The Shining Houses by Alice Munro - Marxist Literary Criticism

In The Shining Houses by Alice Munro, the greater victim between Mrs. Fullerton and Mary is Mrs. Fullerton. In Marx’s social hierarchy, Mrs. Fullerton represents the poor, hard working, lower class proletariat, while Mary is a member of the rich bourgeoisie. Granted, Mary may not be truly rich per-se, more-so a middle class suburban, in the context of The Shining Houses she most definitely is a portrayal of the powerful bourgeoisie.

Mrs. Fullerton is constantly resisting the economically well off upper class. Her livelihood, made through selling eggs, is being threatened by the development of low-cost, high-volume consumer centric centers such as the grocery store. Her very own home is also in danger, which becomes the central plot-line of the story, regardless of the fact that “the house and its surroundings were so self-sufficient,” implying it was naturally a part of the land. The suburban families, in their perfect, colourful, shining, ‘tiny-box’ houses that sardonically seem “to shrink at night into the raw black mountainside” are concerned solely with money, and maintaining their high social status. Mrs. Fullerton is the opposite, and resists these common bourgeoisie values. Still, Mrs. Fullerton is ostracized, and victimized when her neighbours decide to petition to have her house bulldozed, claiming its poor conditions defaces the beauty of the street, and ultimately, “is bringing down the resale value of every house on the street.” Ironically, the group tries to rationalize their actions by claiming “it’s the law” and that they “have to think about the community” when in actuality they are doing the exact opposite - thinking purely about themselves, and their ideology. They also try to mask their villainous ways by noting that she “has money in the bank” and that she will be paid “more than [the house] is worth.” Munro, however, contradicts this ideal, with an earlier line by Mrs. Fullerton, who claims “husbands may come and go, but a place you’ve lived for fifty years is something else” further emphasizing Fullerton’s victimization.

Mary on the other hand, is unable to resist the popular bourgeoisie ideologies. Though she refuses to sign the petition, the effect of high-class ideology is evident, albeit subconsciously, when Mary replies to Mrs. Fullerton’s egg price by saying, “That’s too much ... They’re cheaper than that at the supermarket.” Mary is a symbol of futile hope, but is not a vicitm. She shows the repression of capitalism, yet ultimately, caves into her common way of life. It is Mrs. Fullerton whose life would be destroyed by her economic and social standings, and is attacked by the bourgeoisie.

Munro cynically presents the idea of keeping “a disaffected heart.” Though Mary and the others are able to do this, the reader is not, and ultimately, questions their own ideologies and the victimization of Mrs. Fullerton.