All throughout history, the divide in classes have been an extremely noticeable aspect of society and the inevitable differences and treatment that the two main classes (proletariat and bourgeoisie) receive have been a constant subject of debate. This social separation and its impact on many civilizations caused the ideal of Marxism to develop through literature in which people believed that there was a oppositional relationship between the upper and lower class. A strong example of Marxism in literature would be through the short story “The Doctor and the Doctor’s Wife” by Ernest Hemingway in which the Indians (and Dick) represent the lower, working class and the doctor (Henry) stands for the upper. When using the Marxism lense in this piece
…show more content…
When the doctor asks Dick and the Natives to help him with the carrying of the logs, Dick seemingly purposefully replied in a snarky attitude and blamed him of stealing them. It is common sense that workers would not have the intention of angering or annoying those who employee them if they were content with their job so the conversation that Dick had with Henry proves that he is discontented and is indirectly rebelling. The fact that Dick boldly accuses the person who hired him when stating: “‘Well, Doc,”... “thats a nice lot of timber you’ve stolen”’ (Hemingway 1) even though he may have know that isn’t true, shows his only purpose was to irritate and infuriate Henry. It is very interesting how in the context of the story, Dick should be the one below the doctor, but the mocking tone in which Dick uses to speak to him such as “‘Don’t go off at half cock, Doc,”...You know they’re stolen as well as I do. It don’t make any difference to me”’ (Hemingway 2), makes it seem like it is actually the other way around. This represents a sort of rebellion against the social class that Dick is trying to make, yet the only one hurt in the end is himself because Henry removes him from the job. Not only did Dick’s rude comments not help him reach his goal of showing his dissatisfaction with the social …show more content…
As the Natives were about to leave, Hemingway describes that: “Dick left the gate open. Billy Tabeshaw went back and fastened it. They were gone through the woods.” (Hemingway 3). Even though leaving the gate open isn’t some drastically detrimental act that screamed rebellion, it matched with Dick’s personality shown through the passage as relying on subtle, almost petty replies or actions to convey his displeasure about doctor (who represented the bogusis as the employer). The act of leaving the gate was the last attempt from Dick to “silently” rebel yet it was countered by Billy closing it. Once again, Billy was probably afraid of angering the higher class which caused him to fix the small, seemingly insignificant act from Nick. On a larger scale, this shows that even though some people of a lower class may rebel because of deprivation and too much forced work, it will have no effect on the upper class and overall be unsuccessful because the other people in the proletariat will just make up for the small damage done by the
When the doctor asks Dick and the Natives to help him with the carrying of the logs, Dick seemingly purposefully replied in a snarky attitude and blamed him of stealing them. It is common sense that workers would not have the intention of angering or annoying those who employee them if they were content with their job so the conversation that Dick had with Henry proves that he is discontented and is indirectly rebelling. The fact that Dick boldly accuses the person who hired him when stating: “‘Well, Doc,”... “thats a nice lot of timber you’ve stolen”’ (Hemingway 1) even though he may have know that isn’t true, shows his only purpose was to irritate and infuriate Henry. It is very interesting how in the context of the story, Dick should be the one below the doctor, but the mocking tone in which Dick uses to speak to him such as “‘Don’t go off at half cock, Doc,”...You know they’re stolen as well as I do. It don’t make any difference to me”’ (Hemingway 2), makes it seem like it is actually the other way around. This represents a sort of rebellion against the social class that Dick is trying to make, yet the only one hurt in the end is himself because Henry removes him from the job. Not only did Dick’s rude comments not help him reach his goal of showing his dissatisfaction with the social …show more content…
As the Natives were about to leave, Hemingway describes that: “Dick left the gate open. Billy Tabeshaw went back and fastened it. They were gone through the woods.” (Hemingway 3). Even though leaving the gate open isn’t some drastically detrimental act that screamed rebellion, it matched with Dick’s personality shown through the passage as relying on subtle, almost petty replies or actions to convey his displeasure about doctor (who represented the bogusis as the employer). The act of leaving the gate was the last attempt from Dick to “silently” rebel yet it was countered by Billy closing it. Once again, Billy was probably afraid of angering the higher class which caused him to fix the small, seemingly insignificant act from Nick. On a larger scale, this shows that even though some people of a lower class may rebel because of deprivation and too much forced work, it will have no effect on the upper class and overall be unsuccessful because the other people in the proletariat will just make up for the small damage done by the