Edna Pontellier: The Difference Between Imprisoned And Misguided

Edna Pontellier: The Difference Between Imprisoned and Misguided

Words, in containing inherent personal connotations, are undoubtedly a subjective field. When combined into an intricate sequence, such as a book, there is infinite possibility in meaning. For instance, in Kate Chopin’s novella, “The Awakening,” the main character Edna Pontellier acts in opposition to social norms to eventually meet her death. However, this sequence of events can be read in numerous different ways, such as a tale of liberation from the confines of society or a cautionary tale about false identities. Such massive separation in understanding depends on how the reader interprets the course of events, in particular the diction and characterization, which in turn serves

Edna shatters even simple gender standards for the time: her roles as mother, wife, and woman. Swiftly introduced is her distaste for her children, as Mr. Pontellier confronts Edna about their children, mentioning “her inattention, her habitual neglect of the children,” (Chopin 9). Her lack of care was maintained until the very last section of the book, where she references her children as “little antagonists who...sought to drag her into the soul’s slavery for the rest of her days,” (Chopin 125). Mr. Pontellier’s use of the term “neglect” implies that she had a concrete duty to take care of them, yet her use of the the inherently villainous terms of “antagonists” and “slavery” characterizes a deep resentment for her children. This contrast between the common, societal expectation of a caring mother and her role as a hateful bystander to her children shows a deviation from standards for mothers to be nurturing. She doesn’t act conventionally; in fact, she resides on the complete opposite side of the behavioral spectrum, demonstrating a blatant disobedience of convention in favor of female choice, a cornerstone of feminism. Meanwhile, her relationship with Robert Lebrun is a clear instance of her choosing to defy society. An extramarital affair would be astoundingly taboo, yet Edna spends great lengths of time with Robert, eventually disclosing to Mademoiselle

Due to the sheer volume of unpleasantry, it can be seen how Chopin might convey a warning against rebellion after commitment. Edna is characterized as not being a “motherwoman”, her children’s absence serving to “free her of a responsibility which she had blindly assumed and for which Fate had not fitted her,” (Chopin 12, 22). This rejection of her children is cause for much criticism of her, especially by her husband, who frequently chides her to frustration and tears. This unpleasant reaction may serve to display how her unhappiness with her maternal situation is negligible because of her choice to become a mother. Her responsibility was “blindly assumed” only in that she conformed to standards inappropriate for her personally; her actual having of the children wasn’t accidental, and therefore, she faces retribution for refusing to fulfil her obligations in the role she accepted. Additionally, as a wife, Edna discusses how “Her husband seemed to her now like a person whom she had married without love as an excuse,” (Chopin 83), yet Chopin also details how Leonce “fell in love...his absolute devotion flattered her,” while Edna attributes their union to “the decrees of Fate” (Chopin 21). Both aspects represented demonstrates how Edna’s marriage was a choice, a commitment to Leonce Pontellier that she failed to upkeep, and is therefore