Compare and contrast "The Use of Force" and "The Giraffe".

The two stories we are comparing here are not, at first glance, an obvious pairing. The first story was written in the nineteenth century and is about a doctor who finds himself engaged in a battle of wills with a young girl who will not let him examine her. Eventually, he forces her mouth open with the use of a spoon, finally exerting his power over her and forcing her to reveal the "secret" of her diseased tonsils. The second story is a twentieth-century tale written from the point of view of a young boy not yet old enough to need a razor, who comes into possession of a giraffe after its owner abruptly dies. The boy and his friends try to shelter the giraffe, keeping it in the church until the townspeople elect to kill it, whereupon the giraffe and the boys fly from the town. The giraffe ultimately dies, refusing to allow the boys to feed it hay. The narrator interprets the giraffe's death as a symbol that in this town, "giraffes can't live, because there's room only for the things that are already here." This is normally interpreted as a comment on the closed-minded attitude of the town and its unwillingness to accept anything foreign or unfamiliar, which does not seem to "fit."

Certainly, we can make some initial comparisons between the two stories in terms of format, narration, and so on. Both pieces are short stories written in the first person. Both stories also contain significant amounts of conversation between people aimed at solving a problem. In the first story, this concerns the daughter who is unwilling to submit to the doctor; in the second story, the problem is what to do with the giraffe. It is notable that the stylistic omission of quotation marks, which is a characteristic of William Carlos Williams' story, is not echoed in Senesi's story.

In terms of theme, while Senesi's story is more frequently considered in terms of what it says about the townspeople and their reluctance to accept change, we might compare it to Williams's story by looking at it from a different perspective—that of the giraffe.

The giraffe, like the little girl in Williams's story, is resistant to being compelled. At the end of the story, the giraffe "stood still, its head piercing the sky" while the boys use physical force to try to convince it to open its mouth to be fed—language like "punched" conveys the visceral force—but the giraffe resists. It "folded its legs . . . before flowing to the ground," and, the boy notes, it "died by itself . . . there was no need for them to kill it." The giraffe's resistance, however, is passive. It does not respond to the boys' physical coercion. Ultimately, however, its stubbornness ends with its own death, and this is the outcome the townspeople wished for, although the giraffe has arrived at it through its own methods. The giraffe passively resists force in order to preserve its dignity and agency.

In "The Use of Force," we see the dynamics of power play out differently. The little girl, whose fire the doctor initially finds "attractive," resists the doctor's attempts to examine her with stubborn force. "The battle [then] began." Her stubbornness encourages the doctor's physical use of force: as she "f[ights], with clenched teeth, desperately," the doctor becomes "furious" and forces a wooden spatula into her mouth until she reduces it "to splinters." The child's mouth is now a scene of devastation, "her tongue . . . cut," and the child "scream[s] hysterical shrieks." As the battle rages, the doctor begins to feel that "it [is] a pleasure to attack her," using the justification that she must be "protected against her own idiocy," but he knows that "blind fury" is actually driving him. Eventually, the doctor forces the child into submission, and as he uncovers the "secret" of the membrane on her tonsils, the child is overpowered by "defeat."

Here, then, we can see that the child is seemingly, like the giraffe, resisting what is in its best interests. However, while the giraffe resists passively—and dies—the child resists with matched force. Eventually she is overpowered by the doctor's so-called good intentions, but she feels "defeated" by the battle of wills. What is interesting is that the doctor's feelings toward the child seem to change from admiration for her to an increasing sense of "fury" as he overpowers her. Meanwhile, the giraffe remains a stately, elegant thing in the eyes of the boys as it resists passively, determined to die according to its own wishes. The two stories, then, both represent attempts to use force to "help" another creature, but in each story, the attempt is received differently. Consequently, each story ends differently. We can consider, then, what each author is saying about the nature of resistance, agency, and what happens to our feelings for each other when we respond to force with force and, thus, escalate tension.

We can also consider the way the two stories portray what "society" forces us to do. The townsfolk in "The Giraffe" want to evict the giraffe because it does not fit into their understanding of what town life should be. The doctor in "The Use of Force" justifies his forceful treatment of the daughter by saying that it is "a social necessity" and that "others must be protected against her." In both cases, the recipient of the force is somebody or something who is disturbing the order of society and must be subdued.

Compare the portrayal of ignorance in "The Use of Force" and "The Giraffe."

While ignorance is displayed by a whole community in "The Giraffe," only one individual exhibits this negative trait in "The Use Of Force."

In "The Use Of Force," a little girl displays her ignorance by flying into a temper when the doctor tries to examine her. Her fears are understandable, but her actions exasperate her parents. As for the doctor, he is visibly shaken by the little girl's uncharacteristic violence. On the other hand, it is the collective adult community in "The Giraffe" that exhibits ignorance. The adults become upset when the boys attempt to keep the giraffe in town.

Ignorance is certainly portrayed negatively in both stories. Yet, unlike in "The Use of Force," this negative trait in "The Giraffe" results in the death of an innocent animal.

In "The Use of Force," the little girl's prejudice against the doctor leads to a violent struggle. Although the doctor is ashamed of his part in the conflict, he reasons that he must fight to save her life.

In the end, the little girl's life is presumably preserved after the doctor's final, grim "assault" on her neck and jaws. For his part, the doctor rationalizes the use of force as a medical necessity. Certainly, diphtheria has claimed its share of victims, and the doctor does not wish to see his little patient succumb to the often fatal illness. In "The Use of Force," the doctor resorts to violence to save a life. On the other hand, threatened violence results in death in "The Giraffe."

After the giraffe eats the mayor's prized trees in the park, spies on people in their homes, and devours all the flowers and candles in the town church, the adults clamor for its death. They threaten to shoot the animal. The boys take the giraffe into the country. They try to feed it some hay, but the animal refuses to eat. In the end, it dies.

Ignorance is an important topic in "The Giraffe" and "The Use of Force." However, it is resolved differently in both stories. While ignorance is ostensibly overcome in "The Use of Force," it festers in "The Giraffe" and contributes to the death of a defenseless animal.