Skip to main content

Does Walter Mitty succeed in changing his wife's view of him?

While Walter Mitty does try to change his wife's view of him, there is no indication by the end of the story that he has succeeded in his task. At the same time, there is every indication that Walter will continue to try to exert his individuality, even though his prospects are hardly encouraging.


In the story, Walter uses his daydreams as an escape mechanism. He has no less than five daydreams while he is out running errands with his wife. His last two daydreams are most significant. In the fourth daydream, Walter is a fearless World War Two captain who will take his bomber plane into enemy fire. Apparently, he is the only soldier left in his unit who can complete the task. Before he leaves on his possibly fatal mission, he nonchalantly downs brandy (to the admiration of his subordinate). Walter leaves for his mission cheerfully humming "Aupres de Ma Blonde." Notice that the text highlights the "rat-tat-tatting of machine guns" and the "menacing pocketa-pocketa-pocketa of the new flame-throwers" immediately before Walter is rudely pulled out of his daydream by his wife striking him on the shoulder.


It is appropriate then that Walter's last daydream consists of him facing a firing squad. Here again, we get the imagery of Walter under constant fire. This is a representation of what his life is like on a daily basis; he is constantly assailed by his wife's criticisms and tirades. The daydream ends with Walter standing tall before the firing squad. He is "proud and disdainful, Walter Mitty the Undefeated, inscrutable to the last." With these last words, we get the idea that Walter will continue to do everything in his power to change his wife's view of him.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...
Post a Comment
Read more

A man has a garden measuring 84 meters by 56 meters. He divides it into the minimum number of square plots. What is the length of the square plots?

We wish to divide this man's garden into the minimum number of square plots possible. A square has all four sides with the same length.Our garden is a rectangle, so the answer is clearly not 1 square plot. If we choose the wrong length for our squares, we may end up with missing holes or we may not be able to fit our squares inside the garden. So we have 84 meters in one direction and 56 meters in the other direction. When we start dividing the garden in square plots, we are "filling" those lengths in their respective directions. At each direction, there must be an integer number of squares (otherwise, we get holes or we leave the garden), so that all the square plots fill up the garden nicely. Thus, our job here is to find the greatest common divisor of 84 and 56. For this, we prime factor both of them: `56 = 2*2*2*7` `84 = 2*2*3*7` We can see that the prime factors and multiplicities in common are `2*2*7 = 28` . This is the desired length of the square plots. If you wi...
Post a Comment
Read more

What warning does Chuchundra issue to Rikki?

Chuchundra, the sniveling, fearful muskrat who creeps around walls because he is too terrified to go into the center of a room, meets Rikki in the middle of the night. He insults Rikki by begging him not to kill him. He then insults him by suggesting that Nag might mistake Chuchundra for Rikki. He says, "Those who kill snakes get killed by snakes."  He issues this warning to Rikki not to help keep Rikki safe but as a way of explaining why Rikki's presence gives him, Chuchundra, more reason to fear.  Chuchundra starts to tell Rikki what Chua the rat told him--but breaks it off when he realizes he might be overheard by Nag. He says, "Nag is everywhere, Rikki-Tikki." Rikki threatens to bite Chuchundra to get him to talk. Even then, Chuchundra won't overtly reveal any information. But he does say, "Can't you hear, Rikki-Tikki?" This is enough of a clue for the clever mongoose. He listens carefully and can just make out the "faintest scratch-s...
Post a Comment
Read more