Difficult People Analysis1. In the beginning-part plot outline, Pyotr is a frustrated youth who strives to balance his financial expenditures to that of the amount of his father’s low income. The effort to consume father’s pension for Pyotr’s schooling creates a serious doubt to the financial security of every member in household. Pyotr’s father is a disappointment to the family, his anti-social behavior has subdued the family into a state of fear and panic at the harsh tone of his voice.
In the middle-part plot outline, Pyotr now fantasizes about the possibility’s of leaving the farm and walking the eighty miles North to Moscow. He would establish a capacity for impunity to the family’s grief of a missing son. Pyotr will be inspired by a sole motivation, the relentless three day walk to Moscow. The journey will submit a stream of inevitable consequences as a cause of starvation, frostbite and fatigue, the ability to overcome this torment to the physical appearance would only better saturate the mental ability for perseverance and determination to reach the destination.
The final logic of plot that must be explained at the end of the story is Pyotr’s confrontation with his guilt-ridden, contemptuous father before he leaves for Moscow. The intent to reconcile father’s financial loss is expressed through Pyotr’s coaxing rhetoric and judgemental approach to his father’s daily attitude at the table. Finally, the room is brightly lit, not by the family’s ability to regroup–their affections were a bonfire now–but by a single, dazzling beam of sympathy to Pyotr, when his father says “Good-bye. . . the money is on the round table.
“2. The main conflict of this story is a result of the family’s financial status. Father’s greed, low income, and Pyotr’s frustration are key points to the main conflict. The conflict has plagued Pyotr most, the hallucination of abandoning his family is the main conflict in the story. 3. The nature of conflict is most likely the man vs self “setting”.
As oppose to a man vs man/machine/nature alternative, man striving against his own ability to cope with his family’s troubles and maintain stability in the face of poverty is our conflict. Pyotr spends his time anticipating for the journey to Moscow, thus generating the spiritual ability to prevail in his daily life. 4. Points of tension occur all throughout the story. The near-end climax is the greatest center of tension during the story, Pyotr realizes the absolute necessity to escape from the house before he is to experience more of his father’s abuse.
Its ironic that Pyotr’s mother slides into a deep apathy for the situation that occurs minutes away before Pyotr’s departure. 5. During the story I have come to understand the mother best. She becomes too afraid to take a stand against her husband’s tyrannical outburst’s, she’s happy and content with so little to say and nothing of meager value to prove to her children. The mother has been ravaged by her husband’s constant complaining about the smallest of burdens for years, she has adapted to his behavior and has allowed her children to become victims of the insanity.
6. The author lets us experience the conflict and choose the sides of the family that best describe our own sense of belonging. We become accommodated with the protagonist early on, it is the one dreaming for a better life. .
. fortunately, dreaming about success is the motivation that keeps this family sleeping at night and working during the day. Its a story of a dysfunctional family that works together for a common cause, and is pulled apart by the negative attitude of the father. 7.
Pyotr’s father is the safety hazard who cannot convey his personal emotions of poverty and must spew his troubles upon the rest of the family three times a day: breakfast, lunch and dinner. Paying the train fare to Moscow and advertising 300 acres of farmland may earn him a hefty fortune, later moving into the city and organizing a promising lifestyle would guarantee years of better living and happier times. Father lacks a greater understanding of the possibilities that would benefit his family. 8. Essentially, Pyotr’s mother is a kind and thoughtful person.
She lacks the certain authority that motherhood demands, the ability to safegaurd her children when her husband goes into a frenzy, is a must. The mother cooks a respected meal, she deserves a greater voice in the house. 9. Pyotr is the primary victim of his father’s abuse.
Pyotr adds depth and perception to the story, he has nothing but contempt for his father’s attitude. Stagnation in a family built to destruct, Pyotr must leave the house. 10. The tone of voice is eqaully balanced between Pyotr and his father.
The mother has little or nothing to say during a mealtime argument. When Pyotr’s mother tells her husband “(Pyotr). . .
must have money for the journey” the argument sets place and very soon Pyotr’s father is screaming “Take everything!. . . Take it all!. . .
Strangle me!” The ability to immediately subdue the conflict by acknowledging the personal fault of sparking the financial debate goes unnoticed. 11. The dialogue delivers reality to the domestic situation. Pyotr begins “I used to be able to put up with such scenes. .
. but now I have got out of the way of it!” Pyotr’s father retorts “. . .
Do you know what you cost me, you scoundrel? I’ll turn you out!” This is the most effective scene in the story because Pyotr’s father delivers the threat, his wife and daughter bear witness to the intimidation that is aroused by Pyotr’s need for money.