Milkman in Song of Solomon is the third Macon Dead, with the name originating because of a slip up. We learn later that the real name of Milkman's grandfather was Jake, but perhaps the better name for him and his descendants was Macon Dead, many of the reasons for which refer the the name sounding like "making dead".
Jake was born a slave who became free and, because of his freedom, was able to own a farm that was amazingly successful at growing peaches for its location. It could be said that he started a new life when his name was changed to Macon Dead, so the old life and name of Jake were metaphorically made dead. He was also killed, or made dead, for his land.
Macon Dead II more directly fitted the name "making dead". After his father was killed, he spent a night in a cave, where he stabbed a man to death. He also wanted to kill his wife after he saw her in bed with her father, and he tried to kill Milkman before he was born.
Milkman was rarely referred to as Macon, and his father, from whom the lineage of Macon Dead came, had nothing to do with the name "Milkman". He also tried subtly to distance himself from his father, and, therefore, the meaning of his name. As such, it makes sense that Milkman didn't do much killing or getting killed at first. Even as Hagar tried to kill him, she always failed. Only as he got to learn and care about his family's history did his given name meant what it sounded like: Hagar died because of him, and (I think) he made himself dead at the very end of the book.
Even the Dead who was barely known as Macon ended up embodying the name that his grandfather was accidentally given. If the name Jake were passed down to Milkman and his father, the name wouldn't be nearly as descriptive of their lives.
I really like this post. I think your point about Milkman dying shortly after embracing his family history is especially compelling. After two generations of this pattern, it almost seems like he finally fulfilled his family's legacy. There is something vaguely prophetic about the whole affair, with all the majesty and drama surrounding Milkman's final moments. In any case, the Macon Dead legacy will die with him, since he didn't have any children. We can debate over whether that's a good thing or not.
ReplyDeleteI think there's something to the observation that Milkman's nickname separates him from his forefathers, even though Milkman inherited the same legal name from them. Macon II is distrustful of the name Milkman because he suspects there's something dirty about it, but is he also upset his son is known by a name other than the name he received from his father?
ReplyDeleteI think the idea that the reason Milkman was so separated from his family is because of his nickname is very interesting. It also makes sense in terms of the first part of the novel, because as you say he tried subtly to distance himself from his father. However there's also the scene were the bar owner won't let Milkman in because he's Macon's son and Guitar says that Milkman isn't anything like his father to no avail. This shows that he still is connected somewhat to his family name in the first part even though he embraces it more in the second part.
ReplyDeleteLike other commenters, I think that you did a good job of outlining the dissociation to the name as it reached milkman. I found it interesting that throughout the book he was trying to find a way out, yet his name always brought him back to a very intimate familial moment. It is also interesting to look back at his journey and the association to his family that he finds in the end of the book and his actual desire to find more. Overall really nice post :)
ReplyDelete