One Ordinary Day With Peanuts Analysis

One Ordinary Day, with Peanuts Critical Analysis
In “One Ordinary Day, with Peanuts,” Shirly Jackson composes a story about a husband and wife that alternate days in living as good and evil. As educated from the story, the peanut is quite significant; it symbolizes the generosity that is prevalent throughout the narrative. In a contrasting perspective, a criticism authored by Friedman, explores the evil in which Jackson is known for in all literature she composes. An analysis of symbolism and writing styles are compared and written in a critical manner. Exhibiting these topics, similarities and contrasting distinction is consistently studied in Jackson’s literature. These propositions relate to the motif of good vs. evil, in which they are

distinct and complementary. In “One Ordinary Day, with Peanuts,” Jackson utilizes the peanut to symbolize good, whereas in her literature the majority contains themes of evil, which is explained in a criticism produced by Friedman, by implementing these propositions in a cynical manner, to produce an analytical essay of both objectives.
The peanut is prominently used in the story “One Ordinary Day, with Peanuts,” to indicate a positive value. As written in the story composed by Jackson, the diction describes the situation by stating, “He went on his way, stepping happily with his new shod feet, feeling the warm sun on his back, halfway down the block he met a stray dog and fed him a peanut, (Jackson 333). The quote sited from the story, truly exemplifies the good symbolized by the peanut. A character in the story sharing peanuts with people that need something or someone to just brighten their day, in which the man is proudly there to be a supporter of. “Once, he offered a peanut to a man who asked him for a dime, the man wanting the dime took the peanut because Mr. Johnson had wrapped a dollar bill around it,” as elucidated from the story, “One Ordinary Day, with Peanuts, (Jackson 333). This reference from the fiction depicts hospitality that is present throughout, and the peanut embodying a gleeful message. The symbolic peanut, displays a positive intonation that characterizes the narrative, “One Ordinary Day with, Peanuts”, viewed as an enlightened story with a good attitude.
A critical analysis written by Friedman is subjected to the idea of Shirly Jackson’s writing styles. A paradigm that Friedman composes is as follows, “The isolation, the loneliness, [the evil], and the frustrations that plague Miss Jackson’s characters have many causes, that she shows in her writing methods,” (Friedman). All the literature Jackson constitutes is from a dark and dreary place, which she was experiencing in her life at the time. The novels Jackson produces reflect and are affiliated with personal experiences. The characters described and written about in her stories show relation to her own person. In entirety, the short stories Jackson has authored, all compare in the genre of evil. Friedman conveys the message that describes Shirly Jackson’s writing approach by articulating, “ The Lottery, a story of community social evil, exempt from presentation as an isolated world; for, as typical of other communities, as this particular village is meant to be, it is pictured as almost isolated from the rest of mankind, which is also basically unenlightened, narrow, and evil,” (Friedman). “The Lottery” is only one example of a literature piece that is corrupt, which follows many others Jackson has composed that display a negative connotation. Shirly Jackson’s short stories show repetition in the fact that all represented in an evil, malicious tone.
In a critical analysis aspect, the topics being compared and contrasted show a relation to the theme good vs.

evil. In the story “One Ordinary Day, with Peanuts,” the peanut, symbolically represents the good. In contradiction, the evil is defined by Shirley Jacksons writing pattern, how her literature has a dark meaning. The story appears to be a positive meaning, the literature Jackson produced cannot end on an enlightened note, and so a revelation of twisted evil is pronounced. A citation from the story Shirly Jackson composed, “Went into a department store and accused the woman next to me of shoplifting, and had the store detective pick her up. Sent three dogs to the pound, you know, the usual things,” (Jackson 333). This quotation describes the negativity the woman accomplished during the day, as the husband was the distributor of good amongst the town. Shirly Jackson does incorporate ingratiating context into her novels, but no story goes finished without a little suspicion. In many instances Shirly Jackson has developed stories with a deep, horrific context, and within some situations adds slight positivity, a precedent such as, the peanut. The contradicting and congruence, of the two ideas that coincide and compromise each other to give the assimilation of good and evil, the peanut representing a good portion of the story, whereas Jacksons writing styles show a reoccurrence of evil.
In the short story, “One Ordinary Day, with Peanuts”, symbolism and writing styles are compared and contrasted in an analytical manner. The concept of the allegorical peanut defining goodness in the literature, and the perception of evil that is delineated by Shirly Jackson’s writing patterns in her literary works, are evaluated and interpreted. These motives manifest the theme of good vs. evil, which is portrayed in not only this particular story, but commonly found in all of Jackson’s

pieces.