Throughout Ragtime, many historical figures make
appear as characters, though mostly as cameos. A few of them interact with the
fictional characters, namely Evelyn Nesbitt, Harry Houdini, and Emma Goldman.
The others are all cast in a negative light. J. P. Morgan is a conspiracy
theorist so arrogant that he thinks he is the Illuminati. Henry Ford developed
the assembly line in part so that his so-called fools of workers could manage
it. Theodore Roosevelt is introduced as a great conservationist, but the rest
of that sentence lists the several hundred animals he killed on a recent safari
(112).
They are
all awful in different ways, but they all agree on one thing: bigotry. Robert
Peary is hard on his Eskimo helpers because “They’re children and they have to
be treated like children” (73). When Morgan presents his theory about how all
people are, deep down, the same, Ford responds “Exceptin’ the Jews…They ain’t
like anyone else I know” (147). When Sarah tries to talk to Vice President Jim
Sherman, he recoils from her “black hand” and his bodyguards inflict lethal
injuries that nobody seems to think are important (191).
Portraying the famous people of the
era as bigoted fits with Doctorow’s portrayal of white culture as outlined in
the first paragraph (“There were no Negroes. There were no immigrants.”) (4). Bigotry
was the norm, and the historical figures probably were, by and large, racist.
But surely
these people had some redeeming qualities. Doctorow chooses not to mention them
if he can help it. For short descriptions, only the negative qualities come
through. Is this to make it easy for the reader to side against the historical
figures? The only ones that are easy to sympathize with, Houdini and Goldman,
are void of negative qualities and are from repressed groups themselves. Maybe
it is to make sure we are on Doctorow’s side.
What do we think of Doctorow's description of Ford? In 8th period, we talked about how the portrayal could be seen as a caricature rather than an endorsement or criticism--specifically the scene of admiring the accomplishment of TWO assembly line Model T's for a solid 60 seconds before getting back to work. When Ford goes to see Morgan and Morgan is all hyped about being a reincarnated pharaoh, do we not like Ford for cutting him down to size with his indifference and unimpressed state?
ReplyDeleteI agree bigotry is a common trend among nearly all characters in the story, but what about Evelyn Nesbit? Do we think of her as particularly racist? She embraces a poor immigrant child (although it may be for questionable reasons), and greatly mourns losing her.
Thirdly, are Goldman and Houdini void of negative qualities? Goldman tells a tale of how she and her boyfriend incited violence which might've moved back the cause for workers' rights 10 years. After his mother's death, Houdini tries more and more dangerous stunts, lengthening the amount of time he goes without air, nearly begging for death. Are we not a little worried about this? Granted, we can say these are trials of life rather than character flaws, but they certainly aren't void of negative qualities or incidents.
Lastly, and I know I've been lengthy, are we on Doctorow's side? Well, how would we know? A lot of the difficulty in reading this novel is trying to find out what Doctorow thinks about ANYTHING. We've been able to make a few conclusions here and there, (Doctorow thinks the rich try to emulate the poor but are unable, Doctorow doesn't presume to characterize black characters, etc.), but ultimately we struggle every page, every paragraph, every sentence, to figure out what we are supposed to think. It's part of the frustration, but also the puzzle that allows for multiple interpretations, especially in such a postmodern novel.
I agree that we see a lot of bigotry, especially among the upper class characters, and I also agree that that aligns with his portrayal of white culture in the first chapter. On the other hand, I agree with Alyssa that he seems to criticize something about every character in the novel, no one really comes out looking good. I think part of what Doctorow is asking us to think about in this novel is how we can see ourselves in relation to each of these characters or how we ourselves would react in the different situations he puts them in. I also think the way that the characters act around each other, Evelyn meeting Goldman, Ford meeting Morgan, or Coalhouse meeting Booker T Washington for example, lets us see both the good and the bad if each. It lets us choose for ourselves whose views we align ourselves with and who we are more likely to disagree with.
ReplyDeleteOne way to look at these less-than-flattering depictions of familiar (and often lionized) historical figures in the novel might be as a critique of the "Great Man" theory of history. Doctorow doesn't deny that individuals like Ford or Morgan have an enormous impact on history, but in Morgan especially, he ruthlessly parodies the idea of Morgan as a literally "peerless" Great Man by having him locate his progenitors in ancient Egypt--not necessarily the best "look" for a supposedly quintessential "American" success story.
ReplyDeleteDoctorow's thoroughly positive depiction of Emma Goldman seems perhaps like the same idea in reverse: once known as "the most dangerous woman in America," she was disparaged throughout her lifetime (which we see in the novel), seen as notorious and dangerous, and eventually expelled from the country solely for her extreme political views (many of which don't sound so extreme nowadays, in particular her views on gender and feminism). Goldman is depicted as something like an ironic "Great Woman" model of history, only the power regime is too strong--she is deported, despite being the only one in the novel (and the country?) who really knows what's going on.
Before I looked at the comments, I was thinking about Jared's blog post that I just read about sympathizing for Morgan. He was a very lonely man, as Mr. Mitchell noted, and he also has been raised by an affluent family. With his upbringing, he has been taught to prioritize capitalist ways, but deep inside he longs for a companionship with people who are not elites, who he thinks are trite when he dines with them. However, he does not know how to interact with people of lower status because he has been raised as an elite, so he is stuck in a hole without support. So, basically I don't blame him for acting the way he does and I honestly feel bad for him at points. Other than that, though, I agree that the historical characters are all portrayed as pretty shitty people.
ReplyDelete