1

One of the common threads of human culture is a fascination with stories. No matter where
someone comes from, there is a tradition of using language to transport us to other places,
other times, even other worlds. We all instinctively know that the value of the story is in the
tongue of the one telling the tale, just as the value of the painting is in the hands of the painter
who creates it. A good story will carry us into a parallel reality that mirrors our own, and
throws it's qualities into sharp relief. Stories remind us where we come from, and what has
come before us. Since we have passed on from purely oral history and moved into written text,
we have gained the ability give an immortality of sorts to the tellers of tales. Of course some
stories are more immortal than others, and this is usually dependent on what we can take away
from reading the story.

If we want to fully understand a story, we must take into account where and when it comes
from. Stories contain the perceptions and the opinions of their authors, be they subtle or
explicit. Within each story is contained the delicate influences of the culture and the
environment of the its creator. Becoming aware of and studying these influences can afford
great insight on the author and the work that they created. To be sure, some stories contain
little material of interest for examination, and frequently end up in the “less than immortal”
bin, but other stories, like the psychologically dark and emotionally turbulent work of Sinclair
Ross, As For Me and My House, there is a wealth of information for those who wish to look.

Over the years, various critics have taken different views on the material contained in As For
Me and My House. Of course, there is no “right way” to read it. Even the author was unsure as
to how interpret some of his symbols and ideas. What is commonly understood however, is
that this story represents a world that he created by drawing on his personal experiences living
in the prairies. In the novel we find a internally complete world that reflects, intentionally or
not, on the author. The purpose of this paper is to show how careful examination of As for me
and my house shows specific cultural norms based on gender roles that the author has
experienced and integrated into the text. These norms are expressed through the actions of the
character, who fit into on of three basic types; the complex gender characters, the stereotyped
gender characters, and the idealized gender characters.

It should be noted at this point that we speak of gender here and not sex. A person's sex is
defined by what sort of reproductive organs they have, whereas gender is a socially complex
set of characteristics in a society. There is a clear difference between male and man, female
 2

and woman. A person's gender (man/woman) carries cultural significance and limits what is
acceptable for a given individual within said culture. While real people are complex beings,
cultures create archetypes that members of a given gender are expected to attain. Minor
deviations are generally ignored, but major deviations tend to lead to social strife and punitive
measures. This dichotomy of male/female cultural niches is challenged so powerfully in As
For Me and My House that it can almost seems to be a form of satire.

While there is much debate about who the protagonist is in the story, there is no doubt that
both characters defy simple gender classification. They represent realistic people, and complex
personalities. They exhibit traits that make them difficult to classify in simple gender roles.
Both Philip and his wife, whom we shall call the narrator for lack of given name, display
actions that are considered normal and abnormal for their gender roles. Philip, on more than
one occasion, shows himself to have a sort of machismo, showing temper, especially when
challenged or criticized. This is exemplified when some of the women criticize the decision to
adopt Steve. While the narrator attempts to deflect the comments, Philip is described in
impressive terms:

All the while Philip stood with his hands on Steve's shoulders, a
formidably big, impressive man in contrast, his own shoulders hunched
and gathered a little, his lips clenched bloodless with restraint. One by
one they glanced up at him, gave a sickly little smile to finish off their
say, and sidled out the door. (Ross 2008, pg. 76)

The narrator, for her own part, is Philip's wife and clearly identifies with many “woman”
characteristics. She mentions her own maternal and womanly instincts early in the story:

I ran my fingers through his hair, then stooped and kissed him. [. . .]
He's a very adult, self-sufficient man, who can't bear to be fussed or
worried over; and sometimes, broodless old woman that I am, I get
impatient being just his wife, and start in trying to mother him too.
(Ross 2008, pg 3)

In spite of this, both of these characters are tortured by an inability to conform to the gender
roles that they are given. Philip, no matter how macho he is when confronted when confronted
by outsiders, he falls desperately short of what his gender role demands him to be, the virile
warrior. Far from being dominating in the home setting, the narrator tells of the lengths he will
go to avoid conflict and sex. He is owed over a thousand dollars by the previous towns that he
 3

served as minister, but refuses to confront his debtors and demand his back-pay until his hand
is forced by the arrival of Steve, and he is given no other choice. (Ross 2008, 82) As for his
sexuality, Philip seems to be incapable of being at ease with his own wife:

A few minutes ago I knocked at Philip's study and went in, but he
didn't want me, and I came away again. It's nearly always like that;
sometimes I wonder why I go. I put my hand on his shoulder, and in
acknowledgment he squeezed it a moment; then without looking up or
speaking began to feint some little strokes and rubbings out till I had
gone. For while I'm there he's actually helpless to draw a single line.
He can't even sit out here in the living-room with me and read or write.
(Ross 2008, pg. 58)

Far from being sexually attracted to his wife, he hides from her and goes so far as to wait an
hour after she has gone to bed before retiring himself, so as to avoid her. (Ross 2008, pg. 123)
This hardly describes the archetypical “man of the house”. This is much more as Kroetsch
described him: “Philip is white-faced and tight-lipped, quick, mostly, at drawing shut the door
- of his study or of the bedroom.” (Kroetsch 1989, pg. 29) Instead, we start to see the
multifaceted personality created by the author. A person who is too complex to be simply a
“man”.

The narrator, for her own part, is more than just a simple demur lady. While her role in the
narrative is that of a housewife, there was a time before she married Philip that she had been a
concert pianist. She throws this in his face during once when she loses her temper, “I said
when I married him, I didn't know it was going to mean Horizons all my life. I had ambition
too once – and it was to be something more than the wife of a half-starved country preacher.”
(Ross 2008, pg. 35-36) Far from passively following her husband, she takes matters into her
own hands on a number of occasions, including formulating a plan to get out of town life once
and for all. While Philip is bringing in the money, she is the one deciding where it is spent. She
even says that she is better at manual labor:

It's been a hard day on him, putting up stovepipes and opening crates,
for the fourth time getting our old linoleum down. He hasn't the hands
for it. I could use the pliers and hammer twice as well myself, with
none of his mutterings or smashed-up fingers either. (Ross 2008, pg. 1)

Both of these characters are easy to sympathize with in their dilemmas, since these culturally
defined sexual roles are things that many of us have to deal with. Humans are by nature
 4

complex, and despite cultural pressure will never fit into simply defined roles, no matter how
hard they are pushed. It is clear that both Philip Bentley and his wife the Narrator are
conflicted and struggling with their own identities so can take no comfort in each other.

While the stories protagonists don't seem to fit into their gender roles, but how does the author
represent the rest of the town of Horizon? Aside from two exceptions, the townsfolk are
represented with in ways that approach stereotypes. They are simple, almost caricature, living
in a town who live in a town that's name implies its own unreality, Horizon. In the prairies, the
horizon is always surrounding you, but it is not real; you can't interact with it. So to are the
townsfolk. Both the narrator and Philip are unable to create real connections with the people
living there. The town itself is often represented in the drawings of Philip as nearly empty
streets. The people are only present within their own contexts, with the men busy with their
jobs, and the women raising children and gossiping. The latter part of this is made clear in
passages such as the following:

It's just bickering and petty and contemptible. Mrs. Wenderby, for
instance, gave a bridge last week but didn't invite Mrs. Brooks, the
butcher's wife, and now Mrs Brooks is telling up and down the town
that the Wenderbys owe a hundred-dollar butcher bill. I hear it all from
Mrs. Ellingson, who won't be snubbed and brings me regularly two
fresh eggs. For such is the social hierarchy of a little town that despite
her hats the minister's wife goes everywhere, meets everyone. Her
prestige is second not even to that of proven leaders like the doughty
Mrs. Wenderby. And with social ambitions of her own Mrs. Ellingson
is quick to see I may be useful. (Ross 2008, pg. 60)

It should be noted that this passage speaks exclusively of the social lives of women. A “man's”
horizon has nothing to do with this. The men are almost completely absent from the narrator's
diary entries, as if she doesn't come in contact with them. In short, it is implied that the men
work and the women take care of the home and community. We could almost imagine a
hunter/gatherer tribe going through the same motions. How much the author has exaggerated
reality for this aspect of the story can be argued both ways, but one way or another the fact
remains that the author has created a background of gender stereotypes that contrast starkly
with both Philip and the narrator, who both portray complex and almost ambiguous
personalities.

There are two exceptions that make an impact in the portrayal of gender in this narrative, the
 5

characters of Paul Kirby and Judith West. Paul Kirby is the school teacher and an almost
obsessive philologist. In contrast of his education, he comes from farm living, enjoys riding
horses, and generally playing the part of a cowboy. He takes an almost idealized role of
masculinity. He is both a school teacher and a cowboy, which Robert Kroetsch remarks on as
hero figures:

The western story, in Canada as in the US, seems to offer the best
possibility for a fresh and genuine story. In the American west, the
'free' or the 'criminal' figure becomes heroic - the cowboy or the
outlaw. In the Canadian west, the figure of authority is often the
fictional protagonist. A remarkable number of school teachers ride into
town. (Kroetsch 1989, pg. 28).

Paul is not portrayed as perfect, an overly idealized character would make him fall in with the
simple caricatures of the townsfolk. Instead his flaws are harmless. His obsession with words,
for example, is the sort of eccentric behavior that adds charm to a person, and his love of
nature makes him independent and close to the land. While he lacks the dominating masculine
force of Philip, he still does enjoy showing off such things as his horsemanship (Ross 2008,
pg. 54) or his new clothes (Ross 2008, pg. 74). In spite of his showmanship he is overall
portrayed as a sort of gentleman cowboy, a master of both nature and science, with a strong
moral sense:

He's so humble about being just a country boy, yet so stubbornly proud
of it. Humble because it's born in his country bones to be that way,
because he still shares instinctively the typical countryman's feeling of
disadvantage before town people who wear smarter clothes and write a
better hand. Proud because he's come to know these town people and
see them for what they really are, to discover that most of his own
values have been sounder all the time. (Ross 2008, pg. 98)

“The wilderness enters their [the Bentleys] lives in the form of a girl named Judith.” (Jones
1970, pg 41) Judith West presents us with the counterpart to Paul, creating a parallel role in
femininity. She is described frequently with very feminine traits, and, like Paul, has a spiritual
connection with nature. She seems to be more nymph than human, a daughter of nature. Mrs.
Bentley, the narrator even notices her feminine aspect, “The wind blew back her hair, and
pressed in her dress so close against her body that I could see the firm profile of her breasts.”
(Ross 2008, pg. 109). Judith is quiet, polite, demur, and thoughtful. Very ladylike, but under
the surface there is more. She is described thusly in Butterfly on Rock, “Pale and timid on the
 6

surface, she is felt to be dark and passionate. Philip seems to ignore her, though each is
obviously aware of each other.” (Jones 1970, pg. 42) The connection between her and Philip
culminates in them apparently having a tryst, and while this may be debated, it is plain that she
occupies far more of Philip's attention than the narrator is comfortable with (Ross 2008, pg.
173). Her flaw it seems, is that not only is she good, but she is desirable, she tempts men. The
story even seems to lead us to believe that a tryst between Philip and Judith results in a child.
If this is true, then she is as well quite fertile, another symbol of femininity.

In As For Me and My House Sinclair Ross has created an extraordinarily lifelike setting that,
despite being fiction, is clearly founded on his experiences of growing up in the prairies. The
characters in his stories present an interesting reflection on perceived gender roles in our
society. The characters in the novel tend to be complex, stereotyped, or idealized. The contrast
between these groups typifies the differences between our perceived gender roles (gender
stereotypes), our fantasy gender roles (gender ideals) and our actual gender roles (complex
gender roles). Reflection on these roles allow us to consider ourselves and our own
interactions with our day to day lives. It is certain that many readers found uncomfortable
similarities between themselves and either Philip or the Narrator, for they represent the
ambiguity of the real world. Instead of presenting us with problems that lead to simple
resolution, the Bentley's problems (individually and collectively) are only resolved with the
creation of new problems. They are like us, unable to become simple or one-sided, and so
every answer they find brings more questions. This is eloquently put in the essay Sinclair
Ross's Ambivalent World:

But Reality to Ross is still not clear cut, and that the book should end
so ambivalently seems ultimately part of his plan. The ambivalence is
founded in his imagery, founded in the lives of the characters and the
nature of their world, germane to the whole novel, magnificently
distilling what is has tried to say. (New 1972, pg. 67)