Cruelty or Necessity?

Nicole Nichols

In the story "He" by Katherine Porter, the main character Mrs. Whipple is often seen as a cruel, neglectful mother who mistreats her son, and there is amply evidence to support this view. But there is another away to look at Mrs. Whipple: she can also be perceived as a pitiful mother being forced to raise a retarded child that is totally incapable of returning her love. After closer inspection, however, it becomes evident that Mrs. Whipple does the best she can under very harsh circumstances, to raise and nurture her son to the best of her ability. She treats her son the way she does out of necessity and therefore should not be hated or pitied for her treatment of Him. In his book, The Texas Legacy of Katherine Anne Porter, James Tanner states "not many of us could—under the dreadfully circumscribed conditions imposed by the author—measure up so well as Mrs. Whipple under such adversity" (104).

The Whipples are poor, lower-class people struggling to feed and clothe their children, and make ends meet. Mrs. Whipple is a very proud woman who does not want to be judged by others. She desires respect, and because of this she often makes decisions that do not seem to be in her family’s best interest. It often appears as if Mrs. Whipple cares more about what her neighbors think than she does about her relationship with her son, He. For example, she makes Him come down from the tree just because a neighbor says it may be dangerous, and she constantly justifies and makes excuses to others for the way she treats Him. The truth is, she does these things because of her pride; as a human being it is in her nature to be concerned with what other people think about her. This does not mean that she loves her son any less. In her book, Truth and Vision in Katherine Anne Porter’s Fiction, Darlene Unrue states, "She very badly wants her neighbors to think she is grateful for the Lord’s blessings and therefore proclaims she loves Him better than her other children" (95). Mrs. Whipple feels her neighbors are unfairly judging her because of her son’s handicap. She probably knows that they talk about her behind her back and suggest that there is "bad blood" in her family. She also feels guilty about His condition; so she may suspect that it is somehow her fault. Consequently, she feels she must justify herself to them, and is very careful not to do things that will cause them to continually talk about her. Once again, this is a natural response and does not mean she is a bad mother.

It can also be suggested that Mrs. Whipple is outright cruel to her son. It seems as if she makes Him do things around the farm that she does not make the others do. For example, she lets Him handle the stinging bees. Her older son Adna always gets stung, yet He does not seem to mind. This is a chore that has to be done, so she lets Him do the job. In addition, making Him capture the small pig from its mother, or lead a dangerous bull home seems unkind. Actually, Adna is unable to capture the pig, and her husband refuses to lead home the bull, so again, out of necessity she has Him do these things. He was made to plow the fields because He is the biggest and strongest and is also able to take over Adna’s work when He leaves home. The fact is, she lets Him do all of these things because none of the others can or will do them. It is interesting to note that in the case of the pig He is not scared and in fact, seems to have a knack for outrunning the mother pig. Also, in handling the dangerous bull, He has a special way with animals that enables Him to calmly lead it home without incident. This clearly shows that instead of these acts being cruel, they are necessary things that have to be done around the farm, most of which He doesn’t mind and is actually good at, even better than the other children are.

The Whipple’s decision to send Him away to an institution when He has become very ill and is unable to do anything for Himself can be construed as a final act of cruelty. Mrs. Whipple’s pride once again is wounded because she worries about accepting charity. She finally realizes, however that it is not charity, but a necessity because they can no longer take care of Him. It is a strain financially and emotionally. When the day comes to send Him away, Mrs. Whipple admits that she "loved Him as much as she possibly could . . . there was nothing she could do to make up to Him for His life" (Porter 603). Naturally, she is a little relieved that she will no longer have to constantly worry and care for Him and begins to see her life as becoming normal. This is not an indication, however, that she does not love Him, or that she is a cruel mother. Since He was born, she has constantly taken care of Him and worried about Him, and although she will still worry, her life will be more bearable with Him gone. She realizes it will be better for Him at the Country Home where He can get the treatment He needs.

In his book Katherine Anne Porter’s Artistic Development, Robert H. Brinkmeyer suggests that we should make judgments about Mrs. Whipple that "in effect preclude the possibility of the simple condemnation of Mrs. Whipple and instead invite an understanding of her complexity as both loving mother and burdened farm wife" (103). She is a woman who has an unhappy life; she has no money, an unsupportive husband, and a mentally challenged son incapable of returning her love. It seems the only thing she really has is her pride. Pride can often make people do strange things, and in Mrs. Whipple’s case it makes her seem like a cruel, uncaring woman. This is not true, however, as we look at the hard life she leads. Her motivation for her actions is understandable. This does not mean that we should pity her or that we should hate her. We should just realize that she does the best she can in light of some very difficult circumstances.

Works Cited

Brinkmeyer, Robert H. Jr. Katherine Anne Porter’s Artistic Development. Baton Rouge: LSU Press, 1989.

Porter, Katherine Anne. "He." The Literature of the American South. Ed. William L. Andrews. New York: Norton. 1998. 596-603.

Tanner, James T.F. The Texas Legacy of Katherine Anne Porter. Denton: U North Texas P, 1990.

Unrue, Darlene Harbour. Truth and Vision in Katherine Anne Porter’s Fiction. Athens: U Georgia P, 1985.

Works Consulted

Hendrick, Willene and George Hendrick. Katherine Anne Porter. Boston: Twayne Publishers, 1988.

Jorgensen, Bruce W. "The Other Side of Silence: Katherine Anne Porter’s ‘He’ as Tragedy." Modern Fiction Studies 3 28 (1982).

Moddelmog, Debra A. "Narrative Irony and Hidden Motivations in Katherine Anne Porter’s ‘He’." Modern Fiction Studies 3 28 (1982). Rpt in Modern Critical Views, Katherine Anne Porter. Ed. Harold Bloom. New York: Chelsea House 1986. 117-125.

"He": Mrs. Whipple’s Secret

Cheri Fontaine

The prevailing theme in Katherine Anne Porter's story "He" is Mrs. Whipple’s concern over appearances and particularly how her neighbors perceive her actions concerning her retarded son. Many critics have written about Porter’s emphasis on appearances in this story. However, what lies under the surface of the story is also interesting. Contrary to both her actions and spoken words, it is clear Mrs. Whipple inwardly feels her retarded son is an animal and that she secretly wishes for his death.

The story "He" is similar to another story of Katherine Anne Porter’s titled "The Downward Path to Wisdom." Both stories depict children who are retarded, who are equated to animals by one or both of the parents, and who are wished dead or never born (Weisenforth 359).

The title of the story "He" provides the reader with the first clue that the retarded son is de-humanized. Throughout the story the other two of Mrs. Whipple’s children, Emly and Adna, are given names and are referred to by their given names. This is not true of the retarded son. Not once in the story is He called by his given name. In fact, the reader never learns his given name. The failure to give the retarded son a name is similar to the farm practice of giving names to pets but not to the ever-present farm animals. People generally do not name animals they plan on killing. Because Emly and Adna have names, they appear to the reader to be more human. In contrast, the failure to name the retarded son makes him appear more animal-like or less than human.

Another example of animal treatment takes place during family meals. The retarded son does not eat his meals at the table with his family. In a description of the retarded son, Porter writes "He didn’t whine for food, as the other children did, but waited until it was given Him; He ate squatting in the corner, smacking and mumbling" (597). When Mrs. Whipple’s brother comes for a visit, Porter writes "He wouldn’t come into the dining room, and Mrs. Whipple passed it off very well" (599). For appearances sake "Mrs. Whipple loaded up a big plate for Him first, before everybody"(Porter 599). The parallels to how people treat their dogs can not be overlooked. It is common practice for dog owners to train their dogs not to beg or whine for food. Many dog owners feed their dogs in the kitchen, placing their food and water bowls in the corners. Also, it is common to feed the dog first so that the dog doesn’t disrupt the family’s dinner by begging.

Although it is pitiful that the retarded son gets treated like an animal, what is even more sad is Mrs. Whipple’s secret wish for her son’s death. The neighbors are much more frank when "talking plainly among themselves" and felt it would be "A Lord’s pure mercy if He should die" (Porter 598).

On the surface it appears Mrs. Whipple has the utmost concern over her retarded son’s well being. In one passage Mrs. Whipple states "I wouldn’t have anything happen to him for all the world, but it looks like I can’t keep him out of mischief" (Porter 597). This couldn’t be farther from the truth. Not once in the story does the reader find any attempts by Mrs. Whipple to keep this son out of mischief or out of harm's way. There are several examples of Mrs. Whipple finding him climbing trees like a monkey or climbing the rafters in the barn and not making any effort to stop him. Climbing trees and rafters are clearly dangerous activities which could result in death with one small slip of the foot. In fact, Mrs. Whipple states "it’s actually funny sometimes the way He can do anything; it’s laughable to see Him up to His tricks" (Porter 597).

Critic Winfred Emmons writes that Mrs. Whipple "wishes He had never been born; but she practices the eleventh commandment, which is to put up the appearance of virtue if one cannot manage the real thing" (354). Although Porter writes "Mrs. Whipple’s life was a torment for fear something might happen to Him" (597) and that she thought "sometimes I wish I was dead" (600), just the opposite was true. What Mrs. Whipple actually meant was that sometimes she wished He was dead and that her life was a torment for fear something wouldn’t happen to him. In fact, there are three instances where Mrs. Whipple deliberately sent Him into potentially life-threatening situations.

The first example is when Mrs. Whipple is afraid she won’t be able to send her retarded son out to the bees anymore due to concern expressed by her nosey neighbors. Mrs. Whipple’s justification for sending her retarded son out to the bees in the first place is because "Adna can’t handle them, they sting him so" (Porter 598). But of the retarded son she states "if He gets a sting He don’t really mind" (Porter 598). The fact that excessive bee stings can kill is not a concern of Mrs. Whipple’s when sending Him out to the bees.

The second example occurs in early Autumn with the expected arrival of Mrs. Whipple’s brother and family. In this scene, Mrs. Whipple decides it would be nice to kill a suckling pig for dinner. The problem was "how to get the little pig away from his ma, a great fighter, worse than a Jersey cow. Adna wouldn’t try it: ‘That sow’d rip my insides out all over the pen’" (Porter 598). However, Mrs. Whipple does not hesitate to send in her retarded son to get the little suckling, justifying her actions because "He’s not scared" (Porter 598) while she laughed and thought it was funny. A person’s lack of fear does not have anything to do with how dangerous a situation is and, again, Mrs. Whipple is clearly not concerned with His safety.

In the final and most obvious example, Mrs. Whipple allows the retarded son to lead their neighbor’s bull to their pasture for breeding. Porter writes "Mrs. Whipple was scared sick of bulls; she had heard awful stories about how they followed on quietly enough, and then suddenly pitched on with a bellow and pawed and gored a body to pieces" (601). Although she knew she shouldn’t make a sound or move as soon as He got closer, "her voice burst out of her in a shriek" (601). This is the most obvious example of Mrs. Whipple’s wish for His death and shows just how desperate she had become. Mrs. Whipple even put appearances aside in this one instance. Unfortunately for Mrs. Whipple, this action did not result in His death and her life continued on its downward spiral.

At the end of the story, He is being taken away to a Country Home for treatment. Mrs. Whipple assures her neighbor that "this is only for a little while" leaving the reader to conclude that this will be a permanent situation (Porter 603). In a round about way, Mrs. Whipple receives her wish. Even He came to the realization that Mrs. Whipple was finally receiving her wish for Porter writes "He was scrubbing away big tears that rolled out of the corners of His eyes" and "He seemed to be accusing her of something"( Porter 603). Perhaps not His death but His removal from her life.

Works Cited

Emmons, Winfred. "Katherine Anne Porter: The Regional Stories." Rpt. in Short Story Criticism. Ed. Gale. Detroit, 1990. Vol. 4. 350-356.

Porter, Katherine A. "He." The Literature of the American South. Ed. William L. Andrews, et al. New York: Norton, 1998. 596-602.

Wisenfarth, Joseph. "Negatives of Hope: A Reading of Katherine Anne Porter." In Renascence. Vol. XXV. No. 2. Winter, 1973. 85-94. Rpt. in Short Story Criticism. Ed. Gale. Detroit, 1990. Vol. 4. 359-361.

Works Consulted

Hardy, John E. "Katherine Anne Porter." NY: Ungar, 1973. Rpt. in Contemporary Literary Criticism. Ed. Gale. Detroit, 1980. Vol. 15. 428-430.

Johnson, James W. "Another Look at Katherine Anne Porter." Virginia Quarterly Review. 36:4. 1960. 598-613. Rpt. in Contemporary Literary Criticism. Gale. Detroit, 1977. Vol. 7. 310-312.

Liberman, M.M. "Katherine Anne Porter’s Fiction." Wayne State University Press. Detroit, 1971. 87-90.

Warren, Robert P. "Uncorrupted Consciousness: The Stories of Katherine Anne Porter." The Yale Review. Vol. LV, No. 2, December 1965. 280-90. Rpt. in Short Story Criticism. Gale. Detroit, 1990. Vol. 4. 349-350.

Welty, Eudora. "Katherine Anne Porter: The Eye of the Story." The Yale Review. Vol. LV, No. 2. Winter 1966. 30-40. Rpt. in Contemporary Literary Criticism. Gale. Detroit, 1984. Vol. 27. 398-400.