Week Four: Killing Convention in Bombal’s “The Shrouded Woman”
by samuel wallace
“The Shrouded Woman,” for all its experiments in structure and style, is perhaps most notable for its show of just how far perspective can go by providing the most unorthodox viewpoint: that of a body in a coffin, briefly suspended between life and death. The piece is comprised of social commentary, including but not limited to the woman’s role in the home, effects of social ostracism and living as the “other” in society. By its finale, in showing death as the great equalizer through the protagonist, mirrored is the breaking down of literary convention–and in this same fell swoop, unequal power structures—found in Bombal’s idiosyncratic writing.
Starting off with the reanimation of a dead woman, there is a grim element to the tale which extends far past the grisly nature of the scene. Flashbacks provide clues as to her pitiful lot in old age, including a myriad of “anxieties” and “sorrows” (pg. 157). In death, she is finally at peace from these demons; in this brief limbo, she appears to welcome the admiration of onlookers.
The funeral home has made her presentable. As a result, the people have not decided to attend to Ana María in the final days of failing health and sickly physique, where they might be needed, but for ogling when she is made beautiful again. The cruel irony of the situation is that this sudden uptick in popularity is only made possible in death. With the benefit of fiction, Bombal shows how the societal view of women is not so different—that all the value is placed on the appearance, and little for the soul within.
Similar is the focus on friends and past loves in the context of the “end.” There is a meditation which transcends not just the situation Ana María has been placed in by odd fortune, but life as a whole when viewed as an ethereal spectator. When we live from day to day, we are creatures of the present; we rarely think forwards, but are almost always considering lessons of the past to inform our each and every decision. It takes until inaction—in this case, coming in the ultimate form of lifelessness itself—to think on what every choice means for the grand scheme of life.
At one point, Ana María asks herself, “[m]ust we die in order to know certain things?” (pg. 176). The answer is surely meant to be rhetorical in the context of the story. For when considering the effects of social rejection and living as an outsider, Bombal proves that its effects are felt after death, old wounds ostensibly healed after the individual has passed. Literary convention is not spared from this fate, and in the writing of Bombal appears to undergo the same treatment—a modernist enlightenment, therefore, is only realized when rules are metaphorically dead and buried.
“a modernist enlightenment, therefore, is only realized when rules are metaphorically dead and buried.”
Oooh, I like this final line! I’d love to hear more…
I think a novel with a female theme was a bold choice at the time. especially Maria provides a different way talking her life. And author use dead person talking like a real alive person. It is this technique that gives the novel a unique impression on the reader。
I really liked the point you made about her family and friends being there for when she was dead and ‘presentable’. Very interesting commentary and the connection to the theme of wome being objects to be observed rather than humans with agency was spot on.