The first and most egregious of all the problems is the overwhelming use of foreshadowing. Generally the use of literary devices in aid a story's development , but in “A Good Man Is Hard to Find,” O’Connor takes foreshadowing to a new dimension. Within the first two paragraphs the imminent encounter with The Misfit is literally spelled out to the readers. The narrator tells the reader that the grandmother “was seizing every chance” to change her son’s mind on their trip’s destination. Yet, the reader is only previewed to two examples, both happen to be about the same factor, and the first takes up half of the opening paragraph (358-1). If these examples were not enough to clue the reader in, O’Connor makes sure there will not be one ounce of surprise when, unprovoked, too late to change any minds about the destination of their trip—and after a long stretch of time without even a thought about it—the grandmother asks a restaurant owner, “Did you read about that criminal, The Misfit, that’s escaped?” (361-41). It could be argued that the grandmother was just adding to the conversation; however, the dialogue was forced in that direction by Red Sam, the restaurant owner, for no presently appropriate reason other than to foreshadow The Misfit again.
Another massive issue with the story is the utter lack of character continuity. Bailey, a very premeditated type, unaffected by the obnoxiousness of his children as presented in previous scenes, is suddenly rattled by their absolute lack of decorum and decides to do something on a whim the “one and only time” (362-53). Aside from this statement’s inappropriately sadistic irony, it is absolutely out of character. Secondly, and the absolute most outrageous, The Misfit sends Bailey and his son into the forest with his henchmen, a shot is heard, the henchmen return to the site of the wreck alone, The Misfit asks if “ [the mother] and that little girl would like to step off yonder… and join [her] husband” and the mother simply, faintly replies “yes” (366-125). Who would do that; just reply yes? It is overwhelmingly apparent to everyone reading and in the story that death is upon this family and yet the mother simply, faintly says yes and walks her daughter and baby child to death without any other remark from the narrator. Under the extreme pressure and circumstances such a calm answer seems out of character for any conceivable “real-life” character one can come up with. There is nothing that can excuse such a disregard for keeping the characters consistent in such a gratuitously violent story if there is any intent beyond excessive violence.
Even in what appears to be an insightful statement, the most profound assertion in the story looses much of its strength and effect in the manner it is introduced. “She would have been a good woman, … if it had been somebody there to shoot her every minute of her life,” is not enough to fix the meaningless carnage that is the rest of “A Good Man Is Hard to Find” (368-140). When the statement is read into, it could imply that in the face of death the grandmother was a better person; however, even if that is the message, that some people are only decent when forced to face their own gruesome death, it brings up a line of questions—are they good at that moment to get into heaven, to save themselves, to guilt their killer (mostly selfish reasons)—that egg on the morally lacking nature of the story as opposed to concluding a profound train of thought. There are no rules that say a dark story has to be insightful, impart knowledge on its audience, or have some redeemable value, but if a dark story is going to be so poorly constructed it should have some sort of redeemable value that is more than just a passing thought at the very end to justify a overwhelmingly violent story.

Your introductory paragraph leaves the reader very well prepared for the onslaught of criticism that follows; most of your points are well developed and explained. The one thing that could perhaps use more explanation is your frustration with the violence contained within the story. What about the overwhelming violence is overwhelming? The vivid descriptions? The amount of violence contained within such a short story?
ReplyDeleteAlso, the second-to-last paragraph's final sentence might benefit from rephrasing. You state that there are no rules with regard to insightfulness or redeeming values in dark stories and then write that the story should in fact have some, "redeemable value." As a quick grammar note with respect to that same sentence, I believe that knowledge is imparted to something rather than on to it (Mr. Coon can probably tell you for sure).
Overall, your essay certainly was interesting and although I cannot say I agree with the majority of your points, they are well defended and well elucidated.
There is no doubt you have a strong opinion. I enjoyed reading your essay because of this. It also allowed the class to quickly delve into multiple topics. So great job!
ReplyDeleteHowever, I think it is too harsh to say the story is devoid of any meaning. It is hard to understand, but the grandmother clearly experiences something profound in the last few moments of her life. If you reject that, then there is at least the possibility that the Misfit developed a connection with her. Regardless of what meaning you accept, I think this story holds a wealth of options. Although, they are left open to the reader to interpret.
While I don't agree with your essay, I certainly appreciate your honesty and firm stance. It was easy to read, and you clearly developed your points.
Ari, I really like the way Peter describes your essay as an "onslaught of criticism." You definitely didn't hold back, and while I didn't necessarily agree with everything you said, I liked the fact that you didn't try to hedge your bets, that you maintained a consistent tone and focus, and that you could give reasons for your objections. That approach worked better here (where it fit within the parameters of the assignment) than on the passage analysis from Pride and Prejudice.
ReplyDeleteAri, I really like the way Peter describes your essay as an "onslaught of criticism." You definitely didn't hold back, and while I didn't necessarily agree with everything you said, I liked the fact that you didn't try to hedge your bets, that you maintained a consistent tone and focus, and that you could give reasons for your objections. That approach worked better here (where it fit within the parameters of the assignment) than on the passage analysis from Pride and Prejudice.
ReplyDelete