ARIPZHAN Gulnur Zh. (Арипжан Гульнур)

The master-teacher of the International Kazakh-Turkish University, Turkistan

SOME SIMILAR MOTIVES IN “THE DAYS OF DEFENSELESS PEOPLE” BY MUKHTAR AUEZOV AND IN “SISTER CARRIE” BY THEODORE DREISER

This article deals with some similar motives in “The days of defenseless people by Muhtar Auezov and in “Sister Carrie” by Theodore Dreiser

Literature is a mirror of a certain nation from the certain period of life. It doesn’t matter whether it is a children’s work or a classical novel, they carry the truth & social description of the nation. Any representative of any period tries to cover the essence of life by the help of his character though he is a protagonist or an antagonist. For instance if Mark Twain described the racial inequality in society by his famous children characters like Tom Sawyer & Huckleberry Finn, Theodore Dreiser who is especially known for his naturalistic novels is mainly concerned in the theme of general preoccupation with contemporary social& moral issues like unconventional concerns of men & women from the lower ranks of American society. Mukhtar Auezov, the most outstanding Kazakh classical writer raised the issue of inequality between rich & poor and inequality of women (“Days of Defenseless people” and “Orphans”, etc) by portraying unbearable lives of poor people. To our great astonishment some authors from different nationalities share the similar motives when they attempt to give a pure portrayal of their own countries. If we take “Sister Carrie” and “Days of Defenseless people”, we can be spectators that each of the works show how the society of that time period looked upon women and how the men treated the female characters. In “Sister Carrie” Dreiser’s culture reflects the economic conditions. Here Dreiser’s, on the one hand, “initial focus on women’s work is grounded in the industrial economical order that characterized by managerial capitalism depended on the development of factories throughout the nineteenth century and Dreiser highlights the effects of the factory-based capitalism economy on individuals and families. On the another, he writes about infidelity & prostitution as natural occurrence that shocked the public, but in essence Dreiser writes about these human features of human being with “pity, compassion and sense of awe” [3].

In “Days of Defenseless people” we observe inequality of poor people who were the victims of humiliation & violence of rich people on the one hand, on the another we also witness a high dignity and conscience of Kazakh poor women. In this famous work that has been estimated as a great contribution to the Kazakh literature, Mukhtar Auezov sympathetically relates the truth of life and real description of the period in connection with the daily lives of people suffering from a pitiful poverty.

Mukhtar Auezov sets the plot in motion by tracing the evil-mined visit of Akhan, the rich rural chairman, from his village whose declared purpose is to enjoy a good time with his so called “next victim”. Gaziza is the central character of the story and also is an ordinary protagonist a tall beautiful young girl. This is the

portrayal of decent, fragile Gaziza “сыпайы, нәзік, өскен Ғазиза жіңішке, сұңғақ бойлы, ақсұр жүзді. Ғазиза көрген көзге алғашқы жерден – ақ сүйкімділігін сездіретін уыз жас” [1.11].

Despite her youth Gaziza has already experienced a great grief: at first she loses her father, then little brother Muhash, afterwards she stays with her blind mother and diseased grandmother. “Ғазизаның уайымы осы үйдегі үш әйелге ортақ болған жeсірлік, жетімдік. Бұлардың басынан тағдырдың дауылы жаңадан ғана соғып өткен. Қораның алдындағы жас бейіттер сол дауылдың салдарынан туған. Бұл әйелдердің қуаныш – қызығы да, үміт қорғаны да сол суық қабірдегі өліктермен бірге көмілген. Ол қабірде жатқан Ғазизаның әкесі жақын жаны туысқан жалғыз кішкене бауыры Мұқаш”[1.11].

Suffering from orphanness, Gaziza buried all their joy and hope with her father and brother’s death. Too unhappy to live, Gaziza is destined to suffer from an unbearable brutality of Akhan. As we can judge Akhan is an antagonist of the story and he is mostly devoid of any sense of personality and moral. Even Akhan’s description is disgusting “Бұл жігіттің жасы отыз шамасында. Орта бойлы, дөңгелек денелі, қысқалау мұрынды, шошқа сақалды сұрғылт беті дөңгелек, жалпақтау. Суық қарайған қисық біткен кішілеу өткір көзінде және түксиген қабағында өзгеше қаталдық бар. Кішкене мұрны көз қабағына үйлеспейді. Бұл адамның күлгендегі пішіні құмарлыққа көп салынғандығын білдіріп тұрады” [1.p 4]. In this work we also notice that Muhtar Auezov tries to depict some native features of Kazakh people. The scene in which a hapless woman ( Gaziza’s grandmother)asks Gaziza to observe all customs of hospitality and to give the guests’horses (Akhan and his friend)hay and the scene in which Gaziza agrees to give a hay despite her awareness of Akhan’s evil – minded object are the best examples of the nobility of Kazakh people. And this very night we become the spectators of Gaziza’s being a victim of Akhan’s keen desire of partiality.

Due to the possession of a deep moral and identify Gaziza thinks that she doesn’t deserve to cross the threshold of her house and her solid sense of shame leads her to die beside the new buried tombs of her father and brother. “Ғазизаның шашы азырық уударап қапты. Денесінің жартысын қар басқан. Әкесінің бейітіне жабысып, қасіретті өмірдің ақырғы қуатын сол жерге берген екен. Өлер сағатына шейін қабағын басқан қайғы бұл уақытта ыдыраған, ізі қалған жоқ. Балалық жүзінде: «Менде жазық жоқ, мен тазамын» деген ашық тазалықтың белгісі, қайғы – қасіреттен сейілген жас баланың ажары бар”,”Жауыздықтың жас құрбаны қасіретке толы өмірінің азапты ақтүтегінен адасып, өлімі мәңгі толас тапқандай” [1.22].

As it is obvious from the sited analysis Dreiser’s Carrie is an opposite character to our Gaziza. Dissatisfied with a rural life eighteen – year – old Carrie, with only “… four dollars in money … in her yellow leather snap purse” [2.p,1] takes a trip to Chicago. “Warm with the fancies of youth, pretty with the insipid pretties of the formative period, possessed a figure promising eventual shapeliness and an eye alight with certain native intelligence she was a fair example of the middle American class ” [2p.1]. The beauty and the physical attraction is Carrie’s marvelous success that has been given by nature. Due to the natural prettiness Carrie can enjoy the delight and pleasure of life by going through a series of relationships that are solely based on exchange, i.e., Carrie offers her body, beauty and youth and in return Drouet, Hustwood, and Robert Ames give her material objects, economic security and physical pleasures. Here Carrie’s relationship with men is explained by not only her physical attraction but also her economic necessity, and her vital object in life – to acquire riches. Flattered by men’s attention Carrie acquires not only economic comfort but also she acquires the art of imitation (the gestures and mannerisms of upper – class, wealthy women). However our Carrie who is mostly devoid of any sense of shame and identify is not ashamed by her spoilt conscience. Even though she rides the waves of fortune by undergoing very many changes in her life, Carrie is never conscious of not achieving any significant insights about herself and about the reality of the surrounding world. Consequently Sister Carrie’s ambitious moral causes her remaining alone in a world of flux and constant change and waiting for that halcyon day when she would be led forth among dreams become real. “… and dreaming such happiness as she may never feel” [2 p.357].

The analyses that have been made through the works enable us to decide that the following reasons serve the best motives of both works:

1. Social standing of the country. Muhtar Auezov and Theodore Dreiser try to give a pure portrayal of the country by the sympathetic fate of their main characters. The pitiful poverty of poor people in the “Days of Defenseless people” and unbearable working conditions in the squalid factories where only the people of lower rank work in ”Sister Carrie” are the best evidences of the real picture of the USA.

2. Wealth. “In the days of Defenseless people” the author obviously wanted to depict how wealth affects on people like Akhan. For Akhan, wealth is power. Taking advantage of this wealth and power Akhan plays with young innocent girl’s fate. However in “Sister Carrie” Dreiser describes a girl who sacrifies her conscience, beauty and youth for the acquisition of wealth (i.e. Carrie’s desire and longings for the good things and delight of life are so powerful that she ignores about her guilty, spoilt conscience). Perhaps this can be explained by the fact that Carrie is not brave and intelligent, and she is Dreiser’s result of portraying imperfect humanity in an uncertain world.

3. Up – bringing. “The Day of Defenseless people” is Muhtar’s result of showing the overestimated well – bringing – up children from childhood. The scene in which Gaziza’s grandmother asks her to give guests’houses hay and her agreement despite her awareness of Akhan’s object, her purposely dying by frozening as she doesn’t dare to cross the threshold of her house with her spoilt conscience are the best evidences of this fact. On the contrary Carrie who is unable to find a job, decides to remain with a man and her decision is extraordinary and it is against everything society has taught. It is unthinkable for any decent woman to live with a man without marriage. Our Carrie ignores the rule and ignore her conscience which told her that her behaviour is wrong.

4. Conscience. Through Gaziza’s death that has been the cause of brutality Muhtar Auezov highlights how Kazakh people estimate the feminine conscience while Dreiser criticizes some weak features of woman like prostitution, infidelity that have much to do with a sense of conscience.

5. Inequality – is the main motif in both works. Muhtar Auezov attempts to show the inequality between poor and rich people and inequality of women in society. Through Carrie’s constant imitation for the gestures and mannerisms of upper – class, wealthy women, Dreiser sympathetically points out the inequality between lower rank of people and upper class people.

In conclusion we dare say that by the Gaziza and Carrie’s tragedies Mukhtar Auezov and Theodore Dreiser involve the tragedy of their own nationalities.

References

1. “Қорғансыздың күні” by Muhtar Auezov, Almaty, 2002.

2. “Sister Carrie” by Theodore Dreiser, 1900.

3. www.Google.kz/ Theodore Dreiser’s life and works.