After class on Tuesday I found myself perplexed on the great group discussion that occurred. As a class we somehow began talking about why the misfit decided to murder the family. This discussion escalated quickly and reached reasons that were hotly contested. One proposed idea of why the misfit killed the family was because of the grandmother while another was because the misfit simply wanted their clothes. After class I thought to myself, Wow... We were able to talk about murder like it was nothing. We were more focused on the motives behind the murder to even realize that it was MURDER we were discussing! Like professor Oster and the group presenters pointed out, the class seemed to be completely desensitized to the idea murder, that is, the taking of someone else's life!
I don't think that Flannery O'Connor intended for this to be the discussion of "A Good Man Is Hard to Find." Rather, O'Connor wanted us to realize that the misfit received no joy from murdering the family. In fact, the misfit only murdered one person in the even while his accomplices took take of the rest of the family. At the end of the story the misfit explains that there is "no real pleasure in life." The misfit had just shot the grandmother because she reached out to him after proclaiming that all the misfit needed was Jesus. The misfit's accomplice, Bobby Lee, assumed that it was fun shooting the grandmother. This is when the misfit informs him that life has no pleasure.
The last sentence of the story speaks to more than just the scenario at the time. O'Connor is attempting to illustrate that the serial killer does not enjoy murder. Rather, he is a product of the justice system. The misfit spent time in prison for no specific reason, according to the story. This raises the question, did the misfit become this way because of the judicial system? That is left up to the reader to decide, however, I assume the judicial system is the exact reason.
This post has traveled the entire world in respect to topics, however, I think the class accidentally became focused on something that is contemporary to our time. We became so focused on murder that we missed one of several other underlying ideas. To conclude this post I will leave you with one question. What does murder mean to you?
Thank you for reading!
Brandon Rominger
Brandon, I am interested in your blog post because you were not as much caught up in the ideas of the class but you were really focused on what was happening in the story. I would agree that the class was highly focused on the murder and that it is nothing that should be overlooked. But could it be possible that this is what O’Connor wanted us to look at. Throughout the whole story I was entertained by the thoughts that the “Misfit” was going to make an appearance at some point because of how he was introduced in the very beginning. With the Misfit acting in such hostile ways there seems to be no other solution to possibly overlook the actual affects of murder and try to analyze the story in a different perspective. Although I do greatly respect your thoughts on these actions, I became worried after reading your post that I was overlooking murder too lightly. I should take another look back at the story and really assess the possibilities of what murder really does to this story. You have sparked a few thoughts in my head that could lead to a blog post of its own. Thanks for posting; it has unlocked a different perspective on this story that I did not see before.
ReplyDeleteLooking into Brandon’s blog post, I think he really brought up an interesting idea about the Misfit from “A Good Man Is Hard to Find.” The idea he had brought up, that is, the Misfit finds murdering is not an enjoyable activity. I totally agree with him, though, this idea had raised me a critical question: after all, was the Misfit an innocent person? Brandon’s analysis on the Misfit had offered me a questionable problem to its extent. I think this also one of the debatable topics that O’ Conner wanted us to explore, since story suggests uncertainty to conclude his position.
ReplyDeleteThe reading showed that the Misfit escaped from the federal penitentiary, and he was placed in for killing his father. Though, the Misfit suggested the murder was a lie, saying "’It was a head doctor who said what I had done was kill my daddy but I known that for a lie. My daddy died in nineteen ought nineteen of the epidemic flu and I never had a thing to do with it’” (O’ Conner 130). This denial to his murder raised the idea that he was actually innocent. Grandmother questioned if it was a mistake, however, his response was that it wasn’t, since they had papers for him that justified his crime. From looking the how this problem is framed, it raises an ambiguity of his guilt, since it is seen as almost as if he doesn't think he committed a crime, though, there is evidence that justifies that he did it. Ultimately, what drives this matter of uncertainty is his lack of memory. That is, he says he can't clearly remember why he was sent to the penitentiary, as he mentions, “’’I set there and set there, trying to remember what it was I done and I ain’t recalled to this day’” (O’ Conner 130). Essentially, the significant component to clarify his issue is missing and this leaves us with mystery of his background.
Thanks to Brandon, I was able to generate this extensive problem to consider in this story. This raised critical problem derives from Brandon’s idea of matter of how the Misfit finds murder as not enjoyable, concluding that his life is not pleasant. Beyond his matter of life, I think it further raises more complexity in terms of determining his status as being guilty or not after all. The assumption of his unpleasant experience through murdering suggests a clue to be as innocent, although other details support as him being guilty on other hand. At the end, as a reader, it is upon us to take and conclude his position from given clues in the story.