The main similarity between Winesburg,
Ohio and "The Love Song
of J. Alfred Prufrock", other than that we worked with them in class, is
that both are fragmented. In class, we separated the poem by section, but even
without that, the poem is very fragmented. The chapters and short stories
fragment the novel. This fragmentation is a common device used by modernist
writers.
In section 4, the "arms" are meant to represent the
woman. This use of synecdoche highlights the choppy-ness. We have pieces here.
The "eyes" and "arms" and "dress" are mentioned,
but not the woman. The poem is a very fragmented dream-like state. The constant
sleep imagery lends to this. It is clear that Prufrock is in a nightmare.
Starting in the first section, the use of "etherized" tells the
readers that this is a dream state. Then, in Section 7, a human voice is sent
to “wake” him. This use of dreams further lends to the fragmentation. When you
suddenly wake up in the middle of dreaming, you can remember bits and pieces,
but never the whole thing: Fragmentation. Thus, the choppiness can almost be
explained.
The novel does the same thing—it uses fragmentation. It tells
multiple different stories while telling one story. The one story is, of
course, choppy. Plus, none of these multiple stories seem to be linked except
through George Willard. The one story is George: it’s about his disillusionment.
In "Sophistication", he matures. He realizes that he is
insignificant. He no longer carries any notions of self-importance, just
acceptance of his place. This main story is fragmented because it is told through
other stories. The use of stories such as “Mother” and “Nobody Knows” serve to
highlight his immaturity. However, Anderson never just comes out and makes
George act immature. It shows in his interactions with others in stories that
he is not the main character. In “Mother”, for example, the story is about
Willard’s mother, but his immaturity is what we should pick up on. Then, in the
stories involving Kate Swift, we must realize George’s immaturity in his lack
of understanding. Kate wants George to understand, but instead he is only left
more confused. The story isn’t about George. It is about Kate. Thus, George’s
story is choppy and fragmented. We don’t get the full story, because it isn’t
meant to be George’s story, but yet it is.
This separation or fragmentation, leaving the reader slightly
confused or unsure, is a characteristic of both works. The authors are
effectively able to chop their main story/message and create sections in which
readers can work.
