Comparison Of Katherine Mansfield’s Stories The Garden Party And At The Bay To Sherlock Holmes And The Arabian Nights
A celebrated writer, Katherine Mansfield, is known as one of the most talented English short story writers of her time and is also recognized as “one of the pioneers of the avant-garde in the creation of the short story”. “The Garden Party” (1920) and “At the Bay” (1922) are only some of her unique stories that are praised up to this day. These two stories will become a subject of discussion for this paper, comparing theirits plot developments and structures to that of “The Arabian Nights” and a selection of stories “Sherlock Holmes stories..” The paper will be deliberating the four accounts by looking for structural elements in Mansfield's stories that were brought to light by the comparison, along with the assessment to whether this comparison affects the sense of meaning held within Mansfield’s stories.- Through a comparison of these stories, I will demonstrate that the structural elements of Mansfield’s stories.
As the Modernist literary movement enters the field, a more individualistic and realist formation of subjects including the installation of new and fresh methods to write became a part of the movement’s influences. This brought about Mansfield’s extensive usage of themes — differences in social status, sexuality, and the like — to course through her stories, individually enhancing the message of her narrations and concluding into a realization of the external factors that impact her characters’ situations and decisions, such as the first story of “At the Bay”. This story presents a one-day storyline through thirteen parts, occurring in a single town situated close to the fictional Crescent Bay. Two families sit at its center of the story: Stanley Burnell’s and Jonathan Trout's. Both men are married into Mrs. Fairfield’s family, their wives being the aging woman’s children. The story breaks down into these two men’s perspectives followed by that of Mrs. Fairfield and her daughters; Alice the servant girl; and the Burnell and Trout children.
“The Garden Party” begins with another illustrative presentation of the story’s setting, initially providing a reason for the seemingly busy house that is seen through the main character, Laura’s, eyes. She is to host a garden party. However, an incident that killed a poor neighbor resulted in Laura’s confusion to proceed with her party or cancel it. Although she has been reprimanded for thinking of canceling the garden party for the sake of the deceased neighbor, Laura has seen through that the dead and his family are given respect at the end of the party. What Laura sees inside of the room where the killed man lays, changes her.
“The Arabian Nights”, also known through the name of “One Thousand and One Nights” presents a Shah (a title with the same weight as that of princes, emperors, lords and kings) by the name of Rayar who, by his wife’s betrayal, has sworn off falling for women and arrangements of long-term marriages. This results for his decree of marrying one woman each day and killing her by the time night approaches. It is here that one of the Vizier’s daughters, by the name of Scheherazade, decides to save the kingdom by marrying the Shah and convincing him to cease the murders through her plan of prolonging her life by her tales in hopes of earning both of the Shah’s interest and trust. She, after a handful of months of her tales, has captured the Shah’s heart and has convinced him to keep her alive. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s “Sherlock Holmes” is a serialized story wherein Mr. Holmes and Dr. Watson are subjected to cases that needed Sherlock’s bizarre skills of deduction in bringing the truth to light.
Establishing the summaries of the four stories, the discussion will begin first with the comparison of its plot structures. A distinct comparison of Mansfield’s short stories to “The Arabian Nights” and “Sherlock Holmes” lies with the rising and falling action of the short stories. The plot structure of “The Arabian Nights” and “Sherlock Holmes” draws out the formation of a pyramid — with an exposition that is followed by the rising action, the climax, and finally with the falling action and the resolution. “The Arabian Nights” begins with the introduction of the Shah and Scheherazade’s purpose — baring their ways of thinking to the reader. The narration’s rising action is in a state of perpetuation for each beginning of a new story and conclusion as Scheherazade continues to prolong her survival by spinning more stories that she hopes to capture Shah Rayar eventually. Subsequently, the climax of the story lays within the approaching end of the last of Scheherazade’s stories titled, “The Tale of Maaruf and the Cobbler.” It is at the one thousandth and one night that Scheherazade asks her husband for a favor in return of the stories she has told: having born three sons throughout one thousand and one nights, letting her life is the least that the Shah could do. The crucial part is fixed here, and the resolution presents Shah Rayar professing his love for Scheherazade and also celebrates the end of the Shah’s bloody reign.
“A Study in Scarlet” in Sherlock Holmes begins in a similar way of introducing the characters, with Dr. John Watson at the helm and as the one whose perspective is operated throughout the whole story. This is followed by the opening to the oddity of Sherlock Holmes who has a queer manner when it comes to analyses. The pair was brought into the world of crime and investigation as the story’s rising action. The climax then being Sherlock obtaining the pillbox from Lestrade and summoning the cabby who, by the name of Mr. Jefferson Hope, is found to be the murderer. The falling action ends with Sherlock inviting the astounded men to ask their questions.
Now, Katherine Mansfield’s “At the Bay”, on the other hand, contains an irregularity in its structure. Instead of what may be expected of a pyramidal plot structure, Mansfield’s story adopts an indistinct direction of the story. “At the Bay” begins with an extensive description of what the shepherd sees along Crescent Bay, revealing almost nothing to the reader of any conflict within its account. The character introductions within each chapter then seem to take the part of the rising action within the story, presenting the characters of the Burnell and Trout family which unveils each of their selves, confessing their plights that influences their decisions on various affairs. The twelve-part story lacks the pyramidal form of a story, unlike that of “The Arabian Nights” and of the first part of “A Study in Scarlet” which begins almost instantaneously with the exposition of the plot; followed by the rising action towards achieving a definite goal; reaching the pivotal part of the story, then to its resolution.
This is what the Mansfield’s story lacks basing upon the first part of the story: there is no unified plot or conflict to be found in the tale, yet it is as if all of the characters’ struggles are the story’s conflict, exposition and rising action of the text in one. Stanley Burnell seeks for his family to take matters more seriously; Jonathan Trout is conflicted with the pressings of daily living when all he desires to seem to center on freedom and living life as he desires, for he is growing old and still like an insect, he is trapped in an occupation that he does not enjoy just to provide for his family; the Burnell family, Alice the servant girl, and Mrs. Stubbs all exhibits a form of delight when the men are gone from the household, which may propose that it is only with the male’s absence that they can truly be themselves; Linda Burnell, ruminating how she feels nothing for her children with Stanley Burnell; and lastly, Beryl’s confused feelings of rebellion, similar to Mrs. Harry Kember’s wild streak. Claiming that these conflicts themselves are the story’s truths, the characters, in the end, had done nothing to change their statuses and dreams in life. There is no action towards reaching thus giving the result that there is obscurity with the climax and resolution of the story. It ends similar to its beginning: with a picturesque account of the sky and the moon.
In the end, the story began and finished in a similar yet loose fashion to the proverbial pyramid, where the middle of the story cannot directly be analyzed. This is for the reason that, as mentioned, a well-defined conflict for the story seems to be missing from the narrative. However, the story, in the end, concludes — after all of the characters have lamented their struggles — that there is, in fact, a unifying conflict that encompasses all of theirs lying veiled within dialogues and self-pondering: that of societal expectations in respect to the context of the story. A man is supposed to work; a woman is to bear children, observe proper etiquette, and to service obedience to their male partners. This realization may only be illuminated at the end of the narrative for having gathered the necessary information enough to surmise that it is the story’s period and what it entails to its society that serves as the subtly moving cog which propels the characters to act the way they do.
Moving to the second Mansfield story, “The Garden Party” then again resembles “At the Bay” with the initial introduction of Sheridan’s wealth. Katherine Mansfield employs another batch of literary obscurity within her work that one must learn how to read between the lines to grasp the entire frame of the story. In this story, the initial, small difficulty which discloses Laura’s privileged life gives way to a more wide-ranging struggle that brings to light, once more, the issues of social standing in the story’s context. The trifling matter that has the main character, Laura, in a twist is to decide where to put the marquee within the gardens. The Sheridan land is described as one of beauty, and so to put the marquee in specific places must first be thought of well and hard before executing the move. It may be considered as the exposition of the story for this already divulges the Sheridan’s well-to-do family. Afterward, a scene in the kitchen now reveals the horrible incident which puts Laura into a struggle of whether she will carry the garden party still, or cancels it in respect to their mourning neighbors who have lost a loved one.
Akin to “At the Bay”’s loose formation of the plot structure, “The Garden Party”’s rising action perhaps may be identified as the part where Laura’s parents finally decide that it is only right for Laura to go down the hill to present the mourning family of uneaten sandwiches and cakes from her party. Here, the crucial moment of realization of her situation and the deceased man’s status in life becomes clear to her, an apprehension of how life works in the world stays with her at the story’s resolution point.
With the plot structures discussed, it is essential to briefly discuss the endings of the two short stories by Katherine Mansfield that can be considered as an element of the story that has been brought to light by this comparative essay — apart from Mansfield’s subtle integration of her themes without patently declaring them. Comparing the resolutions from “The Arabian Nights” and of the first part of “A Study in Scarlet,” these two distinct stories end in a happy note. There are no loose threads, only perhaps a vague sense of satisfaction for having closed a case or bringing a hopeful future for the kingdom of Shah Rayar. In Katherine Mansfield’s stories conversely, contains absolute elusiveness. It is never clear what happens to the endings of both short stories, unlike Arabian Nights and Sherlock. It is up to its readers to come up with a plausible conclusion to the characters’ vague realizations about their individual affairs.
Another observation centers on the theme of these four stories. For Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s “Sherlock,” it is conceivably Dr. John Watson who may fit the picture of an individual who appreciates life as it is given to him, and how it turned out to be. Life, for these four stories, means a great worth. “The Arabian Nights” consistently mentions that of living and staying within the good graces of higher beings, including the act of mercy and compassion for others. This method has thrived through the thousand and one nights that Scheherazade and Shah Rayar have shared. The stories that first hold these life lessons have in turn taught the Shah of trusting once more and loving once more. “At the Bay” features two noteworthy characters, Jonathan Trout and Beryl Fairfield, in their desires for living a life far different from how society compels them to be. However, there has been no solemn promise made of changes among these two characters at the end of the story. There is only enough room to let the readers decide or interpret what could have happened next if the story continues as it should. “The Garden Party”, as shown at the end of the story, presents the picture of Laura Sheridan as she observes the deceased man’s face, noting that all of the material possessions that she crazes about are nothing to the man lying down in front of her, his face a complete mask of peace and serenity. It also remains to be seen, however, if Laura will return home and eventually forget the whole incident, or will she return with a renewed sense of appreciation for the life she is given or perhaps a transformed vigor in helping those from the lower class.
Lastly, the characters that makeup as the critical element of a story will be discussed in this portion of the paper. “The Arabian Nights” and “Sherlock Holmes” ends with a character that has been changed through the events that transpired within the narration. A similar feat goes with Katherine Mansfield’s. In “At the Bay”, Stanley Burnell and Jonathan Trout were the two men (the first and only men) to be introduced in the entirety of the short story; their behaviors differing from that of the other — with Stanley Burnell being one of a severe disposition, while Jonathan Trout ambles through life with that of ease. However, this contrasting comportment changes by the end of the short story, their musings and troubles in life exchanges with that of the other: Stanley Burnell being initially agitated by the slightest problem of having lost his walking stick, has returned home in good spirits, even purchasing a bouquet of flowers for his wife, whom he had failed to bid farewell; Jonathan Trout’s joviality transforms to that of a man who seems to carry the world in his aging shoulders. Discerning the story’s development, one may see that Stanley is the sole character who has left the scenes in terrible spirits. But by the time the day closes to an end, it was he who has seemed triumphant. He, also, is the sole character who remains oblivious to the others’ internal struggles. A quick mention of Laura Sheridan’s conclusion is important at this part. It is either nothing or something that has affected the lives of the story’s characters at the end. Overall, there may be more elements of Katherine Mansfield’s stories that are hidden within plain sight, waiting to be revealed in the future.
In conclusion, the plot-driven stories of “The Arabian Nights” and “Sherlock Holmes” has brought out noteworthy elements in Katherine Mansfield’s short stories that are commendable to be discussed for this has results in both a different way of reading the texts as well as an awareness to the subtle hints and dialogues that may reveal more than what it is supposed to be as. The similarities and differences of Mansfield’s plot structures are discussed, along with her delicate incorporation of selected themes, the significant ending of each story, the theme of living, and lastly, the very characters of the two short stories provide new perspectives in light of reading Katherine Mansfield’s works.
