Ryan 1

Madison Ryan

Mann

AP Lit & Comp

9/8/17

Playing for Gains

The stock market is a competitive playing field of precise planning and the constant need

for a continuous incline, all for the goal of improvement of stability. Those who know how to

work the system do so with zeal, putting forth unquantifiable thought into each investment.

Those who dont simply come for the chance at money and leave the work to others. In Mavis

Gallants Other Paris set in 1953, Carol epitomizes the dedication and commitment that

women subject themselves to for their husbands, and the effort put into and for marriage.

Howard, on the other hand, is unaware, caring only for a conduit to suit his needs. Gallant thus

parallels the characters with finance as a demonstration that the marital practices of the era were

not genuine, simply economic processes of unequal yet mutual satisfaction of personal desires.

The piece majorly consists of Carols formulaic assessment of marriage as a reflection of

Gallants distaste for the absence of love. Like a dedicated economic scientist, Carol has

researched the matter extensively, taking and learning from a series of helpful college lectures

on marriage to better understand how to make the process most fortunate. Her internal

monologue reeks of social conformity the entire way through, attributing happy marriage to

inconsequential, yet, to Carol, highly relevant commonalities. This is allegorical for the sameness

of society in the 1950s, of which has turned this would-be emotional process to a robotic

sequence of checklists. This is what society has expected of women and relationships, that vague

elements of sameness will bless the marriage, and Gallant continues to highlight the
 Ryan 2

ridiculousness of such conduct with irony. The illusion of love was a blight, she asserts,

marking the logistics as blatantly untrue. Love is never a blight, but saying it is calls the marital

practice utterly wrong. One cannot only rely on similarities to find true happiness. But in the

fifties, the womans sole purpose was to marry and mother. This left little room for wasting time

on intangible concepts like love. Already halfway to her socially born goal, Carol was undaunted

and highly scheduled, nurturing the relationship like a flower so that she could finally finish her

work victoriously in the mandatory business of falling in love. Carol takes up the majority of

the story because thats how much she has vested in the fate of the marriage, and the way she

pushes forward in her need to fall in love like a dedicated stockholder waiting for prices to climb

is Gallants characterization of the unreasonable role of women in marriage.

Adversely, Howard has only one paragraph to his name. The fact that he has such a small

percent of the excerpt for the feelings he has towards the union is a bold contrast to Carols

specific recipe for happy marriage and life. Gallant belittles his input because Howard feels and

has done tremendously little. As Gallant has chosen him to represent the typical husband in the

typical model of marriage, she makes him a foil for Carol. Where she puts effort for the

partnership, he sits back idly. And, apart from that, he worries only for himself in the entire

matter. He was an economist who had sense enough to attach himself to a corporation that

continued to pay his salary in the same way that he binds himself to a woman that will serve his

needs. Husbands take wives not for the love, Gallant indicates, but for the accomplishment of

stability as well as to relieve themselves as self sustaining organisms. Unless he stumbled upon

a competent housemaid or found someone to keep him from being just...a person who fills in

at dinner, he would be, by societal terms, unhappy and inefficient; bad things to be in a

working, conforming society. Marriage is then less an action for the attainment of good, but for
 Ryan 3

the avoidance of bad. He doesnt care for Carol and hadnt really planned on marrying her, but it

would be favorable, and he leaves it at that, most likely looking forward to the days where he can

leave the dishes to someone else, like a casual trader buying a popular stock and letting it sit by

itself, working to benefit him.

Gallant substantiates that marriage in the fifties was virtually a sham. It was done by an

unfair distribution of work to outdated gender roles. However, unlike the stock market, those

who did more work often got less out of it. With the absence of love came the entrance of rule

into marriage. The wives dedicated themselves entirely to the pleasing of the husbands, even

though it meant giving up their own wishes. Anyone in modern society who read this piece

would find it outrageous, because we have since placed a far higher value on love. But the

problem still extends to today, and society still expects a woman to work hard for a husband and

to give herself to him, or else she would be incomplete. A woman fresh from college will be first

asked as to when she was gonna bring a man home for the family, and a man graduated would

be asked his first career opportunity. Expectations from a bygone era still stand to the present,

and inhibit women from realizing their fullest potential. Women work even harder than men do

nowadays - its time they finally got the payoff.

Account of Revisions

Revisions I Made Rationale

Intro: Changed the reasoning and hook Better represented the roles of the
characters and easily demonstrated the

Intro: Altered thesis
First P: Changed topic sentence
First P: Added allegory and irony, as
well as insight into the setting of
which Gallant wrote
First P: changed context of love is a
blight quote
First P: Changed ending sentence
Second P: Changed and split topic
sentence
Second P: Include Gallant into the
claim
Second P: Claim that Howard
represents the typical husband
Second P: Claim Howard is a foil
Second P: Restructured sentence about
his role
Second P: include Gallant into quote
analysis
Second P: include statement about the
nature of marriage for the male
Second P: Altered last sentence
Former Conclusion: now thesis
Conclusion: added
Ryan 4
parallels that Gallant makes
Better included rationale and evidence
behind claim, and could thus tie in
better with rest of essay. Also had
more focus
Included author to expand on the
reasoning beyond just the writing
Improved writing overall - expanded
present ideas to be better developed
and explored, and improved flow.
Backs up claims and even slightly
alters them to be more big picture
Included the authors purpose in the
writing and the claims she was trying
to make with the character and diction.
Also tied to the overall theme of the
piece and Carols role in it.
Actually asserted claim about what
Carol fully represented, how it tied
into the theme, the setting, and the
author, and had better flow into
Second P
Better structure and flow
To assert her meaning behind Howard
Broadens the meaning of the piece and
further develops ideas which in turn
add to the analysis
Better structure in relation to First P
and thesis
Less awkward, more pleasing to read
Keeps authorial theme intact
Better flow and clarification of
paragraphs ideas
Better connection to overarching
economic theme
Best manifestation of my point
To best and finally connect all the
ideas examined over the course of the
essay and relate them to modern
societal problems in a way that leaves
the reader feeling satisfied with the
essay
 Ryan 5

Explanation of Writers Workshop Groups Effect on the Final Draft:

The Writers Workshop pointed out my specific areas for improvement in my writing;

most pointedly in my lack of focus. This specified itself into my thesis (which was vague) but

also my paragraphs and their lack of evidence relating to the author. When I was revising my

essay, I found that the lack of authorial analysis also inhibited the development of my ideas. By

remedying this, my whole theme flourished and grew to a point I was proud of. Additionally, my

group also liked my use of evidence, and from there I felt stable enough with my chosen

evidence to build on them further, changing the context to match the changing ideas. Of course,

my two biggest critiques had been regarding my intro and my conclusion. My intro was almost

entirely nonsensical, but the economics flowed well into the other paragraphs. I did more

research on the stock market and economics to keep that overarching theme but fix my intro -

which evolved into my statements regarding the unfairness of the womans role in marriage,

creating a layered essay. The other biggest critique was about my conclusion - or rather, lack of

one. My paragraphs were good, they said, but it was lacking without a conclusion. I added one

that fit into that flow they had so highly approved, and adhered to the so what-who cares that

they reminded me of to better connect with the reader and the world.