“There would be no one there to live for her during those coming years; she would live for herself.”

At the time of its release, written by Kate Chopin in 1894, The Dream of an Hour had to be renamed upon republishing as The Story of an Hour to intercept some of the controversies raised by the original story. A controversial text from its first publication onward, Chopin's story focuses on a female protagonist who learns of her husband’s death in a tragic accident, and is overcome by sensations of relief and liberation from her husband.

“There would be no powerful will bending hers in that blind persistence with which men and women believe they have a right to impose a private will upon a fellow-creature.” Perhaps the most striking phrase of the entire story, an encapsulation of the feelings that defined the emotional state of Chopin’s protagonist.

The freedom Louise now encounters is never more apparent than in the very beginning of the story, as Louise stares outside into the trees and notices the beauty of nature, as though her marriage had restrained her from wallowing in its bloom. The readers are oblivious to the actual circumstances of their marriage: we know only Louise’s emotional perspective, devoid of any reflections on actual events that would present context to the feelings she has accumulated towards her marriage. That's the strength of short stories: you don't need such frameworks to understand the point the author tries to accentuate.

The conclusion of the story cannot be discussed without delving into spoilers, so please read the story yourself (it will take only five to ten minutes; a link is attached at the end) before continuing to read this review.


Emily Toth wrote that Chopin’s protagonist had to die in the end so that the story could be published amidst the rigid standards of American society. She felt relief for her husband’s death; no grief for his demise, but joy from her own liberation. No such vilification could have gone unpunished, so Louise Mallard had to die in the end, to face the consequences of her own betrayal to her socially dictated role of a dutiful wife.

The story is deliberately open-ended to leave room for interpretation. As mentioned before, we do not know how their marriage actually looked like. Did Louise Mallard marry her husband for social security, did she exploit him in the first place? Did Brently Mallard truly love Louise, did he try to care for her? Did he deliberately repress her freedom, coerce her into the role of the loving wife who is prisoner to her wedding ring? The ambiguity of the text is probably what cooled the potential controversy of the story upon release, but particularly in the context of Kate Chopin’s bibliography, it is not difficult to understand this as a condemnation of patriarchal domination and female repression.


"Spring days, and summer days, and all sorts of days that would be her own. She breathed a quick prayer that life might be long. It was only yesterday she had thought with a shudder that life might be long."

Thank you to Cecily for raising my awareness for this short story. I have read it here, but the story can easily be found through a simple Internet search. ( )

I'm writing this review as though the reader has read the short story already, since I wrote it for Goodreads' Short Story Club, where everyone was invited to read the stories and write reviews.

I hadn't previously read anything by Kate Chopin, or even heard of her.

There were many opposites in the story.

When hearing of her husband's death, Louise Mallard wept with "wild abandonment" but shortly after she felt "free, free, free".

She felt a "monstrous joy". Her husband had been kindly but had had a powerful will that he imposed on her; thus she could not do what she herself wanted.

She had been repressed but now she possessed "self-assertion". Now there was "the new spring life", a "delicious breath of rain", singing, twittering sparrows, and "patches of blue sky".

Louise carried herself like a goddess of victory.

When she saw her husband come in the door, alive, she died of a heart attack.

The doctors, wrong as they so often are, declared she had died of "the joy that kills".

My comment is that the Universe always brings us what we want, but not always in the way we want or expect.

Had Brently actually been dead, Louse may well later have married someone else who turned out to have the same overpowering nature. But she wanted freedom and Death is the ultimate freedom, so that is what she got. ( )

“What a difference a day makes” and “life is unpredictable” are axioms that come to mind. I do like Kate Chopin and I think she might have a wicked sense of humor.
( )

A very short, very concise, every word carrying great weight in this one hour look at the brief life of a wife who believes she has just become a widow. A work of feminist literature. ( )

Short story with an unexpected twist at the end. Loved it. ( )