Questions for the story, "The Woman of the House"
Choose one of the following questions and answer in a 150 to 200 word paragraph.
1. Explore a social or ethical issue raised in the writing. Judge the behaviour of the characters or the views of the author. Are they right or wrong in your opinion?
2. Tell about how you feel toward this writing or its author and why.
3. Write about something that surprised you, angered you, delighted you, or evoked any strong reaction as you were reading. Write about anything that stays on your mind after reading
17 comments:
William Trevor paints us a vivid world in his story, “The Woman of the House.” His first description of the farmhouse has one of the painters looking at “the gray, cracked flags of the kitchen floor”; next we find the house hasn’t been painted in nineteen years! There is real world humour in having his character, the crippled man, believe the Gypsy painters are both Polish and “good Catholic lads.” Whatever smoothes the waters! But there is intrigue, too, in Trevor’s story. What Martina has done is given to us through the eyes of the two brothers who note the grass “had been crushed and recovered” and that “bright-colored seed packets [were] marking the empty rows” of a freshly turned garden. Having the crippled man’s death happen offstage, but observed through men who need to be observant to survive, delights me. Subtle, but somehow more devastatingly effective. Poor Martina and her evil, but understandable, deed leave me wondering what I might do in the same situation. When fate takes us to “a lonely place,” what might anyone do?
—178 words
-Question 3:
“Whoa! How can she get away from that?” is my reaction after I’ve read the story, “Woman of the House.” Since the story ends with such a mystery, and suspense, I can’t help but to think about the ending. Because the main character, Martina, obviously kills her cousin just to get his money, and after she kills the man, her cousin, she fled the house. In which makes me sympatric towards to the two painters because she gets away from murdering her cousin and the fact that two painters cannot say anything, even though they see her leaving in hurry. Especially, when she volunteered to speak about her cousin being in the other room, and her “rear tire had lost some air,” the painters cannot say anything. Even though the two painters know “Martina” fled the house, and came back tomorrow to pay the money, they still refuse to say anything. And, when she left the house, the two painters could have left the house, but they continue to work.
-173 words.
Judge the behaviour of the characters or the views of the author. Are they right or wrong in your opinion?
Martina’s behaviour and the author’s views are wrong, in my opinion. We know that some people in our lives can be very irritating and inevitable— like Martina’s cousin; they can push us to the wall where we are left with no choice, but do what we can to get off that wall. But killing them to do that is what I disagree with. Martina has no right to kill her “cousin.” Just wanting the money (which she didn’t earn) or being irritated by him is not a reason good enough for her to kill. She has many choices of how to set herself free without killing him—she could move out on her own or move in with Costigan since she had a relationship with him. Murdering a person is not a good way to set ourselves free, and one of William Trevor’s messages to us is that we can murder a person in order to be rich and free and get away with it. His message is devastating and if people follow this example, innocent people would die because there are many people in the world who are in Martina’s shoes. I understand what Martina goes through, but her behaviour and the author’s views are wrong.
207 words
Question 3
After I read the fiction “The Woman of the House”, the indifference of the relationship between Martina and crippled man angered me. Martina rather interacted with the watch, “to do what it told her to do.” But, she never seemed to pay any attention to the crippled man; whenever he tried to initiate a conversation with him, she totally ignored him by not commenting on anything. Everything she was doing for him was totally mechanical. While he was shouting for his painful leg and whispered for companion, and again asked for a conversation, she ignored him again by merely asking him to sleep. She was at least patient with the painter and other people in town except the crippled man. It seemed the misery of her life and her bulky body had angered her and “made her what she’d become” – a cold blood woman. All she ever cared about was only money.
152 words
Question 1:
The two painters’ behavior, who seems to be hard working and honest people at the beginning of the story, is sin. However ,the crippled man was a hopeless, restricted to wheel chair person he was nice and friendly with the two young men as he shared conversation and drink with them. When he was killed and disappeared awkwardly, the painters suspected that Martina has killed him. I was expecting them to investigate about and reveal the truth, but they preferred to keep quiet and left the house viciously in order to continue receiving money. Their behaviors clarified their sincerity and passionate to wickedness and showed their inhuman personality. I think Trevor wants to proof us that money can make our life better; it can also make big disasters and misfortune. First Martina, whose life is full of shame and falsity, turned into immorality and killed her cousin who helped her when she had a difficult life. Than money mad painters became evils as they chose to be salient and failed to tell the truth. They all created a picture of their embarrassing attitude in my mind.
190 Words
After reading “The Woman of the House,” I felt like I was left in suspense. I wanted the story to continue a little longer, telling me exactly what happened to the old man and the motives of the woman. This story was not written from her perspective, but I am very curious to know what she was thinking. The story makes it sound like she was the one who killed the old man to inherit his money, but I wonder if it was the case that he died from natural causes and just didn‘t have his death documented. It does make sense that she could keep the pension cheques coming in if she didn’t notify anyone of his death. The way that this short story leaves the woman’s future up to the reader’s imagination is a little frustrating to me. It’s one of those stories where I wish I could jump into the tale and talk to the main character, asking her a million questions.
-165 words
Question#1
Judging people is not any more my business. I learned through my life experiences and my studies to find out the reasons behind the behaviours. This deliberation pleases me more and satisfies me better. I cannot say those young brother were wrong, or even about Martina, a lonely old woman without any money or pension. Also, we could not exactly say that she killed her cousin, the crippled man.
The social situation for any of these characters is a unique experience. Those young brothers just didn’t want to “call the system”. They didn’t want “[the system] deprives them of their freedom.” They have never been a part of “the system”. Are they real Gypsies or from the countries in Europe that were in the brutal wars in 1980s? We even don’t know! But, there is a reason for them to not report the old man’s death, naturally or murder. Where they belong to? Could they go straight ahead to a police officer and report an uncertain murder? That means for them trouble.
For Martina, I cannot judge her when nobody cares about her anymore and even care about the crippled man. Nobody really knows what happened during those nine days. Then it’s better to read the story and leave the result to the characters. The story is alive and effective that raised lots of reactions.(225 words)
2. Tell about how you feel toward this writing or its author and why.
William Trevor successfully tells a story about circumstance with his unique style. In the story, The Woman of the House, he chooses omniscience as the point of view, and throughout the entire writing it seems that the author is completely in charge of narrating objectively. Of 100 readers, probably everyone would have a deferent reaction that based on the dispassionate description. Sometimes he uses brief dialogues to illustrate the personalities of his characters and the relationships between them. For example, when Costigan asks Matina that how she gets her name, the dialogues—
“I told you.”
“You’d tell me many a thing.”
“Go to sleep now.”
“Are the grass rents in?”
“Go back to sleep.” easily let us hear the slight in Matina’s voice. Besides, some meaningful implications are used to reveal the true feelings of the characters and the theme of the writing. For example, through the way Matina thinks about her ancient Dodge as “a part of [her] circumstances to be tolerated because it was necessary,” we can see her helplessness about the little choice in her life. The last two sentences of the story also subtly mention for us about Martina and the painters’ tomorrow. It implies that everything will be continued constantly in an unpredictable way no matter what, and that is called fate.
–217 words
Once again, I feel the cruelty of the reality. I find two kinds of attitude towards poverty. They are proles, absolutely destitute, but they choose the different ways to live it. Martina, a homeless from a miserable marriage, chose to struggle no matter what she would lose: youth, self-esteem, and even ethics. The Gypsy brothers, homeless too from birth, chose to be totally observant to their born fate of poverty. They are used to observing every rule, keep no threat to anybody, and simultaneously become exemplars of obeying the ethics. But very likely, Martina later would live a free and affluent life due to nobody would notice the death of that crippled; but the Gypsy brothers would still gypsy everywhere, struggling for next meal or a dwelling in the ruin. I don’t want to criticize Marina’s choice because I am never in the same circumstance. But, I am wondering that how many ethics would be left when the living conditions worsen to the most terrible situation, and how the Gypsy brothers would make their choice when someday they could not find a work anymore to supply their basic livings. The human being, as the superior animal, would return back to the basic instinct of an animal once it becomes necessary: live for survival in any possible way.
- 217 words
Question 3
After reading “The Women of the House”, I find that the most impressive character for me is not Martina or the crippled man, but the two Gypsies. I think they deserve sympathy because of their difficult life. They had a wandering childhood to search for somewhere better and left their family when they were teenager. So they could only depend on themselves to make living. They have no home. The only property is their van in which they actually live. Even a dwelling which is made by stones, timber beam and some old stuff is not bad for them. They also need to endure the discrimination from people and have to pretend to be polish sometimes to get the opportunity of jobs. Although in such a tough environment, they don’t lose their hope. They try their best to survive and keep pursuing their aim of life: to find somewhere more than they yet know. So I think they maybe not only deserve sympathy but also respect.
-166 words
After reading the story “The Woman of the House” by William Trevor, I feel sorry for all the characters in the story. The man, who is crippled since he was born, lives in a farmhouse. After suffering the parents’ death, he lives with his cousin. He knows his cousin doesn’t like him but his money. Nobody cares him. So he indulges himself in drinking. At the end, he dies. However, even his death doesn’t draw others attention. For Martina, I express my compassion as well although someone may argue that she is a murderer. Martina experiences an unhappy marriage and leaves her homeless. In order to have a roof over her head and bread to eat, she has to live with her alcoholic crippled cousin togeter. Without the true love and under a poor financial situation, she has an affair with a shopkeeper and gets a little money from him. What a terrible life she has. Two painters in the story struggle for their survival. They work hard but don’t make much money. When they find something wrong with the woman and the crippled man, they don’t think too much except for their money. All they concern is someone can pay for the painting of the house. They are so pathetic because in their eyes, the importance of life is less than the pay of 9-day painting.
Question 1:
After reading “The Woman of the House,” I personally don’t think Martina deserving much sympathy, and I don’t agree with the idea, “Their circumstances made them that…” which seems complaining the fate only. Fate is indeed formidable, but the key factor leading the fate is the choices made by people themselves. William Trevor describes Martina’s previous marriage as “careless”, which might be the first wrong decision made by herself, carelessly. Then, the reason why she lives with her crippled cousin is funny, “she herself had little to lose by coming to the farm,” and quite utilitarian because the attraction is to “inherit what was left”. This is another wrong choice inspired by a wrong motivation. During her inanimate life in the farmhouse, it seems she doesn’t try to do anything positive to make her dark world brighter. She gives up to “particular about how she looked and dressed”; she doesn’t make her cousin a happier life either-“She hadn’t managed for years” to “ get him out to the yard”. She doesn’t quit such a miserable life because she is bonded by the shackles of money. The final choice Martina makes in the story is absolutely wrong again. She will not enjoy a peaceful life since she sends her cousin, in an evil way, to “a room that’s better for him”. So, complain about fate? Reflect ourselves first.
Explore a social or ethical issue raised in the writing. Judge the behavior of the characters or the view of the author. Are they right or wrong in your opinion?
What is your advantage after reading “The Woman of the House”? Is it interesting? Do you get any lessons on social and ethical issue from this story? William Trevor wrote this rather long short story, but he didn’t tell us Martina has killed the crippled man or crippled man died by his own. If we imagine Martina has killed him, she has to go to the police to confess the homicide or she has to run away if she has no courage to confess. How she made his grave in the garden of the house and living there as nothing happened? It seems the background of this story is Ireland in later than 1990. What is the desirable behavior of two painters? They recognized as “the crippled man is dead” and assumed a place in the garden as his grave. How do you think if they depart to other town after receiving payment of painting works without any report to the police?
-162 words
Queston 3:
The story “The Woman of The House” by William Trevor revolves around a woman who was taking care of her crippled cousin. The crippled man then mysteriously disappears and yet his cousin still continues to collect his pension. Two painters that had been hired to paint the outside of the house became aware of this situation yet did nothing. Even though the story revolves around the perspective of Martina and the painter’s situation and circumstances, I found this upsetting due to the fact that the crippled man had disappeared and yet nobody seemed to realize or really care about this fact. This story also makes one realize where they may actually stand within a given society given the right or wrong circumstance. This is especially the case when a person joins into membership with a family or society. This story suggests that membership does not also mean inclusion and if it does, is it more of a stereotype? While the story does focus primarily on the painters and Martina, does society really care about one another or is it a means to an end?
Explore a social or ethical raised in the writing. Judge the behavior of the characters or the views of the author. Are they right or wrong?
Some people believed that fate plays a big role in person’s lives causing someone to be stuck forever in a dark zone. Like—Martina—in the story,”Woman of the House” written by William Trevor, which whom captured me by her intriguing character traits: her patience, and for being tolerant. To me, she was patient in taking care and living with her crippled cousin, though I can sense (some) abuse relationship between them. And, also, for being tolerant, about her life circumstances such as; bad car, careless marriage and homeless. Perhaps, Martina needs a friend to wake her up or spank her maybe; because her affair with Costigan won’t help her to move on from her failure marriage, and it will degrade her even more. However, I would not accuse her for the disappearance of her crippled cousin. Probably, her cousin’s death maybe due to his drinking problem, right! Meanwhile, William Trevor’s purpose is to keep the story “mysterious” and to view the intriguing Martina’s fate, which I enjoyed it, but doubted many things. Overall, the fate of each character in the story thought me not to judge behavior nor Martina or the gypsies because many are missing information, but rather I empathized them in their fate especially Martina.
207 words
The women of the house
It is a very interesting story. The writer uses a view of two painters to describe a woman who has lost herself. Martina, the distant cousin of the crippled man, came to the farmhouse when she had nothing. She had taken over her cousin and the farm since her cousin’s mother was dead. Since then she played a special role, a strange master of the farmhouse, but inside she is full of conflict, she wish to change life but she is scared too. Her previous experiences cause her lost security of money. To be the heir is an attractive reason for her to stay in the farm house. However, what she pay for that “fortune”? With 12 years isolated life, being a care giver for a crippled man with dementia, farm worker, she lost herself, she lost everything could remind her she is still a woman. She couldn’t have a husband and children, and she couldn’t have right to love others. She became an oblivious person in the corner of the society. Nobody knows her, cares her and understands her. How could it happen? Could woman become so weak and passive creature in our society? I wish I never become Martina.
While reading the story “The Woman Of The House,” a lot of emotions have on my mind. I feel sympathy towards Martinas’ circumstances. She ends up homeless after her careless marriage and she decided to stay with her crippled cousin. In return, she has to take care of him and do all the household chores. However, at the very end, I feel angry to Martina because of what she did. It didn’t say that she killed him but she left her crippled cousin and go somewhere else. The two men’s situations are almost the same as Martina but I was surprised the way they handle their problems. They are homeless at the early age of thirteen and fourteen. They don’t have anyone but they survive through their efforts of looking jobs. I was amazed that even they don’t have money they don’t steal. Especially when the crippled man asked them to get the money inside the drawer, they have a chance to take advantage of him but they didn’t. They still have pure hearts even though they suffer.
179 words
Post a Comment