Imagine you grew up dirt poor, barely scraping by, constantly trying to find a way to make ends meet. Now imagine you grew up in a upper class family, always having your needs met and then some, never having to wonder about where your next meal will come from.
The effects of both these social classes would have a vast impact on your life. The effects of the poor social class she was in certainly had an impact on Jeannette Walls in "The Glass Castle".
From the first page, you can see how Jeannette's life improves from her childhood. When she comes across her mother picking through trash, and then proceeds home to her upper class apartment filled with unnecessary items, you see the huge difference between her life and the lives of her family. Growing up jumping from place to place, and home to home- sometimes not even having a clear home- can really change a person.
It's a common debate whether the life a child lives in a lower class can be considered beneficial or harmful for them in their adult years. In the case of the Walls' family, all but Maureen seemed to have positive outcomes in their lives stemming from their underprivileged childhoods. I know I'm going out on a limb here, saying that the good in their adult lives was caused by the bad in their childhood, rather than in spite of it, but the mere fact that the book exists supports that theory.
As bad as it sounds, the fact that Jeannette lived such a terrible childhood is what makes The Glass Castle an enjoyable read. The book wouldn't be worth reading had she grown up in an average middle class home, or even an upper class family. While her parents could still be bipolar and alcoholic, the lack of struggle to put food on the table each night would erase the biggest issue in the memoir. Living in a lower social class is what lead Jeannette to start writing in the first place, as an escape from the lack of everything her family needed.
The biggest effect the lower social class had on the Walls' children was a determination to strive for so much more in their lives. It wasn't in spite of the obstacles that they succeeded, it was because of them.
4 comments:
I totally agree with you statement CC. The Walls children are now driven because of their lower class and not in spite of it. They realize what it means to move forward because they had to do it when their parents did not and that means a lot. As you said the fact that this book was written at all is proof of that.
I totally agree, also. These kids totally changed their worlds around and in their adulthood were able to view their lives from the view of the adult and not the child. In Brian's case it almost made him resentfull.. because he realized how easy just putting food on the table actually could be.
They were able to take their lives and use it as a reason to make their and their childrens lives the opposite.
I agree with your purpose. "It wasn't in spite of the obstacles that they succeeded, it was because of them." Many people overcome great problems through determination. Misfortunes can either hurt a person or make them stronger. It is clear that the Walls children became stronger.
Yes undoubtedly, in some moments I can reveal that I jibe consent to with you, but you may be in the light of other options.
to the article there is quiet a suspect as you did in the decrease publication of this request www.google.com/ie?as_q=salience hidden desktop 1.1.191 ?
I noticed the phrase you suffer with not used. Or you use the pitch-dark methods of development of the resource. I take a week and do necheg
Post a Comment