(History As Fiction) Father's Politics

Political and social ideas are displayed everywhere in Ragtime, because each small plot is part of the metanarrative of the time period in which it is set. Doctorow's politics are oozing from his book in every scene, and I think that the deepest analysis of it will boil down to his beliefs. This blog post analyses the politics that Doctorow reveals in Father.

Through all of the book, Father is depicted as a typically thick-headed, slightly racist, white, middle-class dad. He is utterly stereotypical and intentionally written to be the least likable character in the book. He responds to Coalhouse showing up to his house by taking an instant dislike to him because of his pride and posh appearance. There were many times when Father made me cringe, most notably of which was when he heard the remarkable performance of ragtime music and asked Coalhouse if he knew any "coon music", to which no one knew how to respond, and Coalhouse became exceedingly agitated. This scene was obviously written to make the reader feel uneasy about Father's opinions.

After Coalhouse starts his rampage, we are again made to feel a deep discomfort of Father as a person, as he chews out Younger Brother for sympathizing with Coalhouse for having had his betrothed killed and his car destroyed. This is when tensions appear to be highest between Father and Younger, who has a history of embodying a more understandable liberal viewpoint and knowledge of other people's problems.

The idea I think Doctorow is trying to convey here is related to Coalhouse's purpose for blowing up the fire station: as we said in class, he is 1960's civil rights transplanted into the 1900's, and he wants his right to his car. Father clearly fails to see that basic issue because of his pig-headed ignorance. People who have an understanding and appreciation for others, like Younger clearly has, as pointed out by his knowledge of ragtime music, will understand their issues and take the just side, while people like Father, who fail to know the difference between their stereotypes and reality, will pick whichever side their stereotypes point to from the beginning, which is not usually the just side.

Macon Dead

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.

That First Encounter with Tia

All within two short pages, Antoinette's friendship with Tia starts and ends, making it seem like a side-note of unhappiness in Antoinette's generally unhappy childhood, that only emphasizes how no little glimmer of happiness in her childhood, even in the form of what seemed to be a close friendship, can't last long. However, as proven by the later scene when Coulibri is burned and Antoinette runs up to Tia, assuming that she can life with her, the two page insubstantial friendship still meant something to Antoinette, even after the reader assumes that it had ended. The interactions of Antoinette and Tia and Antoinette's apparent interpretation that what appeared to be an abrupt ending to their friendship was actually just a minor argument can give us some insight into Antoinette's understanding of her society.

Although the initial cause of the argument between them was Tia's betting scheme to take Antoinette's pennies, what eventually lead to Tia storming off wearing Antoinette's dress was Antoinette bringing up the arguments she (presumably) heard from her parents. While before, their argument was purely kids' stuff, when Antoinette called Tia the n-word, she brought the whole argument into the real adult world. However, it could be argued that she didn't know how serious she had just made their argument. She probably thought that it was pointless to argue the original topic, which was a somersault, any further, so she decided to argue that she was just inherently the better person in the same way she had heard all the other white people arguing the point, even if their disagreements had nothing to do with racial superiority. She just sees that insult as a passive, all-encompassing argument for use on black people. However, Tia, who is clearly the better arguer, understands more about being insulted in this way than Antoinette does about insulting. She immediately had the upper hand and managed to walk off with the pennies and the dress.

This shows that Antoinette's childhood might have been rather tragic partly because she didn't understand society and the way society shaped the interactions of the people around her, so the way she thinks she can communicate with the people close to her keeps her from finding lasting happiness.

What was Meursault Tried For, and Who are the French People?

The actual crime that brought Meursault to the court room was the murder of a nameless Arab, but, as has been pointed out at various times in class, the prosecutor, judge, and jury never appear to question or care about the murder. Instead, they focus on Meursault's lack of remorse at Maman's funeral, and this is unquestionably the reason that Meursault is given the death penalty, "in the name of the French people".

That quote plainly states that French society can not tolerate a man like Meursault, but it is important to remember that the crime he is tried for has nothing to do with his mother, rather he was tried for the killing of an Arab man who the French care so little about that he is hardly even mentioned during the trial. French society would not have authorized the decapitation of a man just for killing an Arab, even if it were in cold blood (which it arguably is not, since Meursault is almost incapable of feeling anything, including hatred). It is plain that Meursault was tried, not really for the murder, but for his absence of emotions and how this was displayed at Maman's funeral. As his lawyer put it, "Come now, is my client on trial for burying his mother or for killing a man?".

So, the French refuse to allow someone who puts his mother in a home and doesn't cry at her funeral to keep living, but they seem perfectly content with someone like Raymond, who lures past  romances to his apartment to beat them. He got off cleanly with the aid of some small amount of testimony that the girl had cheated on him, which seems insignificant and inconsequential. They also apparently have no qualms about people killing Arabs, since the trial that was supposed to be about the killing of an Arab was barely even influenced by the murder.  Considering these points, "The Stranger" appears to be a strong critique of French society, or at least the contrived French society Camus describes: these people are ignoring true crimes, and killing a man whose only crime, according to them, is not shedding any tears, because people who beat women and kill Arabs fit nicely into society, but failing to show emotion deserves the death penalty. This makes the French people look illogical and distant from human morality.

It is made to look even more illogical by the fact that, until he was confronted by Arabs, Meursault seemed to have no enemies in the society that wanted him dead. Further, it was noted that the guard at the prison became friends with him while he was waiting for his trial. Even though the French people could overlook the crime of Raymond, they could also overlook these things in Meursault's favour in order to convict him of something as meaningless as putting his mum into a home. In short, Camus was either commenting on the French attitude towards Nazis invading France, or he thought that the French were all a bunch of nut-cases.

Gregor's Fate

At this point, we know that Gregor dies at the end of "The Metamorphosis", but what would have happened if he didn't die? Could he have become human again?

There is a suggestion on page 89 that he could have. When Grete and her mother go into Gregor's room to remove his furniture, the mother suggests that they leave the furniture in place, so that they don't show that they are giving up all hope of his recovery. She went on to say that it would be best if  the room stayed the same, "so that when Gregor returns to us ... he can for get what's happened in the meantime all the easier." This implies that she not only believes that Gregor will recover, but that she is certain of it, as pointed to in her using the word "when" instead of "if". Assuming that the same principle of everyone knowing what is happening without seeing evidence (what Mr. Mitchell refers to dream logic) is applicable here, then Frau Samsa's implication that Gregor's condition is temporary should be accurate.

This knowledge that Gregor could eventually become human again might have influenced the way that his family treated him. Instead of killing Gregor immediately, his family cared for him. Grete gave him food in a buffet to see what he liked, because she knew that he would eventually become human again. Only after they got tired and more resentful of his inability to work did they begin to treat him badly. Only then did his father embed an apple in his back, and only then did Grete deny that it was Gregor, and effectively drive him back into his room to die. They were simply fed up with him being an insect, and they were no longer willing to wait for him to recover.

Ironical and Pitiful

I'm sure we all remember the scene where Jake is digging worms for fishing while Bill watches out the window on page 118, and Bill, trying to be as comical as possible, ends up singing about irony and pity. The scene starts with Bill being called a lazy bum by Jake for not helping to dig, at which point Bill pops into bed, and says that he never gets up. As soon as Jake mentions food, Bill hops up and jokes that he's getting breakfast, and Jake is working for the common good, encouraging him to have irony and pity. As he goes downstairs, Bill even sings about being ironical and pitiful. As they reach breakfast, Bill continues to pressure Jake to show irony and pity to the waitress endlessly.

All this is meant to be another one of Bill's extensive on-the-spot comedy sketches, and it certainly made me laugh. However, it seems that "ironical and pitiful" are the standards Bill lives up to. Irony exudes from his character in all of his comedic episodes. He uses it as his main tool, as do most amateur comics. More evident in this scene is they way he is utterly pitiful. Right from the start, as Bill makes a jovial attempt to stay in bed, his jokes can be described as little more than pitiful. At no point in this entire scene could I imagine Jake laughing without shaking his head in embarrassment or pity for Bill's desperate attempts at humor. They way Bill changes from pulling the covers up above his head to racing down for food at the drop of a hat is one of the purest examples of humor through portraying yourself as pitifully as possible that I have ever seen, and if that's not enough, he risks an excessive amount of strange looks from bystanders as he sings pitifully on the way to breakfast.

Most clearly demonstrating Bill's pitiful attitude towards comedy is when he practically begs Jake to joke with him. Jake only put in a sensible amount of effort: enough to prompt Bill's next response. Meanwhile, Bill was becoming the very definition of pitiful with his begging and pressuring of Jake. This in itself is pitiful enough, but then Bill presents himself as an irony expert; almost nothing is more pitiful than an expert insisting and pleading that someone else try to match his expertise.

Considering that Bill was as pitiful as he could have been, he made a seemingly out of place connection between himself and Cohn when Jake offered Robert Cohn as something pitiful, and Bill says that wasn't a bad attempt. Bill and Cohn are pitiful characters, but Bill failed to differentiate between his and Cohn's brand of pity. Bill was plainly being pitiful on purpose; everything pitiful thing he did in this scene was purposeful. Cohn, on the other hand, was naturally pitiful. He didn't have to try to look the part. The important difference is humor. Cohn is serious. He's too serious to be likable to most readers, but Bill is funny. As stupid as he looks, Bill makes people laugh, and that makes his character likable. This is a further comment on Cohn. His problem isn't that he is pitiful, rather that he can't use that pity to his advantage.

Septimus's world and the real world.

Septimus Warren Smith, because of his mental health, interprets things differently than any other character in the novel Mrs. Dalloway, sometimes even seeing or hearing things that no one else does. His entire world is distorted and seems crazy, but Wolf always manages to relate his reality back to actual reality through his wife Lucrezia. Whenever we see Septimus from Rezia's perspective, she is always trying to nudge him back into the real world, and whenever we see the world through Septimus's eyes, the next perspective is almost always Lucrezia's.

This is a big help to understanding how Septimus's mind is distorting reality, because it allows us to see the parallels between his and the outside world without Wolf having to break from her usual style of writing through the perspectives of her characters. When we first meet them, Spetimus was endlessly slipping back into his own convoluted mind, which, from the reader's perspective, was a mess of illogical connections that eventually lead into totally backwards philosophy. If it weren't for Rezia being a link back into the real world after every paragraph of this nonsense, we would become lost in this strange world of Septimus without understanding how it relates to anything. Rezia brings us back, allowing us to make connections between Septimus and his surrounding, so that we can better understand how he warps reality, and that helps us understand his character, especially once we learn Septimus's backstory, at which point it is possible to look at the way in which he sees the world with a new understanding and sympathy.