Letters of Recommendation Packet Checklist by nbv20251

VIEWS: 238 PAGES: 12

									                    Letters of Recommendation Packet Checklist


List your contact information.

Include in cover letter what you want them to emphasize (i.e. your research ability,
reasoning ability, etc.).

List of Schools to which you are considering applying.

State your preferred deadline and the earliest due date.

Open/Close with thanks and note that their time is valuable and so is their letter.

Print “Letter of Recommendation” forms from LSADS (fill out what you can).

Copy of Unofficial Transcript

Copy of Personal Statement

Copy of Best Work (In the Class)

Resume

Where to send the letter and how (departmental stationary and envelope)

Postage

In the cover letter, explain that their letter should include:
        1. How and how well they know me.
        2. Do I have what law school takes?
        3. a high level of enthusiasm
David Hunt
           Hun00004@byui.edu * (208)656-0745 * 44 S. 2nd E. #19* Rexburg, ID 83440

                                                                            December 6, 2005
Joelle Moen
English Department SA 110
BYU-Idaho
Rexburg, Idaho 83460-0820

Dear Sister Moen:

Your mission, should you choose to accept…
I am preparing to apply for Law School beginning fall semester, 2006. As part of the admissions process, I
am required to submit at least two letters of recommendation which attest to my ability to succeed in this
vigorous study. I would like you to write one of those letters for me. I realize that your time is valuable;
with that in mind, I thank you for your assistance, and I assure you that your recommendation is a crucial
factor in my prospective admittance.

I have included in this folder several items which I believe will help you in this process:

•       List of schools to which I am applying
•       Copy of my personal statement
•       Copy of my unofficial transcript
•       Copy of my occupational résumé
•       “Letter of Recommendation” forms from LSADS (I have filled out what I can)
•       Self-addressed envelope to send your recommendation (postage included)
•       Textual analysis, research, and writing sample

I decided to ask you for a recommendation because as my English professor you can endorse my ability to
organize research and write effectively. It is important that your recommendation include an explanation of
how you know me, and how I compare with other students. Ultimately, the question that must be addressed
is “does this student have what it takes to be successful in law school?”—enthusiasm and lavish praise are
helpful.

I will begin applying in November. If it will not be possible for you to write and submit a letter before then,
please contact me. You will mail your letter directly; it must be accompanied by a completed Letter of
Recommendation Form included in this folder. If your contact information that appears on that form is
erroneous, please correct it. Your letter should be printed on letterhead, signed, and mailed in the envelope
provided. Please include both the form and your letter, but do not staple them together. Also, to ensure
security, please sign the flap after sealing.

 If you need any additional information, please contact me anytime at Hun00004@byui.edu or 656-0745 and
I will gladly furnish it. I very much appreciate your interest in my further education and profession, as well
as your willingness to grant me this personal favor.

Thank You.


David Hunt
David Hunt
HUN00004@byui.edu * 208.656.0745 * 44 S. 2nd E. #19 * Rexburg, ID 83440


Education

Brigham Young University, Idaho                 Rexburg, ID                                  2000-01, 2003-06
    •   B.S. English; emphasis in literary studies, educational clusters in philosophy, Latin, and Spanish
    •   3.9 cumulative GPA
    •   Significant coursework: rhetoric and reasoning, advanced critical theory, formal logic
Recent Experience
Americorps                            Boise, ID                                              Aug 2004-Present
LCSC Americorps Community Service Volunteer
    •   Contributed over 900 hours of community service
    •   Taught year-long ESL and composition curriculum to a linguistically diverse class of 5-9th graders
    •   Provided weekly medical translation service at local health center
    •   Collected nearly 300 blankets and shipped them to tsunami survivors and abuse shelters
Macks Inn Dinner Theatre                        Macks Inn, ID                               May 2004-Sep. 2004
Entertainer / Server
    •   Provided standup comedic pre-show entertainment
    •   Acted nightly in two musical-theatre productions; played both serious and comic roles
    •   Welcomed, seated, and waited on guests
South Mission                                  Buenos Aires, Argentina                      July 2001-Aug. 2003
Volunteer Representative
    •   Averaged 80-hour work weeks for two years
    •   Worked in critically impoverished neighborhoods providing physical labor on various projects
    •   Taught self-improvement, marriage and family relations, effective communication, and ethics
    •   Increased my ability to understand and resolve people’s questions and concerns
    •   Trained new representatives in conduct, methods, and the Spanish language
    •   Directed 20 volunteers for 7 months, including securing their physical and financial welfare
Special Honors and Achievements
    •   Full Academic Scholarship, BYU-Idaho (2000-2005)
    •   Community Service Scholarship, Beehive Federal Credit Union (2005)
    •   Law school admissions consultant, BYU-I Pre-Law Society (2005)
    •   Idaho state speech and debate finalist (2000)
    •   Eagle Scout, BSA (1999)
Publications and Presentations
    •    “Steinbeck’s Allegory of the Cave: Deconstructing Elisa Allen in ‘The Chrysanthemums’.” Paper to be presented
        at “Steinbeck and His Contemporaries” conference, Sun Valley, March 2006. Paper also nominated for 2005
        Norton National Writing Scholarship (decision pending).
    •   “The Great Rhetoric Shift: The Correlation Between Changing Language and the Evolving LDS Public Image.”
        Outlet: The BYU-Idaho Literary Journal 7 (2005): 64-69.
Specialized Skills
    •   Fluent and literate in Spanish
    •   Emergency medical technician, National Registry EMS

Personal Statement for David Hunt
        The microphone sticks to my clammy hand as I set up my first joke. My heart is pounding so loudly
I can barely hear my own voice coming through the speakers. The first joke is always a gamble. The punch
rolls out with perfect timing, and a room of backlit silhouettes roars its approval. The challenge and pressure
of live comedy are intoxicating. Performing standup comedy over the last five years has sharpened my
ability to think on the spot and revise ideas quickly. In fact, reflection and revision seem to be my life’s
recurring themes. Whether you look at my traditional upbringing, my sensitizing exposure to a foreign
culture, or my humanizing undergraduate program, I have always been revising, steadily inclining toward a
career in law.
        I consider myself a progressive Idahoan—if there is such a thing. Yet outside of Idaho, I anticipate
being seen as the go-to person for a conservative stance. Every law class needs someone like that. The
ability to see more than one side of an issue has come naturally to me as the third of ten (frequently arguing)
children—so did a sense of humor. In my rural upbringing, comedic material was almost as readily available
as hard work. As a lanky, redheaded fourteen-year-old, I ‘built character’ on a field by my house, moving
irrigation pipe for a neighboring farmer. However, farm work was only the beginning. I persisted in the
unskilled labor circuit for the next five years, sweating out my days in dawn-patrol custodial work, digging
fence-post holes under the noonday sun, and stacking fifty-pound potato boxes for eight-hour graveyard
shifts. In these intense conditions, I began to revise my career goals. I determined early on to get the best
education I could.
        That message was reinforced in the barrios of south Buenos Aires where I spent two years as a
service missionary. Although some may believe that delaying college might have harmed my career
development, I consider it the best thing that I could have done to prepare for it. For two years, my small-
town naiveté was constantly being challenged and revised. As I waded through endemic, waist-deep floods;
growing anti-American sentiment; and a violent political revolution that left unbelievable poverty in its
wake, I saw firsthand the misery that follows social and political injustice, and—‘quixotic’ as it sounds—I
wanted to help.
        Returning from Argentina, I served as an AmeriCorps volunteer, translating for the Spanish-speaking
patrons of a free medical clinic and teaching a class of eighth-grade ESL students whose abilities ranged
from proficient to learning disabled. However, I learned quickly that a teacher is never just a teacher; I was a
mentor and a counselor as well. Fortunately, I have always had a love—and a knack—for counseling:
listening, reflecting, and encouraging.
        At that time, my newfound enthusiasm for counseling and service seemed an ideal mix for studying
medicine. As a pre-med student, I certified as an emergency medical technician and packed my class
schedule with chemistry, math, and physics. On a whim, I also enrolled in an honors philosophy class. That
class affected me profoundly. So much, in fact, that I revised my educational aims, determining that legal
study more ideally combines the characteristics of advocate, counselor, and the philosophic mind.
        Too bad philosophy is not offered as a major at BYU-Idaho. Having grown up in the freethinking
home of an English teacher, though, I was encouraged to study anything I wanted—as long as it was English.
The study of language and literature suited me, perhaps because, when I was four years old, my family’s
television left home and never came back. Consequently, we read. Dinnertime conversations in my family
of ten competitive children were more like Jeopardy rounds with categories from Homer to Harry Potter. As
an English major I have maintained a nearly perfect 3.9—a GPA that may supplement my less-than-perfect
LSAT score. Through my undergraduate study of English and philosophy, I continued to read voraciously,
but I also learned to organize and communicate well-researched thought and to examine issues and their
implications carefully. I feel prepared for graduate study in law. But why Columbia?
        Applying to a top school like Columbia is—can I say this?—a ‘no brainer.’ My wife and I will be
first-time parents in April and securing my family’s future is very important to me. Besides the clout that a
Columbia Law degree carries in the job market, though, I consider attending an institution with such
remarkable faculty and resources an end in itself—world-class instruction is certainly its own reward. More
particularly, however, I am impressed by Columbia’s Experimentalist Mentorship Program. For six months,
I lived and worked in Olmos, Argentina—a suburb of Buenos Aires and home to one of the largest and most
deficient maximum-security prisons in the country. I was pleased to note that one project of the Mentorship
program, as you well know, involved coordination with Argentina’s Supreme Court to reform the Buenos
Aires prison system. A law school with the concern and the initiative to confront such problems in a culture
that I know and care about interests me very much.
        I am confident that I can contribute uniquely to the Columbia Law School experience and to future
alumni opportunities. My distinctive background, experiences, and coursework—informing and sensitizing
as they have been—have combined to prompt ‘a hundred visions and revisions’ which have led me to law. I
look forward to meeting the challenge and excitement of being a part of Columbia Law School.
  Textual Analysis, Research and Writing Sample

         Steinbeck’s Allegory of the Cave:
Deconstructing Elisa Allen in “The Chrysanthemums”
                                                                  Written for T. Gorton’s English 314
                                                                                          Spring 2005

         Bewilderments of the eyes are of two kinds, and arise from two causes, either from coming out
of the light or from going into the light.
                                                                   Plato, The Republic, Book VII, p. 43

         “The Chrysanthemums” is one of Steinbeck’s most studied and acclaimed short works of
fiction. Although the story lends itself to various approaches, it has earned a respected niche among
feminists. Its value as a feminist work, however, is undermined by its traditional interpretation.
Many suggest that the protagonist in “The Chrysanthemums,” Elisa Allen, struggles in vain to escape
gender oppression through a value-affirming sexual episode that is discarded by her manipulative and
illicit partner, and, unsuccessful, she weeps in frustration. However, ambiguity surrounding why she
weeps has been misdirected by the sexist predispositions of critics. Steinbeck’s feminist writing
challenged the idea that women are a “weaker sex” and he anticipated that “The Chrysanthemums”
would be misinterpreted by sexist readers and critics. Like so many other Steinbeck heroines, Elisa
Allen is a strong woman and her final tears were not shed in resignation or helplessness. Rather, she
glories in womanhood, and like the enlightened one in Plato’s allegory of the cave, she recognizes the
absurdity of the limited notions of her peers and, weeping, laments their ignorance.

Ambiguity in “The Chrysanthemums”
This motivational ambiguity in “The Chrysanthemums” causes confusion which is misguided by
sexism. The story’s inherent ambiguity does not stem from the actions of the characters themselves,
rather from attempts to discern their motives. The third-person objective style that Steinbeck uses to
narrate the events in “The Chrysanthemums” renders the plot straightforward and unambiguous: Elisa
meets a traveling tinker, she makes him a present of her flowers which is ultimately undervalued, and
she concludes frustrated. That much is unquestionable. Steinbeck scholar R.S. Hughes, however,
observes that over the years “critics have differed . . . on the specific source of Elisa Allen’s
frustration.” Steinbeck maintains this ambiguity through his “restricted point of view—in which [he]
reports events ‘objectively’ without entering into the minds of the characters” (Hughes 27). Differing
analyses of “The Chrysanthemums” hang on what the reader determines those character motives to
be. Why she cries is central to Steinbeck’s message. Predispositions concerning that “why” can
adversely affect interpretation. Indeed, perhaps for this reason, Steinbeck scholar Jackson Benson
tells us that Steinbeck himself was convinced that “there was a good deal more to his fiction than
critics would ever be able to perceive” (qtd. in Hughes 12).

Sex-stereotyped devaluation of the feminine
The automatic assumption that Elisa cries because she is weak is fatal to Steinbeck’s innovative
feminism in “The Chrysanthemums.” Like others of Steinbeck’s short works, this story has obvious
feminist undertones. Indeed, as Mitchell observed in her essay on feminine identity in Steinbeck’s
short stories, “It is in his short stories that Steinbeck’s understanding . . . of women is to be found”
(154). However, as I recently noted, the direction that feminism takes in this story depends more on
the reader’s interpretation of character motives, than on the actions of the characters themselves.
These reader perceptions, however, are biased by what Lorelei Cederstrom called the “Sexism
ingrained in American culture” (189). When we see a woman cry, are we trained to automatically
cite oppression? This tendency may suggest what Cederstrom refers to as the “devaluation of the
feminine in human experience” (204).
         Widespread devaluation of the feminine among critics is what misdirects the ambiguity in
“The Chrysanthemums.” What may appear to critics as Steinbeck’s sexist portrayal of women
illustrates the depreciating awareness of the feminine rather than personal sexism on his part.
Cederstrom explains that “The superficial and seemingly sexist characters of the women in
Steinbeck’s [works] are much less at issue than the attitudes of the male characters [or critics]
toward them” (204). It is by our culturally ingrained sexism that even we, as critics, fail to
recognize that, through Elisa Allen, Steinbeck exposes “the limitations of our current attitudes
toward the feminine in both the natural world and in life” (Cederstrom 204, emphasis added).

The “traditional” analysis
The pathetically weak Elisa Allen that has existed for the last half-century is the result of two
conditions: a woman crying without an explicitly stated reason, and preconditioned feminine
devaluation among critics. Critics find what they’re looking for. After an initial reading, critics
who are conditioned to blame Elisa’s concluding tears on gender oppression marshal evidence for
such repression throughout the story. Steinbeck sets the story with a fog that covers the valley like
a “closed pot” geographically symbolizing female limitation. Both valleys and pots are yonic
images and both suggest oppression in this case. As Carey observes, “Steinbeck’s descriptive
setting . . . suggests a sense of barrenness . . . and an ambivalent oppressiveness” (36). Elisa
emerges excluded from the men; she is in her garden, they are in the fields. She hides her dress, and
her womanly figure, with a heavy corduroy apron. Carey calls her “A woman . . . trapped beneath
her heavy work clothes” (36).
        Through the lens of oppression, Elisa’s encounter with the tinker is, as Leroy Thomas
declares, “a symbolic sexual experience.” Most critics agree that it “reveals her to be a sexually
frustrated woman” (Thomas 50). She is literally deflowered by the disheveled tinker, and as he
leaves she naively stands with her shoulders straight and her head thrown back—proud to have
‘been of service’ to a man.
        The final image is, traditionally, a most pathetically harsh scene. As she and her husband
drive to dinner, she boasts that she is now “strong.” But she is crushed in the end as she sees her
flowers discarded on the dusty road. According to critics, she is hurt by this betrayal realizing that
“her partner in coition wanted only her body symbolized by the pot [and] the product of their “love”
is merely cast aside” (Thomas 51). She gives up her futile struggle against oppression and
worthlessness and ends the tale weeping resignedly “like an old woman.”



Steinbeck’s message is elusive and easily missed
Steinbeck’s feminism was much more innovative than it gets credit for. As far as I’m concerned,
the interpretation that I have just described is a total misconception. I agree with Mitchell that
“Steinbeck’s [feminist] contributions to American literature . . . are ignored or dismissed” (Mitchell
154). I believe that his feminist contributions go largely unrecognized because they are
misconstrued by critics’ ingrained sexism. Elisa’s tears are central to the story’s message. If she
cries because she is frustrated with her lowly station of womanhood then file this story away for
dismissal with a million others just like it—it offers nothing new.
         Steinbeck, in a letter to George Albee, described his purpose in writing “The
Chrysanthemums”:
         I shall be interested to know what you think of the story, “The Chrysanthemums.” It is
         entirely different and is designed to strike without the reader’s knowledge. I mean he reads
         it causally and after it is finished feels that something profound has happened to him
         although he does not know what nor how. It has had that effect on several people here. (qtd.
         in Hughes 21)
         Could it be that this “profound” feeling is introduced because somewhere, even
subconsciously, the reader sees and respects Elisa Allen in a new and elevated way? Formulaic
feminism doesn’t “strike without the reader’s knowledge”; it’s predictable and used up. Could it be
that instead of shedding frustrated tears of impotence, Elisa Allen cries because she pities man?
Among all other characters in the story, she alone, as Plato would say, has left the cave and seen the
light? She does not cry because life is unfair to her; on the contrary, she cries because despite her
effort to elevate her peers, they continue wasting their lives discarding that of value and seeking
honors as hollow as an empty flower pot.

Steinbeck’s feminism: how did he write women?
Steinbeck was an enemy of the cultural slide toward female devaluation—he wouldn’t have written
his most lifelike, round, and complex character (Hughes 7) as a weakling. Cederstrom notes that,
“Throughout his career Steinbeck was concerned with affording the . . . feminine its proper value”
(203). Mitchell, commenting on Steinbeck’s short stories argued that he “tried to release woman
from the pasteboard, shadowy role she generally assumed in fiction” (154). And finally, Hughes
observes that, among the characters in Steinbeck’s short fiction are “bright, capable, and energetic
females” (14). Drawing on the character of Abra from East of Eden, Cederstrom argues that
Steinbeck created archetypes of women who are lovely, courageous, strong, and wise (203). Elisa
Allen is no exception.
        Steinbeck celebrated the feminine and frequently assigned his female characters positions of
superiority. Elisa Allen is the only woman in “The Chrysanthemums.” She tends a garden. She
makes things grow. She calls her innate ability to create and nurture life “planter’s hands”; she values
it above all else. This ability symbolizes woman’s unique ability to conceive, deliver and nurture
children—the first two being impossible to men and the third unconventional. Commenting on the
symbolism of gardening, Cederstrom claims that “Steinbeck was celebrating the feminine and
advocating the necessity of feminine values for a balanced life” (190). Truly, Elisa Allen has all the
earmarks of a Steinbeck ‘strong woman.’ This observation alone demands the story’s rereading.

The enlightened Elisa Allen
If Steinbeck, then, did not intend for Elisa to be a weak character, she must have cried for some other
reason than helpless frustrated resignation. Elisa Allen is not an ordinary woman—even to Steinbeck.
Hughes calls her “Steinbeck’s most sensitively drawn female protagonist” (17). Of all of Steinbeck’s
‘strong women’ Elisa is perhaps the strongest. Mitchell points out that, in his fiction, “Steinbeck
reveals fundamental differences between the way women see themselves and they way they are
viewed by men . . . . Women perceive themselves as being equal if not superior partners” (Mitchell
155, emphasis added). A true critic must break the barriers and biases of female devaluation to
correctly analyze “The Chrysanthemums.” He/she must attempt to see Elisa Allen as Mitchell and
Hughes agree that she was truly written—superior.
          From the outset, the author assigns the woman a separate position of enlightenment. She
works far from the men who talk money and business; she chooses to. Cederstrom notes that “By
invoking [gardening], Steinbeck . . . valorizes the long-degraded feminine principle in our lives”
(191). Indeed, the garden symbol is one of the first indications that this woman is not pathetic—
rather, in a way, godlike. Steinbeck makes this biblical connection in her name: “Elisa’s garden [is]
evocative of Eden if one elides the sounds of Elisa and Allen” (Carey 38). Hughes concurs: “Elisa’s
garden itself can also be thought of as a paradise or Eden” (26). The garden is further evidence of
Steinbeck’s appreciation of the feminine and his intention of exalting Elisa Allen in this story.
         Henry Allen, Elisa’s husband, never enters his wife’s Eden, possibly out of “obtuseness”
(Hughes 24). Hughes blames his exclusion from the garden on his lack of “understanding of her
sensitive emotions” (24); I agree with his analysis. Henry, although he means well, simply cannot
understand or appreciate the import of what happens in his wife’s garden, and so, to avoid casting
pearls before swine, Elisa never invites him in.
         Elisa tenaciously avoids the degrading conversation and activities of the men that surround
her. She works in heavy clothing not to impersonate a man, but to “protect her body”—her feminine
attire and hands; these things are precious to her (Carey 37). When her husband asks her to come to
the fights with him she refuses. Perhaps allusive to the shadow games in Plato’s cave, boxing is
among the most degradingly bestial “manly” diversions. And indeed, in training, it is referred to as
shadow boxing. Elisa, however, has no interest in man’s meaningless diversions—his shadows on the
wall.
         Steinbeck did not intend to portray men as superior beings; on the contrary. The leading man
in “The Chrysanthemums” is the unkempt tinker. The tinker presents a stark contrast to Elisa’s “hard
swept” house. He wears a black suit. His eyes and the cracks of his hands are described as dark, and
black. The author compares his brooding look to that of teamsters and sailors—other professions of
men. Steinbeck has introduced another prisoner of the cave and he describes him in one repeated
word: black. After failing to obtain employment from her, the tinker applies to Elisa’s pity, saying
that if she doesn’t help him, then perhaps he will go hungry. Undeniably, contrary to traditional
feminist literature, in “The Chrysanthemums,” the man is quite dependent on the woman for his
sustenance.
         In her garden, Elisa has found significant fulfillment where men do not. However, she is not
selfish with the pleasure she takes in nurturing; quite the opposite: she wants desperately to share it
and is hurt when it is disregarded. By mentioning her flowers, the peddler hints to the Elisa that he is
capable of understanding and appreciating the light that she loves and longs to share—the godlike
glory of creating life. She latches onto his comment and becomes a missionary of the light. Carey
calls it her “moment of exuberant trust” (41). She tries to explain to him the beauty and the
importance of nurturing, of being female. “She [attempts] to share a knowledge that is private and
almost mystical” (Carey 42). She tries to help him turn his head and leave the confinement of his
sexist cave, inviting him to “enter her garden” (Carey 41).
         She is hopeful that he can leave his dark existence and see the importance of what she has told
him. She doesn’t realize that her words have had no affect on him. Through her entire message he
ignorantly watches the shadows and finally asks for money again. As he leaves she stands straight.
She whispers, “That’s a bright direction. There’s a glowing there.” The figurative reference to light
is too obvious to be ignored. She has invited him out of the cave; literally into the “life-giving” light.
        Elisa’s satisfied behavior after sharing her womanly gift is not that of an unhappy or
oppressed woman. She hurries into the house and removes her manly overclothes. She bathes. And
then, naked, she examines her feminine body in a mirror and throws out her chest, celebrating her
femininity. Carey notes that here, “She is proud and stately as she views her . . . magnificence”
(Carey 43). She dresses in “the symbol of her prettiness” and applies her makeup. This is not the
behavior of a woman who wants to be treated, or even thought of, as a man. She is apparently quite
content with her position. She recognizes the blessing of her “planter’s hands” and she is glad to have
shared the light with a prisoner of the den. Upon seeing her, Henry loses his breath. He speaks to her
“helplessly.” This is not an oppressed female. Indeed, she is quite in control.
        As they drive away she sees dark specks on the road, not unlike the shadows that Plato’s
enlightened returned to see and to lament. She is saddened. Not because she has failed to reach
man’s plateau, but because she has failed to elevate the poor pathetic peddler from his dark cave of
“emotional poverty” (Mitchell 163). She pities him.
        She asks her husband about boxing, do women go? Yes? How tragic that they don’t see their
worth. How awful that they must play at the shadows also. “I’m sure I don’t want to go.” She says.
And then, lost in pity for all of the creatures of the cave, she can only “cry—like an old woman.”

Conclusion
Critics, predisposed to sexism, have traditionally misinterpreted Elisa Allen’s ambiguous tears to find
a pathetic and oppressed woman. Steinbeck anticipated this misreading. Elisa was written as a
strong, even a superior woman. Her tears are shed in pity for those who can’t understand or
appreciate the value of “planter’s hands”—meaning femininity. The rich ambiguity that surrounds
character motives is part of what made Carol Henning Steinbeck, the author’s first wife, praise “The
Chrysanthemums” as “the best of all his stories” (qtd. in Hughes 21). Whether or not Steinbeck
intentionally molded Elisa Allen after Plato’s enlightened ancient, the archetype of enlightenment
pitying ignorance can certainly be seen in both stories—especially in Steinbeck’s description of
Elisa’s tears: “like an old woman.”
        The elderly do not typically weep out of vanity; they do, however, weep tears of wisdom,
experience, and even pity. In her poem “Women” Adrienne Rich describes three sisters: the first two
try desperately to fit into a man’s world at the expense of personal identity and self-worth; the third,
the oldest, does not attempt to conform and although “Her stockings are torn, [she] is beautiful.”
Elisa doesn’t cry like an angry child; but like an old woman she weeps. An old, beautiful woman.
                                           Works Cited
Carey, G. K. Cliffsnotes Red Pony, Chrysanthemums & Flight. Lincoln: Wiley & Sons, 1978.
Cederstrom, Lorelei. “Beyond the Boundaries of Sexism: The Archetypal Feminine         versus
       Anima Women in Steinbeck’s Novels.” Beyond Boundaries:           rereading John
Steinbeck. Ed. Susan Shillinglaw and Kevin Hearle.         Tuscaloosa: Alabama UP, 2002. 189-
205.
Gladstein, Mimi Reisel. “Abra: The Indestructible Woman in East of Eden.” Modern Critical
       Views: John Steinbeck. Ed. Harold Bloom. New York: Chelsea House, 1987. 91-103.
Hughes, R.S. John Steinbeck: A study of the short fiction. Boston: Twayne, 1989.
Mitchell, Marilyn L. “Steinbeck’s Strong Women: Feminine Identity in the Short         Stories.”
 Modern Critical Views: John Steinbeck. Ed. Harold Bloom. New           York: Chelsea House,
1987. 91-103.
Plato. The Republic. WordCruncher Publishing Technologies. Provo: Hamilton &           Locke,
1996.
Rich, Adrienne. “Women.” Collected works of Adrienne Rich online. Comp. Carol Bere.            9
Jan. 2000. Accessed 6 December 2005. <http://www.arlindo-
       correia.com/010900.html#Women>.
Thomas, Leroy. “Steinbeck’s ‘“The Chrysanthemums.”’” The Explicator 45. 3 (1987): 50-51.

								
To top