Perhaps Stevenson portrays imperfection and evil in humanity as this palpable reality, present in the world and available as a means of man’s advancement and destruction. Its sinister descriptions (“dark,” “fiery,” etc) and concealed evil (glancing in the bottle stuns the owner with horror) also portray the imp as a potent living force. The unusual law of the imp (sell for less or receive damnation) makes it a constantly growing threat. If the supernatural elements comment on life, the imp itself may also have a specific meaning. The ending modifies the imaginary scenario to convey another reality: though love cannot erase a damning past, somehow, escape is possible. If so, why did he include the elaborate curse that necessitated such an ending? I think the injection of a supernatural temptation portrays real life: wild possibilities coupled with high consequences. If the story warns against complicating love, why does it provide an escape hatch, the drunken sailor who accepts damnation and buys the bottle? Stevenson could simply be softening the blow of his cautionary tale. The surprise ending may add an additional message. The implied lesson? Avoid choices now that will sabotage love’s good intentions later. Each one’s sacrifice removes the other’s greatest source of happiness, an end that could have been avoided if Keawe had never bought the imp. Even Kokua’s and Keawe’s choices to love each other by taking back the curse is bittersweet. The last option (love without destruction) is ideal every other option entails some loss. The story progresses from a focus on reward (first half) to a focus on love (second half). I summarize all these possible combinations in the following chart: Likewise, his love for Kokua began without connection to the imp and continued long after. Keawe pursued the good life before meeting the imp’s owner and in the period of freedom from its grasp. All of these occurred both with or without a connection to the imp. First, recall the two motives (reward or love) and the consistent negative conseqeunces (uncertainty, curse, destruction). Does the imp simply represent the curse or something more?įirst, would Stevenson moralize? I presume the possibility, considering his dramatic shift from a Victorian upbringing to a life of travel and ensuing love of the islander lifestyle (the backdrop for the short story). Does Stevenson present an ideal choice to resolve the story’s dichotomies?
His unavoidable desire leads him to navigate the other events of the story.) (+Note: This is because Stevenson portrays Keawe’s desire as a constant from the story’s beginning. Love can deliver from the curse but cannot escape from the curse. One can avoid the curse but not uncertainty.+ Reward is tarnished without the curse (by uncertainty) or with the curse (by destruction). Curse will destroy (Someone must bear imp’s damnation.) Love absorbs curse (Kokua buys imp from Keawe.) Reward brings uncertainty (Banishment threatens all Keawe’s gains.)
Desire can curse (In his quest, Keawe uses the imp.) Desire can reward (Keawe seeks prosperity and love and is satisfied.) The story’s specifics (ownership and motivation) stage these events: The first reward: obtaining prosperity the second reward: preserving prosperity (including Kokua). Observe also the twin kinds of reward compelling the early purchases.
Reward drives Keawe’s first two purchases (rising action, crisis), but love drives the third (before resolution). Note the relationship between these motives and the story arc. Old man, Keawe (first), Keawe’s friend, others – reward
#Broken heart imp cozy grove full
The full progression of ownership follows: The story centers on possession of the imp (primarily by Keawe, as noted above). Resolution – a sailor buys the imp from Keawe Crisis – Keawe again buys the imp although he doubts he can sell it Rising action – Keawe buys the imp and later sells it
0 kommentar(er)
