In Rebecca, Rebecca resists the norms of 1930’s England, a society that was built upon men having more power over women. In this time, women were just starting to gain access to job opportunities and men held most jobs. Another important issue during the early 1900s was that women had autonomy over the household responsibilities and children, but legally if the women gets a divorce, the men had 100% custody over the child. Even though women had the autonomy over the domestics of the household and gained access to jobs, men still had control over the women and the economics of the household. One way Rebecca resists the norms of this society is when she refuses to follow her husband Maxim’s rules by making her own decisions. For example, Rebecca is married to Maxim but decides to have multiple affairs with other men. Mrs. Danvers, who is Rebecca’s housekeeper, explains Rebecca’s affairs saying, “She would take them bathing from the boat, she would have a picnic supper at her cottage in the cove…She laughed, she would come back and tell me what they had said, and what they'd done. She did not mind, it was like a game to her. Like a game"(Maurier 135). This quote is significant because it shows how Rebecca is very nonchalant and cheating is like a game to her. She doesn’t seem worried about what Maxim would think of these decisions she made. Women should be able to make their own choices rather than following the rules of her husband. Furthermore, if there was mutual respect and communication, there would be a better understanding between Rebecca and Maxim. Equal power between the man and woman would have made Rebecca and Maxim understand each other better. Also, they would have made decisions together as one instead of Maxim making the decisions himself. This would have possibly prevented Rebecca from cheating on him because she was unhappy and this would have impacted the course of their relationship. Rebecca shows signs of superiority in the story stating to Maxim that, “If I had a child, Max," she said, "neither you, nor anyone in the world, would ever prove that it was not yours…And when you died Manderley would be his. You could not prevent it. The property' s entailed…”(Maurier 77). In this quote, she made a statement to Maxim that the child would inherit his money even if it wasn’t his child. Rebecca’s explicit word choice shows that she has power over him because she is saying that he legally would have to take care of the child even if it was not his child. This is the first time she can make the decision that will impact him financially. In Rebecca, it shows how Rebecca resists the norms of the society, but in Murder on the Orient Express, it shows how women conform to the norms of the society.
In Murder on the Orient Express, the female characters conform to the norms of 1930s England, a society where men held leadership positions and women dealt with domestic affairs. During this time, women were not treated equally and if a woman was unmarried, then she was respected even less. In murder on the orient express, the men had higher positions than women. For example, Poirot who was a Belgian detective solved the case on the train with some help with other men. M. Bouc, who also worked with the Belgian law enforcement gave the idea for Poirot to solve the case. Also, another important man who held a high position in the story was Dr. Constantine who examined the evidence and Ratchets dead body on the train, Ratchet who was a upper class man who murdered a young child and escaped from jail because of how wealthy he was and his socioeconomic status. All of these men in the story were very intelligent and held the higher roles compared to the women. In addition, the women in the story did not have the high roles compared to the men but they seemed to be scared. For example, Mrs. Hubbard who is the grandmother of the dead child Daisy Armstrong, always is very talkative about her daughter and this shows that she has the nothing else better for herself. The wife of President Roosevelt once said, “Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people” (Roosevelt). This quote is significant because it means that those who discuss people as an end to itself are shallow. Mrs. Hubbard always gossips about her daughter and it shows how average of a person she is. Lastly, Hildegarde Schmidt who is the cook of Daisy Armstrong, is very slow and always follows orders. She is portrayed as very stupid and always is guided by other people. By explaining the roles of men and women in the story, it shows how men held administrative positions and ladies managed residential undertakings. Men showed dominance in the story but women should be able to have as much power as men. The leadership roles and power should be distributed evenly between men and women. The truth of the matter is that both men and women carry the characteristics of dominance and assertiveness. The world would be a better place if both men and women would themselves to the table. An example from the story that shows how women conform to the norms of the society is when Poirot goes after Mary first to interview her about the murder case of Daisy Armstrong. Inside the mind of Poirot, he sees a woman who seems very strong so it surprised him. Women during this time period were not seen as emotionally strong so he went after her first. He felt that he could easily break her because she was a woman. He was very hard so he gives her no breaks and no expressions of remorse. His conduct is vastly different with her than with alternate travelers since he know exactly how strong she is and how troublesome she will be to break. Eventually, Mary breaks because of all the pressure from Poirot and relies on another man to defend her. Poirot goes after Mary when he states, "You are a strong character, Mademoiselle," said Poirot gently. You are, I think, the strongest character amongst us. Oh, no. No, indeed. I know one far, far stronger than I am. And that is – ? She seemed to suddenly come to herself, to realize that she was talking to a stranger and a foreigner with whom, until this morning, she had only exchanged half a dozen sentences” (Christie 41). This quote is significant because it shows how women are weak and how Mary broke. She did not have the power to step up and defend herself because she was very weak-minded. If men and women held the same power, Mary would have the confidence to step up and express her emotion. Also, no single man would chose a woman just because she was weak but evenly distributed power between them would make it fair. I previously discussed how women conform and resist to the norms of society, but there consequences of resisting to the norms of the society.
In Rebecca, there were consequences for Rebecca’s actions for resisting the norms of the society. She was making her own decisions and denying all of Maxim’s rules. Maxim was very dissatisfied with Rebecca being so independent and holding superiority. He could not control Rebecca’s actions and that made him demented. During that time period, men wanted all control and power of the household but it was the total opposite for Maxim. Due to all of Rebecca’s actions, Maxim decided to kill her because he couldn’t have the dominance in the relationship. Maxim explains that he had this ongoing aggressive emotion when he stated, ‘ I nearly killed her then […] It would have been so easy. One false step, one slip. You remember the precipice” (Maurier 38). This quote shows that Maxim wanted to kill Rebecca throughout the whole course of the relationship. It also shows how Rebecca held power over him because he was keeping all of his emotions inside and never expressing it to Rebecca. Maxim ended up murdering Rebecca and finding a new wife that he knew he could be in control of. Maxim ends up marrying the heroine who is the total opposite of Rebecca. For example, Maxim had control over the heroine when he, ‘He ran his fingers through my hair. Different from his old abstracted way. It was not like stroking Jasper any more. I felt his finger tips on the scalp of my head. Sometimes he kissed me. Sometimes he said things to me” (Maurier 56). This quote was very significant because it shows how the heroine let Maxim get away with telling her that he murdered Rebecca. She finally found out that he killed Rebecca but she doesn’t do anything about it, she thought he was just showing more sexual passion towards her. Connecting back to equality between men and women, if there was mutual power between them then Maxim wouldn’t have done things to heroine the way he did. Women would be able to step up and not let men get away with things similar to Maxim’s actions. Equal power between men and women would have possibly prevented the violence of Maxim because they would have had better communication. Maxim killing Rebecca was not an effective way of expressing his aggression, a more effective way of solving that situation was to communicate with each other what was going on and how they feel. The consequences of Rebecca resisting the norms of the society turned out very violent and incorrect, but in Murder on the Orient express, there are consequences to conforming to the norms of the society.
In Murder on the Orient Express, there are consequences for women conforming to the norms of the society. The women in the story were very scared and the men made all of the decisions. For example, Countess Andrenyi in the story was very timid and didn’t express herself. Her husband Count Andrenyi hid her identity and takes her place in the murder case. Count Andrenyi concealed her identity and didn’t let her express her true self and her opinions involving the murder case. Her being a woman and having her identity concealed, she was not able to stand up for herself and voice her opinions. Another women in the story that was very important was Mrs. Hubbard. She knew about a lot of information about Ratchet being a very brutal man. She was scared of Ratchet and told Poirot, the detective, about what she knew about him. In addition, Mrs. Hubbard removed herself from the suspicion regarding the case about Ratchett. She was very frightened and didn’t have the power to tell Poirot the information she knew. Mrs. Hubbard could have easily let her voice be heard and the reason voicing your opinion is important because holding in your opinion could be dangerous. It would help blind the people who do not agree with them and help with being unpopular. Women should not be reluctant to stand up about their individual inclinations because comfortably addressing what is inside their mind can give a mind boggling feeling of internal strength and quality. All of these incidents about women not having as much power as men, caused the case to be solved incorrectly. Poirot let the real murders free on the train and none of them got in trouble. If Mrs. Hubbard would have stepped up and voiced her opinion on the train, she possibly could have made the situation go a different way. The law enforcement could’ve been involved and could have caught all of the murders. Also, if Countess Andrenyi did not hide her identity, she could have addressed her opinion regarding the case. However, all of the men made the serious decisions and things did not go the way it should have gone. If the power was distributed evenly, the case would have been clarified accurately. The murderers would not have been let free if the women would have had the same power as men.