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.