32 pages • 1 hour read
Roald DahlThe Way Up To Heaven
Fiction | Short Story | Adult | Published in 1954A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.
Themes
The Negative Effects of Societal Expectations
Content Warning: This section of the guide contains descriptions and references to abuse and coercive control, accident, and death.
The theme of the negative effects of societal expectations is central to this story, as it is clear throughout that both Mr. and Mrs. Foster have been shaped by traditional gender roles during their marriage. The story places the couple’s societal expectations of marriage in the early 1920s while setting the story in the 1950s. The story therefore examines the societal expectations of two generations (See: Background).
The narrator, when establishing Mrs. Foster’s character, uses condescending language to trivialize how “she would flutter and fidget” (47) with “foolishness” (47) about being late. It is implied that her behavior is both childlike and perhaps characteristic of women, as it is stated that though she is “not a particularly nervous woman” (47), she is also nearly driven “nearly into hysterics” by her husband intentionally triggering her anxieties by making her late. This is juxtaposed with Mr. Foster’s air of condescension and superiority. He is traditionally masculine in his calm, “cool” (47), and “bland” (47) manner as he purposely perpetuates his wife’s stress. At this point, it is unclear whether the narrator is describing Mrs. Foster in their own voice, or reflecting Mr. Foster’s attitude toward his wife, but the story here plays on sexist gender assumptions to create ambiguity about the characters at the beginning. Any stereotypical gender judgments made by the reader are likely to be overturned when the story shows that Mrs. Foster’s anxiety and Mr. Foster’s calm are the result of his coercive control.
The narrator is at pains to show that Mrs. Foster “was and always had been a good and loving wife” (48) who “had served [her husband] loyally and well” (48). This is important diction because it embraces Mr. Foster’s expectations toward his wife’s behavior, as one who “serves” him. The story therefore shows that, even by Mr. Foster’s exacting standards, Mrs. Foster is a good wife and does not “deserve” his ill-treatment. Without necessarily agreeing with this perspective, the narrator’s voice makes room for the possibility that some 1950s readers might share Mr. Foster’s societal expectations, making clear that, even so, Mrs. Foster is innocent.
Societal expectations make it important that, as a virtuous woman, Mrs. Foster’s life should revolve around taking care of her family. This was still generally true in the 1950s and more so in the early 1900s. Mrs. Foster’s embodiment of these expectations has set her up to be pulled in different directions. As her role has been to nurture her daughter—and she must endure an unhappy and lonely marriage now that her daughter is married—she yearns to be closer to her grandchildren in Paris. The story implies that Mr. Foster has no wish to see his grandchildren, as he doesn’t visit with Mrs. Foster, highlighting the double standard between mothers and fathers. Early in the story, Mrs. Foster “had come more and more to feel that she did not really wish to live out her days in a place where she could not be near these children” (49-50), but she also “knows that it was wrong and in a way disloyal to have thoughts like these while her husband was still alive” (50). Mrs. Foster has been shaped by society’s expectations that her activities and passions are limited to the domestic realm, and her lack of opportunity to apply her purpose in this realm leaves her frustrated and unfulfilled. The story here shows the extent to which she has internalized her husband’s messaging to her that her purpose is to serve him completely, and that any wish to do otherwise, even in her own imagination, makes her “know” that it is “wrong.”
The ambiguous ethical dilemma at the heart of the story relies on the individual reader’s societal expectations and their perception of the relationship between Mr. and Mrs. Foster. The story allows different ideas of what constitutes “correct” behavior for men and women in marriage in order to question these roles and the ways in which societal expectations might contradict ethical considerations.
The Limits of Tolerance for Abuse
The ethical purpose of the story is closely connected to the abuse experienced by Mrs. Foster, as it contextualizes her decision to leave her husband behind. Dahl builds up a picture of evidence that Mr. Foster has been emotionally and possibly physically abusive in his attempts to control Mrs. Foster. The story frames Mr. Foster’s verbal treatment of Mrs. Foster as cruel, and as “torture,” what would now be termed coercive control. The story doesn’t explicitly show Mr. Foster physically abusing Mrs. Foster, but the language of the story leaves this possibility open:
Mrs. Foster is not allowed to rush Mr. Foster, as he has “disciplined her too well for that” (48). He has full control of whether she can see her beloved grandchildren, and it is obvious that he realizes that this is something that he uses to torment her, as “it had taken months to persuade her husband to allow her to go. If she missed it, he might easily decide that she should cancel the whole thing” (49). She is “terrified” and lives in fear of how he is feeling and can only determine emotion in his eyes when he is “in a rage” (52).
The story’s building of Mrs. Foster’s repressed anxiety and unhappiness due to her husband’s abuse is apparent through the twitch that becomes increasingly frequent as she gets nearer to missing her plane. Through this process, she is aware and afraid that Mr. Foster is analyzing her reactions to his mistreatment, as “she noticed with a kind of horror that he was staring intently at the little place in the corner of her left eye where she could feel the muscle twitching” (52). Through this twitch, and the repetitive goads of Mrs. Foster by Mr. Foster, the narrative sets up the expectation that Mrs. Foster will react in a way that provides the action of the story.
The story shows Mrs. Foster as heroically tolerant of her husband’s behavior. Her responses to him are patient and polite, even when he is openly insulting. The story shows that she has been gaslit by her husband’s constant abuse, to the extent that she does not “allow herself” to perceive his cruelty for what it is. Much of the story’s interest and purpose lies in Mrs. Foster’s slow realization that her husband is deliberately making her unhappy. The final piece of evidence comes when she finds the present “wedged down firm and deep, as though with the help of a pushing hand” (57). This realization causes Mrs. Foster to assert herself by going to fetch her husband, showing that she has realigned her perception of their relationship. It is this act of assertion that leads to her hearing her husband inside the house and, therefore, to the greater act of assertion when she drives away to catch her plane. The story creates linkages of cause and effect to connect Mr. Foster’s abuse with Mrs. Foster’s eventual decision. The morality of her behavior is left for the reader to decide, but the interest of the ethical dilemma relies on the extent to which the reader supports Mrs. Foster’s decision and wishes for Mr. Foster to be punished.
The Ethics of Choosing Not to Act
Mrs. Foster decides not to act when she—the story suggests—hears her husband trapped in the house elevator. Mrs. Foster’s process of deciding not to open the door and fetch Mr. Foster is described as listening “head up, ear to door, hand on key, about to enter but not entering, trying instead, so it seemed, to hear and analyze these sounds that were coming faintly from this place deep within the house” (57). This implies that she is aware of the choice she is making to leave him trapped in the elevator so that she will not miss her flight to Paris. Objectively, she is making it likely that her husband will die. As a standalone act, morality would dictate that this is unethical, but the story emphasizes Mr. Foster’s torment of Mrs. Foster, so it is easy to sympathize with her in seizing the chance for happiness that is presented to her.
The story maintains uncertainty throughout about the nature of Mrs. Foster’s decision and Mr. Foster’s whereabouts. The narrator immediately and continuously focuses on positive consequences for Mrs. Foster, though always leaving open a dual possibility. Soon after leaving, when she is on the plane, she is in a “new mood” (58), feeling “remarkably strong and, in a queer sort of way, wonderful. She was a trifle breathless with it all, but this was more from pure astonishment at what she had done than anything else” (58). This suggests a lack of guilt and instead feelings of liberation for Mrs. Foster, who arrives in Paris “just as strong and cool and calm as she could wish” (58). From this point, the story focuses on how happy the visit to Paris makes Mrs. Foster, and her transformation from anxious and powerless to calm and self-possessed. When she arrives home, her behavior continues to indicate a lack of guilt, as she is “a little amused” (59) at the lack of car to pick her up at the airport, and there is a “little glimmer of satisfaction on her face” (59) when she arrives home to realize her husband never got out of the elevator. Rather than becoming upset or anxious, she calmly calls the elevator company to have someone come and fix it. The extended focus on how Mrs. Foster’s choice to leave her husband has positively transformed her, her complete lack of guilt, and the lack of focus on Mr. Foster’s experience or perspective throughout this indicates the story’s sympathy for Mrs. Foster’s act of empowerment.
It is significant that Mrs. Foster does not enter the house. She cannot be certain that Mr. Foster is trapped in the elevator, nor can she be sure that he will not find a way out or somehow be released while she is away. This represents a considerable risk for her, as she is likely to be punished by Mr. Foster for leaving. The story also doesn’t state that she actively intends for him to die, only later that she is pleased about what she finds on her return—presumably, that he is dead. The unfolding descriptions of her increasing certainty as time passes in fact makes it clear that, when she left the house, she was not certain of the situation or consequences. The story never states that Mr. Foster is, or has been, trapped in the lift, nor that he has died, making clear room for Mrs. Foster’s uncertainty and for the reader’s individual supplying of the missing plot events. In this way, the story makes the reader metaphorically responsible for Mr. Foster’s death, as they imagine this to be the case. Ultimately, the story throws the ethical dilemma onto the reader, prompting them not only to consider Mrs. Foster’s culpability but their own too.
Related Titles
By Roald Dahl
