The analysis of the text “One Stair Up”

The analysis of the text “One Stair Up”.

The extract from the novel “One Stair Up” by Campbell Nairne deals with the relationship between 2 friends, Rosa and Andrew, who are going to the cinema and watching a film, which they turn out to perceive in a different way because of their difference in the social status and the class, they belong to.

The extract begins with the exposition, from which we learn, that Rosa and Andrew enter the cinema circle, when a film is on. There Rosa hopes to recognize some of her acquaintances. She is pleased to be seen in the circle, even with Andrew, who is asking Rosa a question, where the rising action begins. After asking Rosa the question he, due to Rosa’s restrained reaction, he risks no further inquiries, knowing how often she had forbidden him to talk to her in a cinema, as the author lets us know, and further on he resists the temptation to break her prohibition and tries just to enjoy himself.

The film turns out to end a few minutes after Rosa and Andrew had come in, after which follows the next one, namely “Mothers of Broadway”, which, according to the author’s description, seems to have smashed all records, draws tears from the hardest hearts and sends thrills down the spine. The film is characterized as a rapid-fire drama and a heart-searing tale of studio parties, million-dollar prize fights and superchanged automobiles. Some of the scenes in the film make Andrew laugh, namely when the characters find themselves in foolish situations, e. g. when a cat moves along a shelf with a basket of eggs on it, and the eggs fall one by one on a fat man’s head, then the man squeezes the yolk out of his eyes, staggers forward and plumps headfirst in a water-butt. One more scene, Andrew finds too funny for words, is when a lean chap, coming into the corridor, doesn’t look where he is going and hits a cook, who is marching out of the kitchen with a tray of custards and the custards are all over the place. Then, Andrew sees a dog on the screen, carrying a stick of dynamite in its mouth and puts it under the fat man’s bed and after a sudden loud explosion the fat man is with a black eye, no beard, half a collar and no trousers. While Andrew thinks that Rosa will like it, Rosa blames him mentally for his primitive sense of humor, characterizing him, as a big hulking stupid kid, and when Andrew asks Rosa, if she likes it, being sure of it, Rosa finally answers that she doesn’t see anything funny in that, where the climax takes place, after which follows the falling action, where the author sympathizes with Andrew, whose joy dies out and who looks so abject, that Rosa is sorry for him against her will. As the author reports, she tries hard, still moved by pity, to talk to him gently, but unfortunately the retort is uttered before she has command of it, namely that she doesn’t have his sense of humor, where the resolution takes place. So we can conclude that the plot conforms to the formula and the story is told chronologically.

Andrew, the protagonist, faces an external conflict, taking the form of the opposition “man-man”, namely the conflict takes place between Andrew and Rosa, belonging to different social classes, namely Andrew belongs to the working class and Rosa wants to belong to a higher class and she behaves in such a way, as if she does belong to a higher social class, that’s why the novel is called “One Stair Up”. Besides, they have different sense of humor, that’s why they can’t understand each other and, apparently, they are unlikely to be together, so the conflict isn’t resolved and the ending is unhappy.

As for the genre, the text is a psychological story, showing that association and mutual understanding between people with different sense of humor, with a different character, interests, etc. are difficult, sometimes just impossible, that is the main idea of the text.

In the text one observes the combination of the omniscient (the narrator outside the work) point of view and the first-person point of view (the narrators inside the work). In the last case Andrew describes the foolish situations on the screen and Rosa reflects about Andrew’s primitive sense of humor and childish behavior.

Andrew is the protagonist, as he takes the major part in the action. I see only positive features in him, namely I can characterize him as delicate and reserved, as he feels nervous, when he thinks that he is preventing the spectators from watching the film and knowing, how often Rosa had forbidden him to talk to her in a cinema, he tries not to do that. I also find him childish, as he laughs at such foolish things, that adults are unlikely to find funny, but personally I don’t think that’s one of the qualities to blame for. From his characteristic I can conclude that he is a round character, as he has more than one traits and he is also a static character, as he doesn’t change throughout the plot. I sympathize with him, because I’m myself as childish, as he and in fact, I see his loneliness in the story, consisting in having little in common with Rosa.

As for her, she is proud and arrogant, as she doesn’t condescend to Andrew’s disadvantages. He does things, unaccepted in the social class, which she wants to belong to, and she blames him mentally for that, and she spends time with Andrew just because she is having nobody at the moment to spend time with. Fortunately, there is a positive feature in her, namely she is still able to feel sorry for Andrew, but unfortunately it’s not seen externally. I can’t blame her pride, which climbs out even against her will, because I’m not deprived of the same quality myself. As it’s said, don’t judge and you won’t be judged. From the characteristic I conclude that Rosa is a round character as well as Andrew, and static.

As for the language of the text, it’s full of expressive means and stylistic devices, serving the aim to express the feelings and emotions of the characters and the atmosphere in the cinema.

The author uses formal words (e. g. acquaintances, to note, to forbid) and colloquialisms (e. g. to hop, to pick out, to glare) to express the difference in social position between Rosa and Andrew, namely she wants to belong to a higher social class, than he, that’s why she behaves in such a way, as if she does belong to such a class.

The epithet together with the metaphor dim region of luxury maens that it’s comfortable in the cinema, one is sure to enjoy oneself there and the light isn’t bright there. The same aim serves the epithet voluptuous stillness. The epithet hot darkness expresses the idea, that it’s dark and hot in the circle. The further epithet to say huskily shows Andrew’s nervousness, when he thinks that he prevents the other spectators from watching the film. The epithet awful temptation displays Andrew’s fear to break Rosa’s prohibition to talk to her in a cinema and to make her get angry with him. To show that the film “Mothers of Broadway” is moving, the author also uses epithets (e. g. a rapid-fire drama, a heart-searing tale), metaphors (e. g. to send thrills down the spine, to be packed with heart throbs, vibrant with love), an exclamatory sentence (What a story it had!), the syntactical parallelism (It drew tears from the hardest hearts. It sent thrills down the spine) and the anaphor (It was a heart-searing tale … . It was a rapid-fire drama). According to the description of the film, it evokes delight. The epithet a pleasant feeling lays an emphasis on the fact, that Andrew enjoys himself in the cinema. The further epithet a rare fun emphasizes that Andrew rarely sees foolish situations, like those in the film and he finds them too funny for words, what shows the exclamatory sentence you had to laugh! Andrew’s amusement from observing such situations is emphasized with the question-in-the-narrative Where was it going to put that? Under the fat man’s bed”. The same expresses the epithet to laugh gleefully and the exclamatory sentence Oh, this was good! The metaphor to swim into view means in the context “to appear on the screen”. The metaphors they could hear a voice rise above another voice and sink again into voluptuous stillness mean that there are some voices, one after another, and then follows silence in the circle. The epithet a hulking kid strengthens Rosa’s censure of Andrew’s childish behavior. The same do the expressive word cackling and the exclamatory sentence Oh, for heaven’s sake, stop that cackling! The metaphor he broke out makes obvious that Andrew can’t keep the fun in side anymore. The metaphors his hands dropped, all the joy died out of his face and eyes show Andrew’s disappointment about Rosa’s reaction and opinion about the film. He doesn’t expect Rosa to have a different opinion about the film. The fact, that inside she feels sorry for him, is confirmed with the metaphor moved by pity. The expressive verb to glare means that a few human beings look at the pair in an angry way, because they can’t see watch the film behind Rosa and Andrew.

In conclusion I note that the author reaches his aim mostly by means of epithets and metaphors.