The ending of “The Fly” by
Katherine Mansfield was both unpredictable and strange but at the same time it
was appropriate. The boss, the protagonist, cannot overcome the death of his
only son who he lost in World War I, and he is stricken with anguish. After
attempting to improve his situation by talking to his friend, who also lost a
loved one in the war, the boss noticed a fly on his death. The fly acts as an
outlet for the boss, because he can focus on something else besides the death
of his brother. When the fly first lands on the boss’s death he teases it by allowing a drop of ink drop on it, and
then watches it struggle to get free. He repeats this again and again,
sarcastically encouraging the fly until the fly eventually drowns and dies. The
ending is so strange because it is completely unexpected that the boss would go
from grieving over his son’s death to torturing a fly. Even though the ending
is peculiar it is appropriate be after killing the fly he could not remember
what he was doing before, weeping about his son. The author was attempting to
show that the boss had finally begun the healing process by killing the fly. His
treatment of the fly could have symbolized how he believes his son was treated,
taking no value in his life and putting him in a situation where he would more
than likely be killed.
it is also disturbing that he must kill something small and vulnerable to feel better. Mansfield always leaves me with a sour feeling in the pit of my stomach. She is the real deal, I think.
ReplyDelete