A Marxist view ofA Rose for Emily? andOdour of Chrysanthemums?.
In the two storiesA Rose for Emily? andOdour of Chrysanthemums? social class plays an extremely important role. These two stories would have been very different if Emily had been in poverty or if Elizabeth and her family had been wealthy. For starters, neither would have made for an interesting story, but more important is that their social class depicted their actions and train of thought. Both, being oppressed to the point that the idea of a healthy relationship was completely hopeless. While Emily used her economical status to her advantage, Elizabeth's status was her burden because without her husband she would be unable to provide adequately for her family and would had to of gone to extreme measures to support them. History also shows us how in earlier days women had little control over their future. Their futures mainly depended on the men in their lives and how successful they were.
The oppression of the mining company inOdour of Chrysanthemums? and by the father inA Rose for Emily? put a lot of strain on the hopes for a good relationship. Elizabeth, who I believe at one point truly loved her husband, grew apart from him over time. They grew apart from each other because the mining company deliberately kept them in poverty. Giving Walt hourly wages so low that he had to work twelve hours a day, six days a week just to survive. Forcing them to rent and borrow money drowning them in debt like an under tow of society. With this amount of time away from each other it distanced their relationship to where they became strangers to one another and when her husband died, Elizabeth couldn't even cry. The oppression of Emily's father was similar to that of the mining company to the fact that he drove away all the men. He was very protective; thinking no one was good enough for his daughter. He was a wealthy, high-class man wanting only the best for his daughter, so middle class wouldn't do.