Sunday, September 16, 2012


Ambivalence

                Circumstances can quickly change causing human beings who are friends turn into enemies.  The dictionary defines ambivalence as “the coexistence within an individual of positive and negative feelings toward the same person simultaneously drawing him or her in opposite directions.” Guy De Maupassant’s “Mother Savage” shows a perfect example of ambivalence between a French mother and four Prussian soldiers who are billeted in her cottage.

                 The story was set during the Franco-Prussian War in the 1800’s and this would fit as the author himself was a Frenchmen who lived during these times.  The mother whose name is given as “Mother Savage” has a son who volunteers to go to war leaving her alone.  During these times, Mother Savage is forced to quarter four soldiers from the same country her son is fighting against.  At first, the mother treats the soldiers with respect and takes care of them as “she liked them well enough… those four enemies of hers; for country people don’t as a rule feel patriotic hatred-those feelings are reserved for the upper class” (Maupassant 78). Although they are supposed to be her enemies because of the war, Mother Savage does not treat them this way because she feels these men have done nothing wrong to her.  The soldiers were also considerate to her as they took care of the chores around the cottage. 

                Feelings direly changed as one day the mother received a letter that stated her son had been killed during the war. This event totally changed the way the mother felt about the Prussian soldiers. She wanted revenge for what had happened to her son and she wanted the mothers of these soldiers to feel the same way she did. Maupassant uses the literary device of foreshadowing to show a terrible event is about to happen as Mother Savage “watched the [soldiers] from the corners of her eyes, not speaking turning an idea over and over in her head” (Maupassant 80).  The Mother ends up locking the four soldiers in the house and setting it on fire.  With no regret to what she did, she calmly told everybody why she killed the men and was later executed. 

One event can certainly change the way we feel about other people in a good or bad way.  Did Mother Savage have the right to kill these soldiers who had nothing to do with the death of her son?  One will never know what they did would do unless it happened to them, but I feel she had no right to kill the soldiers.  These men were considerate and treated her with the utmost respect as “they took pains to show her all possible consideration and did everything they could to save her trouble or expense” (Maupassant 78).  Also, should one pay one bad deed with another bad deed? If this was so, then this would be a never-ending cycle of murdering.  The author as well showed the terrible effects war can have on people who before the war were best friends, but because of nationality, could turn into hated enemies.

Works Cited

De Maupassant, Guy. "Mother Savage." Fiction: A Pocket Anthology. 7th ed. New York: Longman, 2012.

               76-83. Print.

7 comments:

  1. Revenge is a funny thing, she knows that the soldiers had nothing to do with her sons death but that did not matter, she was always looked at a sweet old lady that never has done anything wrong, but the death of her son changed her she became malevolent. I believe Mother Savage is her nickname and she earned it from what she did to those poor soldiers. In the end she got what she deserved from the Point of view of the Prussians. But was she entirely in the wrong? these were enemy soldiers on her land, If there were more civilians like her the Prussians would be high tailing their way out of the village.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes she was a sweet woman, but people can change their entire nature when they go through horrific events. Its like Sherman Alexie said in "The Lone Ranger and Tonto Fistfight in Heaven", "People can do things completely against their nature, completely. It's like some tiny earthquake comes roaring through your body and soul, and it's the only earthquake you'll ever feel. but it damges so much, cracks the foundations of your life forever"(Alexe 209). Alexie describes exactly how Mother Savage might have felt as she watched the house and the men inside burn.

      Delete
  2. I don't think Mother Savage was justified in killing the soldiers. They treated her and her property with the utmost respect, helped with chores, and were no more of a burden then they had to be. But Mother Savage was blinded by grief. To her, every Prussian soldier was the soldier who killed her son, and one of the 4 soldiers she killed may very well have been the one who killed her son, but war is war. As for bad deeds being repaid with bad deeds, I think that's more of a case by case basis. Though I completely understand and sympathize with her motivations, I don't think killing the Prussian soldiers because of her son's death was right, but I think executing Mother Savage was justified. Did anyone else see a parallel between Mother Savage's death and her son's death?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I do see some some parallel between Mother Savage's execution and her son's death. They were both killed by the Prussians and I think its very interesting how Maupassant described both of their deaths. When the Prussians killed the son he was cut in two by the cannonball. When Mother Savage was executed Maupassant describes, "She had been cut almost in two, and her stiffened fingers still clutched the letter, bathed in blood"(Maupassant 82). Why would the author convey the image of when Mother Savage and her son died, they both looked like they were cut in half?

      Delete
    2. I think if you are going to use the phrase "war is war" I think that Mother Savage is justified in her actions because she was getting revenge for something she saw going wrong in her country. If there are invading soldiers in your house and you have no investment in the war then there would be no reason to kill them but when you find out that your own family members have been killed by this army then where is the wrong in taking their lives the same as they did to her son. Also I think the parallels are kind of creepy to a point but still a great image showing that the mother and her son are killed the same way by the same war.

      Delete
    3. There was a parallels to both their deaths in that they were cut in half. Its easy to imagine a cannon ball bouncing on the ground and cutting you into two, when i read that scene in the book i had vivid images of the Scene in the Patriot where the soldier was but in two by the cannon ball. But how about the execution of mother savage, how many times have you heard of someone being torn into by bullet fire? its interesting i do think their was a message in the way she died. I cant take all the credit Mrs. Grover gave me the idea, but everyone has two sides and maybe being torn in half symbolizes the two different sides of a person. we don't get to know the son very well but I'm sure he struggled with leaving his elderly mom and going to war to save his country. and mother savage had a "good" and "evil" side to her and it was an internal struggle for her on what she was about to do to them.

      Delete
  3. When I was a child I was always told that two wrongs do not make a right. I believe mother savage had absolutely no right to kill the soldiers who treated her so well. I like that Michael asked about the parallelism between the sons death and Mother Savages death. Because as I stated earlier about the two wrongs why do I feel it was just that the mother was executed? This discussion is provoking quite a few questions about my own beliefs and now I'm not sure.

    ReplyDelete