The themes of “The Red Bow” and “Adams” exhibit a father’s desperate attempt to ensure the safety of his family and his community. Both father’s go through great measures to protect their family and community from ever enduring the pain and anger that they feel inside. This motivates both fathers to act in a violent way only one is acting in the fact that his daughter was viciously killed by a dog, and the other one found his neighbor standing in his house facing his children’s room while wearing nothing but underwear. Although different scenarios these stories by George Saunders tell us that the fathers of the house are the protectors and that they will do what it takes to ensure the safety of their family and community. After all they do
…show more content…
He took actions without Ed’s help because he knew that Ed was hurting and didn’t want all the weight to fall on Ed’s shoulders so to speak. Uncle Matt sits down and creates flyers for a village meeting because they want everyone in the village to be aware of what is going on and what action needs to be in place for nobody else to get hurt. There was an unknown infection running through these animals from just being near an infected animal, so they needed to strategize a plan to execute to check all the village animals for such infection. Uncle Matt and Dr. Vincent worked together to come up with a “three-point emergency plan” (Saunders, 2009) where the animal’s owners would agree to have them checked out to ensure they were not infected. At the village meeting uncle Matt brought “a large red bow not Emily’s bow but one as large as a lady’s hat” (Saunders, 2009) to symbolize what they lost the day a dog took the life of Emily. With using the large red bow as a metaphor for Emily’s red bow it showed the village the significance of what the family had lost, and that they didn’t want anyone else to find something as such because of another …show more content…
In my opinion this was not the way to handle the situation. Roger ends up doing the same exact thing to Frank’s family as he did to Rogers family. He threatened the security and safety that Franks family felt before he invades their home. I understand that he was just trying to ensure that his family was safe, but I feel he went to far. He should have involved the police, but I also know how the conflict of rage and instability of the safety of his family would cause him to act in such a way.
Moreover, Frank tells Roger “I am what I am” (Saunders, 2004) I feel that Roger takes this in a different way than how it was supposed to be taken. He then feels that Frank knows exactly what he is doing and will most likely end up returning to Rogers home. I didn’t completely understand what Saunders meant by this statement because he doesn’t go in to detail about what Frank means by “I am what I am.” So, this leaves the reader being able to perceive Frank as what they think he may be such as, a predator or a
He took actions without Ed’s help because he knew that Ed was hurting and didn’t want all the weight to fall on Ed’s shoulders so to speak. Uncle Matt sits down and creates flyers for a village meeting because they want everyone in the village to be aware of what is going on and what action needs to be in place for nobody else to get hurt. There was an unknown infection running through these animals from just being near an infected animal, so they needed to strategize a plan to execute to check all the village animals for such infection. Uncle Matt and Dr. Vincent worked together to come up with a “three-point emergency plan” (Saunders, 2009) where the animal’s owners would agree to have them checked out to ensure they were not infected. At the village meeting uncle Matt brought “a large red bow not Emily’s bow but one as large as a lady’s hat” (Saunders, 2009) to symbolize what they lost the day a dog took the life of Emily. With using the large red bow as a metaphor for Emily’s red bow it showed the village the significance of what the family had lost, and that they didn’t want anyone else to find something as such because of another …show more content…
In my opinion this was not the way to handle the situation. Roger ends up doing the same exact thing to Frank’s family as he did to Rogers family. He threatened the security and safety that Franks family felt before he invades their home. I understand that he was just trying to ensure that his family was safe, but I feel he went to far. He should have involved the police, but I also know how the conflict of rage and instability of the safety of his family would cause him to act in such a way.
Moreover, Frank tells Roger “I am what I am” (Saunders, 2004) I feel that Roger takes this in a different way than how it was supposed to be taken. He then feels that Frank knows exactly what he is doing and will most likely end up returning to Rogers home. I didn’t completely understand what Saunders meant by this statement because he doesn’t go in to detail about what Frank means by “I am what I am.” So, this leaves the reader being able to perceive Frank as what they think he may be such as, a predator or a