different side of Okonkwo. The first instance was when Okonkwo was still being heavily affected by the death of Ikemefuna although he was beginning to get over it in the start of chapter nine. Another example was when Okonkwo acted quickly to come to his daughter’s aid when she was sick. Lastly, what balanced out part one of the story, was when Enzima was taking by the Chielo which caused her mother, Ekwefi, to be scared and forced to go after Enzima to ensure she was safe. During that time Okonkwo also went to search for Enzima not once or even twice but he went four times to find Ekwefi and Enzima to then tell her “go home and sleep” because he will wait at the cave mouth for Enzima. As subtle as those events were it portrayed Okonkwo and the community in a positive light which counteracted with the previous chapters we read. 

Things Fall Apart

The first 7 chapters in “Things Fall Apart” serve as a great example of how an experience can affect one’s life for better or worse. The main character, Okonkwo, is described as the character with a coarse and gruff temperament who passionately despises his father, and anyone similar for that matter.  Okonkwo’s father, Unoka, is quoted in the book as “lazy and Improvident and was quite incapable of thinking about tomorrow” (Achebe 4). Unoka, for his entire life didn’t carry a title which was important within these villages. Unoka was a coward who always managed to borrow money he couldn’t repay. These were chiefly the reasons the village laughed at Okonkwo’s father. Unoka’s characterization as a disgrace clearly resonated with his son and is the defining experience that made Okonkwo who he became. Okonkwo could’ve taken two paths as a result what he witnessed with his father. Okonkwo could have accepted a life similar to his father merely because he didn’t know better. Or he could have accepted a life opposite of the life of his father.  This crucial experience would have justified any life Okonkwo chose and would have pulled him to the extreme of that decision.  The community naturally judged according to a man’s worth separately from his father, but if Okonkwo would have followed Unoka’s path they would have had no sympathy for the fact that he had a horrible example to follow. The same goes for if he would’ve accepted the life of a successful man; his father would have equally been a justifiable reason for what he became. Unoka would’ve set such a horrible example Okonkwo had no choice but to succeed. As the story progressed within the 7 chapters, it’s noticeable that Okonkwo is greatly affected by avoiding any comparisons with weakness, failure, disgrace and his father.  

Characterization of Mrs. Newell

In the text, “The Last Asset”, Mrs. Newell is characterized as a woman who is struggling to remain in the upper-class where being financially secure is the main requirement, and to her luck, only possessing the social aspect causes her to become a type of freeloader. Early on, Mrs. Newell understands that her position can change quickly to something less luxurious as her ability to squeeze off the rich runs dry. Hermy, Mrs. Newell’s daughter serves as a new method to remain in the aristocracy by commodification. Hermy is forced to marry into a family of wealth and Mrs. Newell justifies by saying “what’s the use of producing a daughter if she doesn’t contribute to her parent’s financial & social advancement” (Wharton 218).  Mrs. Newell is desperate enough exploit anyone or do anything unethical to attain what she desires.  

Marxist analysis of “The Last Asset”

   In the newly learned concept by Tyson called Marxist theory, we understand that “the socioeconomic system in which we live does much more than determine who has the most power. It also determines, among other things, how we are educated, and it influences our religious beliefs, which together control to a great degree how we perceive ourselves and our world” (Tyson 53). What’s more, is that Edith Wharton’s “The Last Asset” juxtaposed Tyson’s “Marxist theory” proved to have strains of concepts within each other.

   The two most prevalent theories associated with “The Last Asset” were Tyson’s classism and commodification. Tyson’s classism, in the Marxist theory, “points out that the accumulation of wealth, especially of enormous wealth, isn’t necessarily a sign of merit. All too often it’s a sign of questionable ethics” (Tyson 56). This quote, or explanation of classism, correlates with the egotistical intentions of Mrs. Newell. To support this, it’s clear that in the story Mrs. Newell is using her daughter as “advancement” in the aristocratic society by arrangement of the marriage to the French.  Mrs. Newell’s “questionable ethics” and leech like tendencies are what’s keeping her afloat at this time.  What’s also good to note from the text was the quote, “Garnett felt sure she would never willingly relax her hold on her distinguished friends-was it possible that it was they who had somewhat violently let go of her?” (Wharton 214). What the quote verified was that, if she was indeed “let go”; to remain and move up in the wealthy class Mrs. Newell who is so accustomed to, “questionable ethics”, knows that it’s her only option.

   With that association established it makes it that much easier to also connect Tyson’s commodification theory. Commodification is what “encourages us to relate to things and people as commodities. We commodify something when we relate to it in terms of how much money its worth or, put another way, how much money it can be exchanged for (its exchange value)” (Tyson 58). What this definition finally concludes in relation to “The Last Asset” is in a particular quote, “Mrs. Newell spoke as if her daughter were a piece of furniture acquired without due reflection, and for which no suitable place could be found” (Wharton 218). It was apparent that Hermy was only a commodity in the eyes of her mother which was thoroughly explained in another quote, “what was the use of producing and educating a handsome daughter if she did not, in some more positive way, contribute to her parent’s advancement” (Wharton 218). Both of the quotes proved that Mrs. Newell’s daughter, Hermy, was simply a commodity and tool for her mother to remain and position herself higher in the class she struggles to be part of.