I think this story is all about gender. The narration ends with the main character realizing the biggest threat of theft to herself is indeed herself. What is she robbing from herself? Could it be the "traditional" settling down, the married life complete with children and the white picket fence? What actions does she see as harmful to herself? Drinking and going out with multiple men? And, if that is indeed the case, is Porter supporting this or poking fun at the traditional institutions themselves? (i.e. Bill seems to have had the "traditional" married life before, but now he's a wreck, the wife is gone, and they are fighting over alimony).
What do we make of the men in this story? There are mentions of Camilo, Eddie, Roger, and Bill, who seem to owe our main character something or another. Roger lays his arm around her in the cab (pg. 60), so are these all romantic relationships? or are any of them? If so, does that make our main character a "bad" woman, in terms of "traditional" values?
If we continue in this same vein of pondering gender roles, I think the purse is such an important symbol because it is something feminine. It's not an umbrella or something unisex that's stolen, but a purse, and I also am thinking it is important that it is stolen by a woman, not a man. It's sort of like one woman stealing feminine status from another woman who "had [her] chance" (pg. 65). What could this chance be? and would the chance have been different if our main character was a man that was robbed?
3 comments:
Considering what you have said about the gender in this short story, I think that the men are portrayed as persons that give the protagonist surrogate male-companionship. I also believe that she is extremely scared of being in anything similar to a serious relationship. Altogether there are 4 men that appear or are mentioned– Camilo, Eddie, Roger, and Bill. Camilo and Roger appear to have some romantic tie to the protagonist, while Bill seems more of a companion or work associate. She seems somewhat distant from these three men.
In contrast, Eddie seems to have had a closer relationship to the protagonist. Eddie is mentioned very early on when she compares his hats to Camilo’s. Perhaps she has some nostalgic feelings towards her past relationship with Eddie, as individuals often compare a past love to a present fling. She notes, in this instance, that she has a fondness for Eddie—even though his hats were old and they looked, “as if they had been quite purposely left out in the rain, and yet they sat with a careless and incidental rightness on Eddie” (59). Eddie appears to win over Camilo during the comparison, even though his hats were shabbier.
I also wonder whether or not the letter she received was from Eddie. I question her motives in tearing and burning the letter if the author of it was Eddie. She thinks of him earlier in a distinct way, so she might be denying herself that close personal bond with him or that chance of reviving their love simply because she is afraid of needing anyone. In the end, I believe her supposed strength to deny her feelings and be independent is a weakness that leaves her lonely.
When I was first skimming through this book to see what I wanted included on the syllabus, the thing that caught my attention was the sentence that Brad quotes, "You're a grown woman, you've had your chance, you ought to know how it is!" I was somewhat incensed by this comment. Now after reading the whole story, I am left wondering what "Theft" the title refers to, because there seem to be a few "thefts" in this story. The one that I find most interesting is the one that Brad points out, that the purse is a representation of the feminine in a way, so when the purse is stolen it is an extension of her femininity being stolen. I also think the theft in the title could be referring to the men in her life and how they are all using her in a way. Camilo seems the most like a romantic interest for her, but yet he uses her money. There is a character named Eddie that we don't really see, who has presumably left her life (possibly the author of the letter?). There is Roger, who is using her like a companion while he is married, so she is not able to gain anything from this relationship. Bill is also using her because he has used on of her scenes but not paid her. The thing that kind of bugs me is that she (not named, interesting in itself) does not view these things as theft. And maybe they are not. Maybe "theft" is in the eye of the beholder.
Excellent point about the purse. I hadn't thought about that prior to our class discussion.
My thought after reading this the first time was that something could only be stolen from her if she placed personal value on something. Upon a second and third read--and our class discussion--I recognize the other significant theft--the non-payment of money from the script. I hadn't placed much value on that before. Now I find it an interesting juxtaposition regarding gender--she is non-confrontational with the man, but confrontational to the janitress.
Interesting, stuff.
Post a Comment