22 pages • 44 minutes read
Mary Eleanor Wilkins FreemanA New England Nun
Fiction | Short Story | Adult | Published in 1891A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.
Literary Devices
Omniscient Third-Person Narrator
An omniscient narrator has access to the thoughts and feelings of all the characters in a work of fiction. Omniscient narrators were popular in 19th-century fiction because they produced a sense of authority in the narrative voice and because they lent themselves to techniques like satire and the genre of psychological realism, which became popular in the second half of the 19th century.
In “A New England Nun,” the omniscient narrator stays closest to Louisa’s point of view, but the reader has access to Joe’s thoughts and feelings as well. The omniscient narrator has distance from the characters’ feelings, as opposed to a first-person narrator, who presents the story from the protagonist’s direct point of view, or limited third-person narration, which maintains some distance from the protagonist but describes their thoughts and feelings to the exclusion of other characters’.
The use of an omniscient narrator is important because the story is about two people who misunderstand each other. Much of the story’s tension arises from the reader’s knowledge that Louisa and Joe are not in love with each other while the characters believe that breaking the engagement would mean breaking the other’s heart. The omniscient narrator gives the reader insight into the dynamic of Louisa’s feelings versus Joe’s. We know that Joe is relieved every time he leaves Louisa’s home, but at the same time, he is willing to put his feelings of awkwardness aside and accept Louisa’s idiosyncrasies after they are married. We know that Louisa is relieved when Joe leaves, even cleaning the dust from his footsteps off the floor, but whereas Joe is prepared to accept her differences, the prospect of joining Joe’s household terrifies Louisa. The omniscient narrator allows the reader to understand the stakes of the marriage from multiple perspectives.
Satire
The story satirizes the Victorian morals that hold Louisa and Joe bound to an ill-matched marriage that would take place 15 years after the couple’s meeting. To accomplish this, Freeman creates characters who are polar opposites. Louisa and Joe have nothing in common except for the promise they made to each other 15 years ago. Though Freeman paints Louisa as extreme and silly at times, the reader experiences sympathy for Louisa at the prospect of her having to relinquish the things—and way of life—she loves.
Satire is most effective when the characters are three dimensional rather than straw men, or one-dimensional characters created to make a point. Joe and Louisa, and even Lily, have complex inner lives, desires, hopes, dreams, and fears. Freeman pokes gentle fun at their eccentricities, such as the description of Joe feeling like a bear in a china shop and Louisa feeling like the china shop’s owner (5).
The fault lies in the Victorian morals that bind Louisa and Joe together, despite all signs that they would lead happier lives apart, rather than in the characters themselves. Freeman uses the verb “perforce” to describe how Louisa and her delicate belongings command Joe’s respect, signifying that when individuals are bound to rigid mores, they must deny their own judgment in favor of tradition.
Feminism
Louisa is a nontraditional woman for her era. Rather than taking joy in caring for a husband and children, she derives joy from taking care of herself. On one hand, Louisa’s lifestyle shows her to be excessive in her daintiness to the detriment of her enjoying anything outside of her narrow lifestyle. On the other hand, Freeman paints Louisa as quietly uncompromising. In the late 19th century, women were expected to be domestic caretakers. Louisa maintains a perfect domain of domesticity, but it is for her own pleasure and no one else’s. She uses china on a daily basis, a habit of which the neighbors disapprove. Sticking to her preferences, even if others find them unacceptable, shows Louisa’s strength of character.
Freeman rejected her mother’s domestic world. As a young woman, Freeman refused to do housework, preferring to read and write. The author married but did not have children. She made a living as a writer, which was unusual for women at the time. Freeman’s works explore, in various ways, the paradox of femininity in a world where a woman’s highest purpose is thought to revolve around other people, namely, her husband and children. By making Louisa staunchly self-centered, Freeman is posing a challenge to the mainly female readers of her day, who would have likely held traditional values. Many would have considered Louisa’s situation as sad, lonely, and misdirected. It is easy to perceive Louisa’s worrisome manner, soft voice and old maidenly habits as weaknesses, especially compared to Joe’s masculine vitality and Lily’s strong, sensual youthfulness. Louisa is nitpicky, but she is determined to keep things in her life—whether it is the albums on the table or her sewing basket—just the way she likes them.
It is significant that Louisa is the one to break off the engagement. She and Joe equally share a sense of duty, and each was suffering under a misapprehension about the other’s feelings. Somehow, Joe and Lily came to find out they have feelings for one another, which means they had an honest and awkward conversation or moment of affection. During one of Joe’s meetings with Louisa, he could have been similarly honest. He could have felt out Louisa’s feelings, but he chose not to. Louisa took the initiative to save them both from the unhappy marriage, even though her action was taboo. Taking that step revealed Louisa’s courage. Joe’s loyalty is admirable, but without Louisa’s intervention, he would have married her while he was in love with someone else, which one could interpret as unfair to his wife.
Freeman never directly tells the reader how to judge Louisa, even though the humorous narrative implies that Louisa’s priggishness is insufferable to others. Looking at Louisa through the lens of her own values rather than the values of those around her portrays her as someone who refuses to compromise for anyone, despite what those around her think.
