On Monday my small group discussed the intentions of Madame
Péricand rather extensively, often differing on our opinion of her. Where I
thought here character was clear in her manipulative actions, other members of
my group disagreed, claiming that she was acting out of genuine concern for
others. My issue with Madame Péricand comes not from her actions but from the
omniscient third-person narrator’s comments on her thoughts. This narrative
form is an incredibly invaluable tool for the audience to achieve insights into
a character’s mind without said character ever expressing these sentiments
personally.
By
her actions, such as offering her servant medical aid and sharing food with the
children “less fortunate” than her family, would seem kind to the untrained
eye, however the insights provided by the narrator allows the audience to
discover her true intent. Her true intent is to be perceived as a kind and
generous woman however she only means to be seen this way, her intentions are
not genuine in the sense that she wants others to see her in a light that she
does not truly intend to live in. Others in my group disagreed, saying that she
may be selfish due to her upbringing in a higher class but she is attempting to
break from her social norms by helping others less fortunate. This argument
would be believable if not for her selfish actions preceding the acts, such as
the way she stopped sharing the food in the café the moment she believed that
there was none left.
I love the way you put this point: "This narrative form is an incredibly invaluable tool for the audience to achieve insights into a character’s mind without said character ever expressing these sentiments personally."
ReplyDeleteGood description of the debate, but please include at least one substantial quote as evidence. Literary analysis requires it!