Societal oppression persists in many facets of life and forces individuals to assume imposed roles that radically determine their mindset and identity. The oppressed are not accepted in such societies and are instead forced into servile positions. These roles then become the entire identity of these individuals, as they become incapable of seeing themselves as anything other than what they are uniquely perceived to be. Charles W. Chesnutt's "Dave's Neckliss" depicts several examples of such oppression both through the use of female characters and the context of slavery within the framed story. Looking at the short story from both a feminist and postcolonial perspective, the subservient roles of certain individuals and the harmful effects of the oppressive nature of society are revealed. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an original essay Chesnutt's short story features only two female characters who receive little attention or development. Despite this apparent lack of women in the text, the plot of both the main narrative and the framed narrative depends on their existence. Without Annie, the narrator's wife, Julius would not have had the opportunity to have dinner at John's house and therefore would not have had the opportunity to tell his story. Even in Julius' story about Dave and his "neckliss" (Chesnutt), Dilsey, Dave's fiancé? and the object of desire of many others, and the need for her causes the process by which Dave receives punishment for supposedly stealing meat. Although these women are essential to both stories, they are only used as tools to advance the plots and are never given any development beyond the roles specifically designed for them. Both women play subordinate roles to the men and are only defined by their relationships and necessity to the man. gender. Annie's only appearances throughout the narrative all depict her fulfilling the expected societal role of a dutiful, hardworking housewife. Early in the story, the narrator notes that she "had served dinner" (Chesnutt) and later expects his wife to serve him breakfast, "at breakfast the next morning, it occurred to me that I would like a slice of ham. . I told my wife” (Chesnutt). This clearly shows the male expectation of an obedient, domestic wife, and Annie readily conforms to this role. Her character only extends to that of the traditional servant because she has the hospitable nature expected of housewives and women in general, "when he was at our house at meal times, my wife would not let him never leave hungry” (Chesnutt). Even Annie's calling Julius "Uncle Julius" (Chesnutt), who demonstrates greater familiarity and kindness than her husband, submits to preconceived notions of femininity. Dilsey also has little character development beyond that relating to men and submits to society's views of femininity. Julius introduces Dilsey as a woman who "will not put up with any nonsense with any man" and focuses excessively on her beauty, "Dilsey was a monstrous pear, beautiful gingerbread-colored girl" (Chesnutt). Julius makes no further note of her character, only mentioning her physical appearance and her resistance to the sexual advances of most men. While this may show strength of character, this description is simply also consistent with the traits expected of women: beauty and virtue. These two and only characteristics of Dilsey make it a kind of prize that men can win and possess –a notion perpetuated throughout history. Dave wins his affections, but Wiley continues to try to win his affections, eventually committing criminal acts to get him for herself. With Dilsey's worth solely due to men's desire for her, she becomes both a literal slave and a slave to the patriarchy. The two women in Chesnutt's story fulfill the role of a creature submissive to men. While they both literally serve men, Annie serves food to John, Julius and Dilsey. She is a slave to Mars Dugal – they also figuratively serve the patriarchy by conforming to idealized concepts of womanhood as conceived by the patriarchal system. Just as patriarchy perpetuates male domination, the manipulation of the two women shows their intellectual inferiority compared to men. Julius' well-crafted story has Annie falling prey to his plans to get the ham. She has no considered view of the story and takes it literally, simply focusing on the ham and not the psychological aspect of the story. Julius aims to exploit the emotions of his listeners and thus unconsciously convince them to do what he wants. However, only Annie, not John, falls into the trap due to the male-influenced notion of women's emotional nature. Dilsey also experiences the manipulation of the patriarchy. , but more indirectly than Annie. When she returns from her trip, she quickly hears about Dave's punishment and undoubtedly believes the lies she was told. However, Dilsey doesn't hear this from a man, but from a woman, "a fus' nigger' ooman she met tells her. ...Mars Walker said he was stealing bacon and that 'he tied a ham around his neck, so he couldn't get rid of it' (Chesnutt) Although the man does not directly manipulate his mind, the idea of ​​Dave as a thief comes. of two men: Wiley, who causes Dave's downfall, and Mars Walker, the one who inflicts punishment on Dave and announces Dave's madness to everyone, thus directly influencing his mind the "nigger 'ooman" (Chesnutt). and subsequently indirectly bias Dilsey Just as men manipulate Dilsey and Annie, patriarchy itself forces them into their roles as submissive, traditionally feminine women. Society convinces women of how they should act, preventing them. thus moving beyond the type of woman idealized by men. Such oppression is what prevents Annie and Dilsey from becoming dynamic characters, forever forcing them into a subordinate, domestic, and reward-like role. This role that society has forced them into allows for their perpetual manipulation and use by men from which they cannot escape due to years of mental conditioning making them believe their own inferiority. In conjunction with an oppressor conditioning their subordinates to believe that they are as they are perceived, the racial disparity that underlies both the main and framed narratives of Chesnutt's story reveals many layers of oppression that affect the outcome of both stories. In both stories, a white man holds power over those he deems inferior to himself: Mars Dugal owns his slaves and treats them as property that he can control and mistreat and John, the narrator, is the employer of Julius and considers him a moocher and a child. , “his curiously undeveloped nature was subject to moods whose variability was almost childish” (Chesnutt). Both have preconceived ideas about how they believe those deemed inferior to them should behave and act, which influences the plots of both stories. In the story of Julius, menWhites oppress their slaves both physically and psychologically. While Mars Walker asserts his dominance by beating and physically harming his slaves who disobey him, the most powerful weapon is the power Mars Dugal holds over the minds of Black people. While Mars Dugal embodies Southern society, he also keeps his slaves away from any form of education other than that which could contribute to reinforcing the idea of ​​the superiority of the white man: "it's ' g'in de law ter l'arn nigers how ter read, uh, down with the books of hab” (Chesnutt). Mars Dugal's psychological oppression is subtle as he treats his slaves quite well and behaves quite friendly towards those he favors. However, the juxtaposition between the two "marches" and Dugal's ability to quickly turn even on his favorites keeps the slaves submissive and in fear of his wrath. This power dynamic between the oppressor and the oppressed creates an imbalance where the thoughts of those in control directly influence the culture and mindset of those under them. Whites convince blacks of their own inferiority and also convince their slaves to act like them. When Mars Walker calls Dave a thief and ties the ham around his neck, he lowers Dave's status lower than before as a mere slave. In the same way that white people oppress those they deem inferior, their slaves imitate this exact quality by marking Dave as inferior to them and thus also oppress him through isolation and mockery, "the niggers all turn on him » (Chesnutt). While the white man holds power over them, slaves look for someone over whom they can claim superiority in order to feel less inferior and emulate those they unconsciously deem superior. By forcing Dave into an inferior and even more oppressed role, Dave becomes an "other" within his own community and becomes an outcast among those who once revered him. This "other" becomes solely centered around the ham, which becomes the Dave's only association and, therefore, his only source of identity. This "other" that he becomes has very little power and social status. Everyone treats him as an outcast and as some sort of anomaly. has no place in his society Although Dave tries to fight his new label, he finds the literal and figurative mark of an "other" and an outcast inevitable and develops a double consciousness. Dave sees himself on two distinct planes, one being his old identity and his old life, and the other his new life as a labeled thief whose only mark of identity is a ham around his neck. This dual consciousness between two identities. separate and conflicting relationships slowly drive Dave crazy and once Dave loses everything he had from his old life: his fiancée, his leadership position within the slave community and the respect, "de las' the one he had on 'hung for his whole life'. ter stan' by 'im had returned to 'im, and dey' 'pear ter be nuffin mo' wuf libbin' fer. He couldn't hold any more pra'r meetings, because Mars Walker would want to preach, and the dark ones would listen if he preached. He didn't have his Bible to comfort him, for Mars Walker had taken it at any time and burned it, and he said if he took any negroes with Bibles onto the plantation he would "make them." Wuss'n he done Dave" (Chesnutt), he begins to lose his sense of self and fully gives in to the new identity dictated to him by the slave community. Since he has nothing else to define himself by, he begins to see himself as others perceive him, associating himself with the ham and essentially becoming the ham himself. This deep-rooted oppression that relies on many layers of a dichotomy of inferiority andsuperiority and on Dave's attitude. The ultimate suicide, because it reveals the harmful effects that society and biased discourse can have on the mind. These aspects of colonialism applied to race and those considered inferior lead to a misinterpretation of oneself. Dave became a ham in death by hanging himself like the ham hung around his neck, "hangin' fum one er of rafters, wuz Dave"; they had a rope around their neck” (Chesnutt) represents how much society influences a person’s identity. Even though a person may perceive themselves in a certain way, how others perceive them greatly affects who they are and what they do. Society's oppression of a person by imposing a new identity on them has detrimental effects, as shown in "Dave's Neckliss". The use of a feminist lens in Chesnutt's short story highlights the powerful impact of the lack of female characters. The remarkably brief descriptions and presences of the two named female characters despite their direct involvement in the progression of both plots demonstrate the extent to which women are only considered when necessary for men. This adds to how women are seen as servants of men, as the only purpose they serve in this story is to cause conflict. Neither Annie nor Dilsey are developed beyond what attracts men, demonstrating once again that, from a male perspective, women are not dynamic and do not need to have a real personality beyond that which attracts men. This lens also offers insight into patriarchy and its effects on women and how they function in a phallocentric society. By analyzing the position of these two women in history, the theme of the harmful effects of societal oppression and perceptions of how one should be or is gains another layer and more meaning beyond identity. individual. Despite the many benefits of analyzing through a feminist lens, this lens, as applied to this story, can lead to blindness to anything other than oppressive patriarchy as well as overly complicated conclusions due to lack of material from which to infer. Only viewing through this lens also limits the perspectives visible in the text. Another drawback of this perspective is drawing on a culture's definitions of masculinity and femininity which may vary depending on the culture. This lens also relies on femininity as an abstract construct, while some of the notions behind this paradigm are based on indisputable scientific facts such as anatomy and biology. The feminist lens leans heavily on theory and the idea that everything is a societal construct while being rooted in a certain truth. Just as the feminist lens has both advantages and disadvantages, the postcolonial and racial lens also has both. This type of lens allows for an in-depth examination of the role of those who are forced to submit to the rule of a more powerful oppressor. This lens highlights the true horrors of such a system and how it continues to infiltrate even when such imbalance is meant to be destroyed. This lens also focuses on the aftereffects of oppressive systems and how people who are ethnically and racially different from the "superior" group are treated with a very specific and often stereotypical or romanticized discourse. Postcolonial and racial critiques open the debate on how oppression affects both the oppressed and how it continues even in modern society. GOOD. 2016.