Draft Workshop: Paper #2

Begin by going to drive.google.com, creating a new Google Doc and pasting your draft into it. Share the document with dlupton79@gmail.com and turn in a link to it here:

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1f8HYf9U1tT8qZ7CMN9TbVScuooDi3bNZsBk7-e0deao/viewform

Next, choose TWO of your group members whose drafts you will read and respond to. For each, copy and paste the following questions into their Google Doc (they will need to share it with you first). Read the paper and respond thoughtfully to each of these questions. Devote about 30 minutes to each essay; you should have time to read both during class, and the detail and clarity of your responses will factor into your paper grade.

Read your partner’s draft closely at least once before completing this sheet.

1. Begin by identifying the paper’s thesis statement. Does it make a specific and surprising claim about the interpretation of the text? Does it identify specific formal features of the text that support that claim? Suggest any ways in which the thesis statement might be improved.

2. Based on your understanding of the story, is the draft’s argument surprising or interesting? Why or why not?

3. Do you notice anything about the story that you would have expected the author to write about, yet it wasn’t covered in the draft? This might be a prominent formal feature (diction, syntax, etc.), a powerful image or metaphor, or something else entirely.

4. Are there any parts of the story that do not seem consistent with the author’s argument? Can these parts be reconciled with the author’s thesis? If so, how?

5. Compose a brief retrospective outline of the draft in which you identify each paragraph’s main idea in 3-5 words. Note any paragraphs that do not have clear (or clearly expressed) topic sentences, any paragraphs whose main idea does not relate clearly back to the thesis statement, and any paragraph that seems to have insufficient support for its main idea.

6. Identify any parts of the draft that, as a reader, you have difficulty understanding or following. Try your best to determine the cause of this difficulty; is the passage obscurely or confusingly worded? Is it insufficiently connected to the paragraph’s or the paper’s main idea? Provide your partner with any feedback that you think could help sustain the reader’s attention.

Your feedback for BOTH drafts is due 24 HOURS AFTER CLASS ENDS. When you have finished the first workshop, turn it in here:

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1bJwpScWP3_DOQVMeG-0ee3c4eFAUqiCm7XjD9gvwAyU/viewform

and when you have finished the second, turn it in here:

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1lo4gMQ0leBtyuWYWs4LPXeE7-v2zsoIBKG5-KOAt4fw/viewform

Activity: Harrison Bergeron

Identify the paradox present in this short story. Use evidence to support your text. (Hint: The paradox is emphasized towards the end of the story). Why do you think Vonnegut decided to end the short story with a dance scene, and what is the significance of this scene? How does the style of the story change in this passage?

Do you think it is significant that Vonegut decided to intensify the sounds in the short story as the story progressed? If so, why? 

Should the ultimate goal of American policy/action be equality? If not, then what should be the goal? 

It is stated in the story that Hazel Bergeron bore a resemblance to Diana Moon Glampers. Hazel also states that she’d make a good Handicapper General if she were one. Hazel isn’t described with having a handicap and is mentioned in the story of having average intelligence. What do you think Hazel stating she’d make a good general mean? Does Hazel have a distorted view of things based on the propaganda given by the television, or does it imply that there is more to her than meets the eye? Is it also possible that she is related to Glampers?

Do you think Harrison’s performance triggered any emotion in the public? Despite the ending of the performance, do you think it is possible for people to be influenced by this sort of rebellion and be pushed to defy government standard? Why or why not?

Think about when this story was published and relate it to the context of the story. In what way does the time period affect Vonnegut’s depiction of this dystopian science fiction story? 

Activity: Three Deaths

Tolstoy chooses to refer to characters by two different names/terms, and also chooses to reveal some of the names until later, such as Marya and Uncle Khveodor/Feodor. Why do you think he does this? Does this add anything to the story or take away from it? How (if at all) would the story change if all the characters' names were given the first time they were mentioned?

The title of the story shows us that there will be three deaths, but there are four chapters in the story, in one of which no death occurs. Is there any purpose in doing this? What do you think is the point of splitting up the story into four chapters? Is there a reason that Tolstoy alternates between the two story lines between chapters?

Throughout the three scenarios of death in Leo Tolstoy's short story the prospect of death is often juxtaposed with the vivaciousness and joys of life. Give examples of some of these instances. Do you believe that Tolstoy has a meaning behind his placement of such life-filled characters to those who were nearing or experiencing death?

Two of the three deaths in Three Deaths were humans. What do you think the purpose was of showcasing the death of a tree? Did this death occur at the end of the story by strategy or mere coincidence? Why or why not? 

After viewing the distinctions between two classes in society when confronting death, how do you think the middle class in today’s society would respond? What similarities and differences would exist?

In the story, we saw how stubborn Marya was and how selfless Uncle Feodor was. With today’s technology and advancements, how would someone react in similar situations? Would you see them being stubborn, selfless, or something else? 

Reading Quiz 11-21

The final reading quiz! Yay!

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1tuYDQY4oX3xUq5faERsFl9PBMuP2OlklzNMahL-L1v0/viewform

The Circle of Life:

 

Three Deaths, a work by Leo Tolstoy, explores a phenomenon that is experienced by all, yet the prospects of it do not have a universal understanding—the occurrence of death. Regardless of who you are, what background you may come from, or your views on the afterlife, every living being will at some point be faced with imminent death. In this short story, the reader is introduced to three protagonists who have encountered this inescapable aspect of Nature. The first subject is a noblewoman who prolongs her death, the second is a poor coach driver who has come to accept his time and the last being an “ancient, immovable” (588) tree whose death comes unexpectedly. Even though the author places focus on the way each subject handles dying, the underlying message and point of this story is depicted mostly through those who surround them in their process of dying. The contrasting scenarios of these three figures points out a common theme among them all; the theme of the cycle of life from degeneration to renewal. Tolstoy uses these three characters, as well as the beings surrounding them as an outlet to express the significance of the circle of life.

During her carriage ride in Chapter One, the old lady is constantly wincing from the pain of her ailment. Throughout this ride, the old lady’s “weariness, irascibility, and habitual suffering” (579) is sharply contrasted by the presence of her maid, who was a healthy young lady with a “fresh face” (579), fat hands, and strong legs. The juxtaposition of the old lady with her younger counterpart gives the reader an initial insight to the idea of comparing those who are facing death with those who are alive and well. The ‘invalid’ woman is startled by the prospect of her death and wishes to prolong her life by seeking medical attention in the warmth of Italy. Those who surround her strongly believe that it would be a waste for her to travel, predicting that she could by no means handle such a trip. Begrudgingly the old lady accepts their presumptions and they all return back to their mansion. In Chapter Three, the old lady is revisited a few months later, when the trees are “full of life and brilliancy” (584). At this point the elderly woman’s health has almost completely left her, and up ‘til her last breath, the woman is still unaccepting of her approaching fate. During her last moments, as well as the moments during her funeral, the story flashes to children playing and being joyful, with the distant rooms echoing of “the voice of children and their romping” (587). This imagery further expounds upon the theme of old life exiting to allow fresh, new life to enter.

No longer possessing the strength to move the old, sick driver, Khveodor is cooped up upon the top of an oven as he patiently waits for his death. The old man is aware that his “death is at hand” (584) and he has no issue ‘lending’ his new pair of boots to a young boy, Seryoha. This exchange was given under one condition; that the young fellow would purchase a headstone to adorn the site of his grave. The old man’s willingness to give away his pair of shoes in exchange for a headstone further illustrated that he was accepting his impending death. Since he knew that he no longer needed the new boots, he was at peace with the prospect of giving them to the younger generation.

Having illustrated the deaths of two characters who were knowledgeable of their demise, Tolstoy introduces one final death which is arguably the most prominent and powerful display of the purpose of his story. Seryoha, the young boy who promised the old man a headstone, made a trek into the heart of the forest one early morning to chop down a tree fit to construct a cross with. During the blows of the axe, the tree is personified as being full of life. With its “juicy leaves” whispering to the birds and the base “shuddering with fear” (588), the tree eventually falls to “rest like all the others with their foliage” (588). As sad as the prospect of the trees death may be, the other trees were more joyous than ever, “slowly and majestically” (588) waving their hands over the dead tree. The sunbeams broke through the clouds and gleamed toward the heavens.

The three deaths showcased in this story go to prove that even though death is a definite and sometimes unnerving prospect, happiness and joyfulness can and will continue after death. Living beings must die in order to create space for fresh, new life to emerge and thrive. No matter how long one may postpone their death, the cycle of life is an unchangeable and even beautiful phenomenon.

 

One in the Same

In the aptly named short story Three Deaths by Leo Tolstoy, three different deaths occur under different circumstances - the death of a rich woman, a poor peasant driver, and a young tree in the woods. Unlike most literary works that deal with death, Tolstoy takes on a very detached and distant tone.  The fact that the title of the story itself gives away the ending of each plotline also draws the reader’s attention away from the plotline. By doing so, the focus of the story is shifted from the actual events to the story to the way the setting, characterization, and structure portray how death, in all the ways it can occur, is vastly different but surprisingly similar.

There are four chapters in the story, which alternate between the two plotlines: one revolving around Marya Dmitrievna, a rich and seemingly young woman who has been afflicted with a terminal illness, and a poor driver known as Uncle Feodor.  By alternating between the stories, Tolstoy juxtaposes their lives, how others around them treat them, and how the reactions to their inevitable death. Marya is obviously wealthy and has her own maiden to look after her; she is under the watch and care of her husband and doctor but does not seem to appreciate their concern. In fact, she is angry at her husband for trying to take her home so she can live longer, and scorns him by saying that “if I had not listened to you so long, I should at this moment be at Berlin and have entirely recovered.” Feodor, on the other hand, lays dying on top of an oven, surrounded by people but cared for by very little but is still kind-hearted and even gives another driver his new boots in exchange that he simply get him a stone for his grave.

Although the differences between their lives are more than clear, the earthly possessions and the amount of (or lack of) people who care for them are not what completely set them apart. Feodor had completely accepted his death, symbolized by his willingness to give up his boots and his desire to ensure he would be properly buried, while Marya, even on her death bed, insists that she would have been well if her husband had let her continue on her journey. No matter how they perceive and react to death, however, both ultimately die, just as the tree falls in the forest. Perhaps Tolstoy is showing us that no matter what kind of lives we live, or how wealthy we are, or even how we try to avoid or welcome death, that we all will die. This statement, however, does not have to be taken negatively; perhaps Tolstoy is making a comment on the circle of life. Just like “the branches of the living trees slowly and majestically waved over the dead and fallen tree,” so will the lives of those who knew Marya and Feodor continue.

Mind Games

            

            The short story, Harrison Bergeron by Kurt Vonnegut is set in the future of year 2081. Amendments 211, 213, and 213 state that every American is fully equal – in all ways, and the Handicapper General and a team of agents strictly and immorally enforce these laws. There seems to be massive, unavoidable (government) corruption present at this point in time. The average American is too dumb and helpless to question the laws and the intelligent man is prohibited from doing so. Technology such as television and sound is now being used to shape and manipulate society.

            Media, especially television, is extremely powerful during this period of time.

The government uses television to broadcast warnings about “dangerous” people like Harrison Bergeron. A ballerina had announced, “Harrison Bergeron has escaped from jail, where he was held on suspicion of plotting to overthrow the government” (Vonnegut 591). This announcement was followed by a police photograph of Harrison, which was shown upside down, sideways, and right side up. This photo was a way to intimidate television viewers, when in reality Harrison meant no harm to these people. Harrison was shown with his handicaps that totaled up to nearly three hundred pounds (Vonnegut 592). This gave the television viewers a visual example of the handicaps imposed on those who are above average and do not suppress their own abilities. Something that I found extremely interesting was that of all places that Harrison could have gone after escaping he came to the television set. This displays the importance of media and technology because, as one of the most powerful beings, Harrison decided to deliver his message on television, in front of the world. Diana Moon Glampers, the Handicap General, also shoots Harrison and his Empress (the ballerina) with a double-barreled ten-guage shotgun and then aims the gun at the musicians telling them that they had ten seconds to get their handicaps back on – all on television (Vonnegut 593). Television is used to terrorize the citizens and the live execution of Harrison and the ballerina shows society what would happen if they tried to challenge the law. Furthermore, televisions significance is emphasized because the entire short story takes place as George and Hazel are sitting in front of the TV.

            The government constantly transmits noises into mental handicap radios that intelligent humans are required to have. “Every twenty seconds or so, the transmitter sends out a sharp noise to keep people like George from taking unfair advantage of their brains (Vonnegut 589). The fact that the lives of intelligent humans are heavily regulated on a daily basis is evident and quite obvious to the reader. Something that may go unnoticed to many readers is that Vonnegut intensifies the noises in the story as the plot nears its peak (paralleling the violence and tragedy of Harrison’s life). When the story begins, there is only a buzzer sound in George’s head as he is watching ballerinas on television. He tries to think a little about the ballerinas. “George was toying with the vague notion that maybe dancers shouldn’t be handicapped. But he didn’t get very far with it before another noise in his ear radio scattered his thoughts” (Vonnegut 590). He is now hit with a sound of a bottle being smashed with a hammer, which is slightly more intense then the buzzer. As the story progresses, George begins to think about his son Harrison, who was now in jail, “but a twenty-one-gun salute in his head stopped that” (Vonnegut 590). This was such a “doozy” that George was white and trembling, and tears stood on the rims of his red eyes. When George begins to think about the laws of equality, and wonders what would happen to society “the minute people start cheating on laws” a siren goes off in his head. These last two sounds foreshadow the death of Harrison because he cheats the law, and is then killed by a shotgun. When George sees Harrison on the TV screen, George hears an automobile collision in his head, and when he opens his eyes, the photograph of Harrison is gone. I find this ironic, especially because the government basically prevented Harrison from knowing his son was on television (through noise). Hazel’s lack of memory and the array of sounds that impact George’s memory prevent them from knowing about Harrison’s death.  The final sound is a “handicap signal” which isn’t specifically identified. Vonnegut’s inability to mention this sound may suggest that it is so awful, just like Harrison’s death, which George and Hazel cannot comprehend. The last noise George hears is a riveting gun, which echoes the way Diana Glampers killed Harrison.

The "perfect" society

    “Harrison Bergeron” demonstrates the detrimental effects that absolute equality brings upon a society. The story is staged in year 2081 in the United States, where everyone has become equal through the use of physical and mental handicaps. This conformity has led to an intellectually stunted and uninspired population, perhaps presenting that a truly equal society is far from what many imagine.
    The narrative begins by stating “everybody was finally equal” with the “211th, 212th, and 213th Amendments to the constitution” (589). This not only presents the current state of the world, but also insinuates that the final goal of equality has been accomplished. The second paragraph begins with “some things about living still weren’t quite right,” suggesting that they believed most things were right and the world contained only minor defects (589).
     In order to ensure equality amongst all people, the United States Government has appointed the Handicapper General who is in charge of “handicapping,” making certain that each citizen is equal in terms of physical and mental abilities (589). The main character, George, is an intelligent man required to wear an earpiece that emits a beep every 20 seconds to disrupt his train of thought, as well as a 47 pound bag to ensure his strength remains standard. His wife, Hazel, considered physically and intellectually average, constantly forgets what she is thinking about. Even the “beautiful” citizens are required to wear masks to ensure that they remain equal to all others.
    The story centers around the life of George and Hazel, whose son is taken by the government; however, they cannot grasp or understand this concept and quickly forget in mere seconds. Though they share dialogue with each other, it is stunted and uninteresting. They seem to lack motivation and inspiration, spending their free time by simply watching TV.  What is even more interesting is their lack of independence. When Hazel suggests to George that he break his weighted sack, he rebukes her by stating that he does not wish for the world to return to its old “competitive ways” (591). Hazel then quickly forgets her notion and continues watching television. This shows that those intelligent enough to contemplate society are already content, and those that are merely average are incapable of insubordination.
    Hazel and George’s son, Harrison Bergeron, then appears on the television among a group of dancers. He is the epitome of the alpha male, standing 7 feet tall, incredibly handsome and mentally gifted. He burst free of his handicaps on television, and claims to be emperor, dancing with such incredible grace that he and his partner are lifted to the ceiling. The Handicapper general enters and quickly dispatches the two dancers, signaling the end of their independence. Though most are content, Harrison represents the dwindling desire of the population to become free. His quick and efficient death at the hands of the state, and failure of his parents to even remember his actions, suggest that the government, in its quest for equality, will always prevail. (592-593)
    I personally do not believe that the goal of the United States or the constitution is equality in every respect. As stated in the text, I believe the founding fathers aimed to ensure that everyone was considered equal under “God and the Law,” not absolutely uniform in all aspects. Kurt Vonnegut seems to believe this as well, demonstrating that a quest for true equality will perhaps result in an incredibly static and dull world that lacks inspiration and motivation.  Difference does not imply inequality, and Kurt Vonnegut presents that the government may fail in realizing this fact. Vonnegut shows that a government too intent on a quest for equality will result in a world that is characterless and empty.

The Deaths

     Three Deaths is a short story that is split up into four chapters. The first and third chapters we are exposed to the story of a woman's death. The second and fourth chapters we are exposed to a man's death. Although their sickness is very similar, the way their deaths are handled is not. The short story is showing an example of how society, and social classes were different.
     Marya Dmitriyevna is attempting to flee the harsh Russian winter to reach the warm Italian climate in the hopes of curing her illness. The two carriages ironically intersect in sections 1 and 2 of the story, when the carriages of the upper-class make a quick stop at the post station, where most of the lower class characters work. At the station, all the passengers except Marya leave to go eat. Marya does not believe that her husband, or doctor for that matter, have her health in their interest "It makes no difference to them how I am, they are well, and it's all the same to them" (580). The doctor and the husband both discuss how they believe if Marya keeps traveling that she will not live to reach Italy.  Marya husband tries to come up with excuses to stop her because the trip will cause her to pass away even quicker. She entirely disagrees with him. When she comes to the realization that she will die soon she is at peace, but at the same time full of anger at her husband for not taking her to France. Her family also endures pain. Her mother has to see the death of her young daughter die and this is huge. The second is an old peasant driver, lying sick on an oven in a restroom for coach drivers. He is somehow more aware of his death as are the people around him. His attitude is completely different than the woman. He knows his death is coming and just simply accepts it and waits for it. On the night he dies, his niece dreams that he is on his feet and well again and has offered to help her cut wood from the jungle. We can even assume that this is true, and that his spirit has been set free, and that was in fact his spirit in her dream. The niece is the first to mention him the next morning describing her dream, then they find the old peasant has passed. The third death is that of a young tall tree in the center of the woods. Even the way the things around the tree handle the death is significant "The birds hopped about in the thicket, and, as if beside themselves, voiced their happiness." Also the other trees rejoiced "The trees, more joyously than ever, extended their motionless branches over the new space that had been made in their midst" (588).
     These three deaths signify that at some point we will all pass away, and that we will eventually have to face death on our own. These deaths show how not only the person passing away handled their death, but also those around them. It shows the difference between the social classes, and also the effects of nature. 
    

Inevitable Death

Leo Tolstoy, in his short story Three Deaths, explores how different lifestyles can lead to different reactions when faced with death. Although everyone at some point has to cope with the thought of death, whether it be themselves or loved ones who are dying, people may express their attitudes toward passing away in ways unique to their socioeconomical situations. Tolstoy illustrates and compares the deaths of a wealthy woman, a working man, and a tree by depicting the differences of the reactions of the dying and the people and atmosphere around them.

                The rich woman is immediately introduced in comparison to her maid, who “breathed of health”. The word choice that obviously emphasizes the maid’s robust physical features is through the filter of the sick woman, which is significant because it gives a tone of bitterness and accusation from the “invalid” to the healthy people around her. This is seen again when the carriage passes the church and the maid makes the sign of the cross. Directly after this gesture, the lady asks the maid “why did you cross yourself?,” implying she thought the maid might have made the cross sign to bless her as people bless the dead. The woman’s husband tries to support his wife and hide the fact that she is going to die soon from her, although his desperation to keep her happy is revealed when he talks to the doctor, confessing that his wife has “made her plans for living abroad” in order to cure her illness, even though she would have to leave behind her children. The denial of the woman about her own blatantly imminent death and her willingness to leave behind her family to stay alive show desperation and represent the need to remain in control, as it can be presumed she was during her healthy days when she had money and political power.

                The poor man, who has a similar terminal illness as the rich woman, has a very different reaction to his impending doom. When his nephew approaches him, as he lays in his death bed, about wearing his new boots, the dying man complies. He has accepted his death perhaps before it was even confirmed by a doctor, asking his nephew only to buy him a stone when he is dead. The nephew replies to his uncle’s request by first thanking him for the boots and then agreeing to get a stone. This was significant because both the uncle and his nephew did not question or try to avoid death or the idea of dying like the rich woman did. However, the pain of death of the uncle brings on people who loved him is not totally overlooked. Nastya, his niece, has a dream that her uncle is young and able to work once again, and wakes up alarmed and screaming, telling herself that her uncle “can’t be dead”. The denial of death still is present as it was with the rich woman, but it is subconsciously inserted in the feelings of people whom death impacts in a dream.

                The last of the three deaths illustrated by Tostoy was of a tree, cut down by a logger. The tree could not talk, and it had no family to mourn its death, but the notion of denial and the impact of loss were still present in the diction of the chapter. When the logger begins to cut down the tree, the sound is described as “strange”, as if the removal of the tree is extremely unexpected, which gives readers a feeling of unease and anxiety, similar to the family members of the dying people and the dying people themselves in the previous two deaths. The tree is also described as “ancient” and “immovable”, which sets a mood for the shock of the actual falling of the tree. The tree is then personified as resisting death, and having “fear” as it begins to fall, fighting gravity for a few moments and “straightening itself”, but eventually the tree fell. The trees around the fallen tree, perhaps representing family and friends, “shook for an instant”, which is symbolic for the postmortem shock of the living. But, eventually, the surrounding trees, “more joyous than ever” extended their branches “over the new space that had been made in their midst.”

                By giving readers three distinct yet eerily similar illustrations of death and its effects, Tolstoy forces the contemplation of passing away and different ways in which it can be coped with. In his final chapter, however, he clearly depicts the idea that death, while it may seem inevitable, is unavoidable and necessary for others to prosper.

Equality Achieved?

In the science fiction short story, “Harrison Bergeron,” we see the concept of egalitarianism emerge in a dystopian society in which competition is strictly hampered by the use of handicaps to limit people’s abilities. In the past and the present times, the need for equality is strongly advocated for through a series of protests, law, and amendment changes. We seem to acquire and desire for equality so much that it defines our society. But how much equality is too much? In the year 2081 in the fictional world of “Harrison Bergeron,” society was finally equal in a way that “nobody was smarter, better-looking, stronger, or quicker than anybody else.” Vonnegut depicts a feared future world where everything is controlled by an authoritarian government and through this, he conveys his attitude on equality by describing the demise and the danger of ultimate equality.

Conformity is a key concept that the story portrays, and the setting implies that it is a vital part of society. Failure to follow the government’s standards can result in astonishing consequences as stated by George Bergeron, Harrison’s father, "Two years in prison and two thousand dollars fine for every ball I took out” (591).  Harrison Bergeron, imprisoned and overwhelmingly above average due to his handicaps, is the beacon of hope in the desire to break away from the authoritarian government, or so it seems for a brief period of time. Even though everybody is in awe of Harrison’s enlightening and graceful dance with the ballerina, the harsh reality is brought to light as Diana Moon Glampers, the Handicapper General, kills Harrison and the ballerina. There is no escape from this world, and any form of rebellion will be relinquished.

Essentially, the authoritarian government is controlled by a Handicapper General who oversees the functions of suppressing people who are of above average intelligence. George Bergeron has a mental handicap in his ear, which is a device that makes a sound every twenty seconds that effectively halters his thought processes to prevent the above average intelligence population from having an unfair advantage. Besides the control of intelligence, beauty and grace are also inhibited based on the description of the ballerinas in which “They were burdened with sashweights and bags of birdshot, and their faces were masked, so that no one, seeing a free and graceful gesture or a pretty face, would feel like something the cat drug in” (590). The quote “All men are created equal,” is widely known. In these ways, everybody was finally equal. On the surface, it seems that it is a simple statement that requires easy adjustments, but it is not so. Conformity is not fully achievable.

Media is a distraction for the general public, as seen through the beginning of the story when Hazel and George Bergeron are watching a television program about the ballerinas. The television is the main source of communication and ways to effectively convey messages. Unfortunately, this is too much like propaganda, such as when Harrison’s picture was shown with a variety of intricate handicaps, to signify the importance of adhering to the strict rules of the government. The short story has a similar theme to 1984, on the danger of the government and rebellion, and the inescapable need to be loyal to the authoritarian regime. With this desolate situation, it is clear that the story depicts the author’s view of equality and societal standards. The standard of equality and the need for conformity is not attainable to the fullest extent. Vonnegut exemplifies the danger of the ultimate equality by describing a terrible scenario in which people are hampered by severe handicaps to achieve equality.

Social Ladder of Death

            Three Deaths is a short story that I believe serves for comparison. In the story, we are exposed to two difference people in difference areas that are going through the same experience of death. In one scenario, we have a woman who seems to be in the upper class of society. In the other society, we have a man who seems to be in the lower class of society. The manner in which both individuals approach death is drastically different. In one case, the idea of death is not mentioned in a straightforward manner to the woman. In the other case, the idea of death is extremely apparent to the man and society does not seem to care much about it.

            The woman, Marya Dmitrievna, seems to belong to a family that is in the upper class. This becomes apparent to the reader when we are first introduced to Marya and her maid when the narrator states, “One was a lady, thin and pale; the other, her maid…” (page 578). People in the lower class do not normally have maids, so it becomes evident that Marya is from a higher class on the social ladder. Her family members surround Marya when she is on her deathbed. Marya is also young and tries to run away from death when it confronts her.  She is also extremely stubborn as seen when she says, “If I had not listened to you for so long, I should at this time have been in Berlin and have entirely recovered” (page 581).  She passes away in the spring, which could potentially signify the loss of young life.

            The man, Uncle Feodor, seems to belong to a society that is in the lower class. This becomes apparent to the reader when nobody is readily trying to help him when he is close to his death. Seryoha, without inquiring about Uncle Feodor’s health, seems more interested in the boots that Uncle Feodor owns than anything else. He is extremely selfish and this is seen when Seryoha states, “Now I should like to know where he should need them [the boots]” (page 583). Uncle Feodor is not stubborn and readily gives the boots to Seryoha, only requesting that Seryoha buy him a stone when he is dead. When Uncle Feodor is on his deathbed, nobody is at his side. Rather, he is alone. Furthermore, nobody hides the fact that Uncle Feodor is close to death, nor does Uncle Feodor try to escape death. He passes away in the fall, which could potentially signify the loss of an elderly person.

            Overall, I think this short story was created to serve as a comparison of the different classes in society and how they perceive death. We see the clear distinctions between the classes in the story when we compare the death of Marya and the death of Uncle Feodor.