Fra gm en ta t ion

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.