The Relationship Between Mother and Daughter in James Cain’s Mildred Pierce
I have always been of the belief that in order to truly love, hate must exist within the core of the relationship. Nowhere in modern fiction is this dictum examined more accurately than in the novel by James Cain, Mildred Pierce. Looking at the concept in a familial context, James Cain has created two well-developed characters, Mildred Pierce and her daughter, Veda, that not only emphasizes the nature of mother-daughter relationships, but looks at how love and hate permeates the very essence of the relationship. The Irish poet Thomas Moore once described the fascination of these violently fluctuating emotions, “When I loved you, I can’t but allow/ I had many an exquisite minute/ But the scorn that I feel for you now/ Hath even more luxury in it” (Tresidder 57).
While reading Mildred Pierce, I was reminded of my own mother’s relationship with her daughters. One of my sisters, Leslie, in particular, hated my mother in youth. It was strong emotion to extinguish, especially in those formative teen years, but because life is dominated with experiences, things in which we learn from, later one comes to understand the nature of their hate and love and begins to properly delineate the truth of each. Unfortunately, we don’t get to see this in Mildred Pierce and Veda’s relationship.
The reason for this is twofold; one, it is the element of obsessive love that fosters a breakdown in the natural boundaries that exist in a parental relationship. Secondly, it is the need by Mildred to seek the unrealistic approval from her daughter, Veda, which further exasperates the boundaries, almost wiping them completely away. We see these elements of obsessive love, ...
... middle of paper ...
...essive love for Veda; her need to gain acceptance and approval from this undeserving daughter that leads her catastrophic collapse. For Veda, it is her spiteful and vindictive nature to exact pain from those she holds in contempt. One needs the other in order to bear witness to the conclusion of their story. Love and hate rules in Glendale.
Work Cited
Cain, James. Mildred Pierce. New York: Vintage Books. 1989
Firman, Dorthy. “Healing the Mother/Daughter Relationship.” Mother/Daughter Relations 8 Dec 02
http://www.motherdaughterrelations.com/article.html
www.motherdaughterrelations.com/article.html
Phillips, Shelley. Beyond the Myths. New York: Penguin Books. 1996
Tresidder, Megan. The Secret Language of Love. San Francisco: Chronicle Books. 1997
Vial, Veronique. Women Before 10 a. m. Photograph. New York: Powerhouse Books. 1998
Within this family is a rather troublesome and frankly a bit clichéd mother (being the husband’s in this case) whose sole issue appears to be being herself. Readers are made to see her as complaining and overall very unpleasant to the rest of the family, especially the two young parents. It is absolutely clear that Bailey very much dislikes his mother, taking a dismissive stance to her, “Bailey didn 't look up from his reading so she wheeled around then and faced the children 's mother” and certainly not entertaining to her pleasure, “She asked Bailey if he would like to dance but he only glared at her.” However, soon readers start to see another side of this story, one which explains the situation more than what is initially offered by O’Conner. The differences in personal beliefs and ideologies between Bailey and his mother cause a major rift. It’s implied that perhaps she was not a very good parental figure to him leading up to the end as realizations dawned upon her far too late. Some of this may be attributed to the lifestyle and morals an older woman would have been raised in, but it is also strongly hinted at that she may have certain incorrigible flaws. This idea is confirmed in the ending lines of the work: “‘She would of been a good woman,’ The Misfit said, ‘if it had been somebody there to shoot her every minute of her
...d kill immediately but if acted upon quickly the violence could be avoided. Abelard started this whole mess but the love of his family was too strong and, he would rather his family broken up than together and possibly miserable. Lola’s problems with mother-daughter love roots from Abelard breaking up the family and Belicia problems with La Inca as a child. Finally Emily, she never felt the love she actually had because she was very conscious about what was going on around her, she would just form an opinion and stick with it stubbornly. Love comes in all different ways and was the clear cut reason why anger and love influence the impulsive and reckless decisions the characters made in their lives.
The two in the poem do not value one another whatsoever. “As I try to leave you again” (Ai 7), is the theme of this poem. The two really have no reason to stay with each other, for one states, “I think with [his] laziness...” (Ai 9), dwelling on the negative aspects of the relationship, continuing to try and find other reasons to stay with each other. Ai’s poem describes a intimate relationship between lovers. However, in a sense, this relationship is more complicated than what Derricotte speaks of. Derricotte describes a familial bonding in which the “lover” is tied down more with commitment and responsibility, in other words being less likely to leave the child or fall out of love with him. The love in Ai’s poem “may have a definable endpoint...that is the total annihilation of the other” (Love and Hate 301). The two mentioned in the poem are in a constant battling whether to stay or to go. There is is this constant struggle whether the relationship is worth enduring or if all ties should be cut. Critics may argue that this is a form of love that is unstable and unsure, but when we look at all the aspects of love, this relationship does not fall into the margins. This love, as some would call it, has an
Of all characters, Bradbury uses Mildred Montag to effectively portray the idea that the majority of society has taken happiness as a refuge in nothing but passive, addictive entertainment. She immediately reveals her character early in the book, by saying, “My family is people. They tell me things: I laugh. They laugh! And the colors!” (73). Mildred is describing her parlors, or gigantic wall televisions, in this quote. Visual technological entertainment is so important in her life that she refers them to as “family,” implying the television characters as her loved ones. By immersing herself in an imaginary world, Mildred finds herself able to relate to fake characters and plots, giving her a phony sense of security. This is necessary for her to achieve her shallow happiness, or senseless plain fun, as she lifelessly watches other people in her walls with a senseless mind. Her family in real life only consists of Guy Montag, her husband, whom she has no fond feelings about. Montag is so frustrated with Mildred because of her inability to express feelings for ...
Granny Weatherall has weathered all with more than her fair share of life’s adversities. The oldest adversity Granny recalls is George’s jilting. Joseph Wiesenfarth declares the jilting is the “central fact of her life,” (“Internal Opposition” 107). Anyone is hurt by being left at the altar and would have thought about it over the years. Granny wishes to forget the jilting because she is self-disciplined with no desire for self-pity. The internal quality of self-discipline is a means of standing firm through adversity. Granny states she is on intimate terms with “a few favorite saints” and mentions St. Michael (81). St Michael is a warrior. Granny views herself as a warrior and has fought and conquered her adversities. A fighting spirit is a means of persevering through suffering. Joseph Wiesenfarth insists that after George’s jilting Granny never risked loving again (“Internal Opposition” 108). This fallacy implies Granny felt no real love for John. Granny wishes to show off the children to John, not George. Granny remembers her appearance and youthful looks when remembering John, not George. Granny has not forgotten the pain of the jilting and that painful memory serves to contrast and enhances her love for John. Granny knows true love because she has known true sorrow. Granny’s true love for John is what carried her through the hardships of life, and John is the bridegroom she looks for at death. Love is a powerful means of dedication through
Politics and laws are one of the biggest factors keeping gay and lesbian couples from adopting children. This is to discourage or prevent gay and lesbians from even trying to adopt. It has been proven that m...
...s parents are gay or lesbian couples, you just can’t! It is a pretty hard situation for both the parent and the children going through the process, but it could all be easy if gay and lesbian adoption is taken out of the picture completely.
Elizabeth Cobbs Hoffman and Jon Gjerde ed., “Virginia’s Statutes..” and “William Byrd..”, in Major Problems in American History, Volume 1 (Boston: Houghton MacMillan, 2002), pp. 43‐46.
Further, brain imaging studies noted differences in scans of adolescents and adults while performing tasks. It was theorized that the differences in teens’ brains were the cause of the turmoil and the myth evolved to the belief that teenagers are less motivated and put less effort into tasks (Epstein, 2007)--some see them as rebellious and irresponsible. It is now known that turmoil is not an inevitable part of human development. The author argued that differences between the teen brain and adult brain scans are not necessarily evidence of immaturity, deficits in reasoning, intelligence, cognition, or in any other function of the brain. He states that the studies may indicate a correlation, but there is no evidence of causation. Further evidence that turmoil is not inevitable can be seen in studies of other industrialized nations.
In recent years, same-sex relationships have become more encompassing in US society. State legislation is changing such as accepting gay marriages, enforcing anti-discrimination laws, and legal gay adoptions; the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender community is becoming public. Gay-headed families, like heterosexuals, are diverse and varying in different forms. Whether a created family is from previous heterosexual relationships, artificial insemination, or adoption, it deserves the same legal rights heterosexual families enjoy. Full adoption rights needs to be legalized in all states to provide a stable family life for children because sexual orientation does not determine parenting skills, children placed with homosexual parents have better well-being than those in foster care, and there are thousands of children waiting for good homes.
Out of fifty states, only sixteen states allow gay adoptions while people in the other thirty-four states are either denied or sent to court to be determined by a complete stranger with no background information on the couple, whether or not they can take care of a child or not. According to “LGBT Adoption Statistics”, in 2012, 110,000 adopted children live with gay parents. Of the total amount of children in U.S. households, less than one percent lives with same-sex parents. If homosexuals were allowed to adopt, that one percent would rapidly increase. Sexual orientation of parents is not important when it comes to raising children; how the children are being raised and how the parents work together is what is truly important.
Homosexual couples should be granted the same freedom to adopt children like heterosexual couples because there are so many children in the foster care who need a nurturing home; it is narrow-minded to think that only heterosexual couples have the capability of raising a child properly; and it is prejudice to exclude homosexuals from adopting a child based on their sexuality. A parent-child relationship may be one of the most sacred and cherished gifts in life but it is also a privilege. The main purpose of adoption is not just for the satisfaction of a couple, regardless of their sexuality—ultimately, it is for the well-being of the adopted child.
Homosexuality is becoming more and more accepted and integrated into today’s society, however, when it comes to homosexuals establishing families, a problem is posed. In most states, homosexuals can adopt children like any other married or single adult. There are many arguments to this controversial topic; some people believe that it should be legal nationally, while others would prefer that is was banned everywhere, or at least in their individual states. There are logical reasons to allow gays to adopt children, but for some, these reasons are not enough. The main issue really is, what is in the best interest of the child? This type of problem isn’t really one with causes, effects, and solutions, but one with pros and cons. Like any other adoption situation, a parent prove themselves to be responsible and capable enough to raise a child on their own, or with a spouse.
In 1734 however, the first instance of breaking away from British law and emerging towards an American law that propagated a “freedom to print/ publish criticism of the government” occurred when John Peter Zenger published criticism against the colonial governor of New York, William Cosby, in his newspaper The New York Weekly Journal. Zenger was arrested (under the 18th Century British Sedition Law), but was set free once the jury acquitted him based on the argument made by his attorneys that imprisoning him for fairly and truthfully criticizing the government was not the right way to promote justice.
Thompson, Carolyn. "The Struggles, Experiences And Needs Of Children In LGBTQ Families." Diversity Factor 15.3 (2007): 36-42. 29 Jan. 2014.