Twain: Comedic or tragic?

One of the main questions I am left with after reading “The $30,000 Bequest” is whether Mark Twain was attempting comedy or tragedy? In class we discussed the dark aspects of his character Tilbury and the moral decay that occurs with wealth, but we also touched upon the comedic aspect of the role reversals and the juxtaposition of reality and fantasy.

           

After reading some of the other blog posts from our class, I stumbled upon Kelsey’s interpretation of the short story “The $30,000 Bequest”. She calls attention to the passage “all four of [the family’s] members had pet names, Saladin’s was a curious and unsexing one—Sally; and so was Electra’s—Aleck” (2). After only introducing the names of his protagonists, Twain effectively reverses the expected gender roles. This choice adds a comedic twist to the entire story. Sally, the feminine, infantile husband, is a laughable character, unable to see past his day-to-day actions and constantly yearning to spend beyond his means. Humor is also created in the interactions between Sally and Aleck, the responsible wife. Their banter reminded me much more of a mother and child than that of husband and wife.

Even though on the surface this short story is light hearted, especially when read in conjunction with Maggie: Girl of the Streets, in fact I think the opposite. The deeply negative undertones that run throughout this story depict both the weakness and the cruelty of human nature. Without ever inheriting any physical principal, the Foster family is brought to basic shambles in their fantastical life. Instead of being happy with their two beautiful daughters and stable life, Aleck and Sally become obsessed with upward mobility. In fact, there are extremely morbid moments in the text when the couple yearns for the death of another human being.

Ultimately, Tilsbery is the reason this short story is a tragedy. His character can easily be read as the devil, tempting the innocent Foster’s into sin. He knowingly passes down his fortune with the intent of destroying their lives, “Tilbury now wrote to Sally, saying he should shortly die, and should leave him thirty thousand dollars, cash; not for love, but because money had given him most of his troubles and exasperations, and he wished to place it where there was good hope that it would continue its malignant work” (2). He is an evil figure in this text and proves how money can alter one’s perspective. Even though the story ends with the Fosters getting a second chance, I believe that if they found money again their corruption would happen in a similar fashion.