[Heading including your name, professor’s name, course name, and date]
Natalie Abrams
Professor Scott Golding
Literature and Spiritual Themes
September 12, 2019
[Title and (optional) epitaph]
The Redemption Pendulum
“Lucifer represents the massive destructive energy resident in the universe as it stands over against the equally enormous constructive powers link[ed] to the divine”
-Carl Jung (Wood 1)
[Introductory sentences presenting the topics to be discussed] The mind of a human is a tricky puzzle. Especially that of Francis Marion Tarwater, Francis O’Connor’s protagonist in The Violent Bear It Away, a journey of creation and destruction, good and evil. It is apparent in O’Connor’s works that “faith is not won without keen suffering,” and her characters’ obsession with salvation “tends to produce the demon rather than the demi-god, the violent rather than the passive” (Srigley 32; Shinn 63). But does Tarwater actually achieve salvation or simply an identity for himself--the acceptance of both good and evil within? [Thesis statement that presents a unique argument to be proven in the rest of the paper] O’Connor instills Tarwater with psychological violence in the form of an identity crisis in order to promote acts of purging through physical violence, ultimately leading to acceptance and the formation of a self identity.
[Introductory sentence setting up first body paragraph] Tarwater’s identity crisis is apparent from the beginning of the novel as he does not accept his role as a prophet--he is young, silently skeptical to the point of rebellion, and naive of the world outside of Powderhead and Old Tarwater’s lectures. [Evidence from primary source with in-text citation] Young Tarwater expresses “disconcernment” and even “anger” at his great-uncle’s spiels, and fears he may be just as hungry for Jesus as his great-uncle (O’Connor 21). [Block quotation as further evidence] O’Connor explains:
The boy sensed that this was the heart of his great-uncles madness, this hunger, and what he was secretly afraid of was that it might be passed down, might be hidden in the blood and might strike some day in him and then he would be torn by hunger like the old man, the bottom split out of his stomach so that nothing would heal or fill it but the bread of life. (O’Connor 21)
[Analysis of quotations] This fear of ending up addicted to the idea of salvation, Jesus’ mercy, or the “bread of life,” is a seed that is watered by Tarwater’s experiences on his journey to the city and back (O’Connor 21). O’Connor sets up a strong duality in him: the prophet and the independent non-believer. [Transitional sentence leading into the second body paragraph] The events that follow show how he swings like a pendulum between these two extremes.
[Introductory sentence to set up paragraph followed by a claim directly relating to thesis] The stranger’s voice Tarwater hears while digging a grave for his great-uncle is the first instance of his “divided self” projected outward in a hallucination (Rosenfield 337). O’Connor uses this devilish voice to forge a greater and greater split in Tarwater’s psyche. [Further evidence from primary text] When Tarwater mentions his prophetic inheritance, the “strange” voice states, “the Lord ain’t studying about you. You ain’t entered His Head” (O’Connor 38). [Analysis of evidence] This conceivably spurs him to question: If I am not special or chosen by the Lord then who am I and what is my purpose? It is important to note that the “strange” voice becomes “friendly” and “wise” the more Tarwater swings between the two extremes of himself (O’Connor 38-9, 161). [Transitional sentence leading into the next body paragraph] The Devil represented by the voice encourages and impersonates Tarwater’s own dual nature (O’Connor, “The Habit” 367).
[Introductory sentence presenting topic to be discussed in this paragraph] Tarwater’s choices at the beginning of the novel are made out of rebellion and experimentation--he is trying on the identity of the non-sacred man. [Evidence from primary text] For instance, after Old Tarwater dies, his first action of rebellion is not to look for the Lord’s call, but to “[get] drunk, prophet or no prophet” (O’Connor 45). Violence against his own body with poison is something he was warned against, despite Old Tarwater keeping a hidden liquor “still” in the “hollow of the bank” (O’Connor 44). His next rebellious act is to burn Old Tarwater’s body along with the house, in lieu of giving him a proper Christian burial as he so thoroughly requested (O’Connor 50). [Analysis and transitional sentence leading into the next body paragraph] Tarwater’s expressions of rebellion and God-fearing submission seem to alternate depending on who is in his presence.
[Introductory sentence presenting topic to be discussed in this paragraph] The secularism represented by Rayber and saintly innocence of Bishop show Tarwater’s journey from one extreme to the other. [Evidence from primary text] Rayber, an intellectual with a penchant for psychology, immediately diagnoses Tarwater with an “emotional infection,” and “false guilt” for neglecting to bury Old Tarwater, which has led him into “a desperate heroic struggle to free himself from the old man’s ghostly grasp” (O’Connor 111, 106). [Analysis of evidence] While he is projecting bits of himself onto Tarwater, his insights are not without merit as Tarwater does suppress the religious urges buried deep down in him. [Further evidence to back up prior point] For instance, when he goes to the “atrocious temple” carrying “his own imprisoned image” he allows himself an opportunity to understand the word of God but cannot ignore the caged sinner inside himself (O’Connor 124). [Further analysis of evidence and transitional statement leading into the next paragraph] Rayber’s pathologizing and efforts to promote healing only lead Tarwater to more intensely subdue the infectious, saintly seeds of his great-uncle within (O’Connor 194).
[Introductory sentence presenting the topic to be discussed in this paragraph] Upon seeing Bishop, Tarwater is compulsively sucked back into the idea that he is a prophet. The child even resembles the “old man grown backwards to the lowest form of innocence” (O’Connor 111). [Evidence from primary text] Tarwater “knew that the child recognized him, that the old man himself had primed him from on high that here was the forced servant of God come to see that he was born again” (O’Connor 93). [Further evidence and analysis] Bishop, with whom Tarwater avoids eye contact and deems a “dangerous hole in space that he must keep away from at all costs,” constantly reminds him of the duties Old Tarwater expects of him (O’Connor 112). O’Connor highlights his internal battle when she writes, “He stood like one condemned, waiting at the spot of execution” while his eyes “reflected depth on depth his own stricken image of himself, trudging into the distance in the bleeding stinking mad shadow of Jesus, until at last he received his reward, a broken fish, a multiplied loaf” (O’Connor 91). [Analysis of quote] Tarwater’s cognitive dissonance is apparent, as he sees no benefit to come from baptizing Bishop, yet he cannot ignore the magnetism of the words forced into him his whole life. [Transitional sentence leading into the next paragraph] The notion of wearing a crown of specialness gifted by God seems undeniably appealing.
[Introductory sentence presenting the topic to be discussed in this paragraph] Tarwater’s uncontrollable attempt to baptize Bishop physically shows the tug-of-war going on in his head. [Evidence from primary text] When the child runs into a fountain at the park, Tarwater “stood arrested in the middle of a step” when Rayber notices his eyes, focusing on Bishop, “beheld some terrible compelling vision” (O’Connor 145). O’Connor notes Tarwater was “drawn toward the child in the water” but resisting with “equal pressure away from what attracted him” (O’Connor 145). [Analysis with further evidence to support] Tarwater’s knows he can take the throne of a prophet at that moment, but is repulsed by the idea of giving into Old Tarwater’s wishes, branded “madness” by Rayber (O’Connor 92). Later in the novel, Rayber presents a glass of water, urging him to “baptize him at once,” prompting Tarwater to hide his hand that “twitched” at the suggestion (O’Connor 195). [Analysis and transitional sentence leading into the next paragraph] Perhaps he declines the offer because he has not finished trying on the opposing roles of the prophet and the unholy man--or--nothing dire enough has happened, like a sign from God, for him to choose.
[Introductory sentence presenting the topic to be discussed in this paragraph] So O’Connor grants him a loud, violent deed. [Evidence from primary text] Tarwater drowns Bishop in an act to “deny the existence of God,” but ends up proving Old Tarwater’s prophecy when he compulsively utters the words of baptism (Dowell 238). On his way back to Powderhead he tells the cab driver, “I had to prove I wasn’t no prophet and I’ve proved it . . . I proved it by drowning him. Even if I did baptize him that was only an accident” (O’Connor 210). [Analysis of evidence and transitional statement] Once again, he denies the religious urges in him, which only inspires the Devil to make a louder bang.
[Introductory sentence presenting the topic to be discussed in this paragraph] The rape of Tarwater represents the peak of his journey as he is physically touched by the Devil--the man in the lavender shirt (O’Connor 228). [Evidence from primary text] He then “burns out” the Devil and (with the realization that his great-uncle has been buried by Buford) is led to believe he is a prophet after all (O’Connor 240). [Analysis and further evidence] But has he been saved or has he merely just accepted both extremes of good and evil into his being? As he sees a vision of people--who are perhaps angels--in the clearing he realizes the object of his hunger; just as Moses heard God’s voice from the burning bush, the boy hears God’s command: “Go warn the children of God of the terrible speed of mercy” (Dowell 239; O’Connor 242). [Further analysis of evidence] Yet might this vision be a hallucination in the aftermath of trauma? After all, O’Connor’s depiction of the Devil likes to play tricks. He smears the dirt of Old Tarwater’s grave on his forehead, a symbolic act of his rebirth, marking him as one who is chosen. [Transitional sentence leading into concluding paragraph] The swinging pendulum has rested--or has it?
[Introductory sentence restating ideas present in essay] Having experienced the good and evil within himself and others, Tarwater has accepted both good and evil into his identity. [Complementary quote referring back to the epitaph and ideas present in essay] Going back to Jung, who refers to Lucifer as “the light-bearer whose demonic negativity dwells in a mandala-like complementarity with divine positivity. [Analysis of quote with secondary source] Only as good incorporates evil into itself, Jung teaches, can higher wisdom and wholeness be attained” (Wood 1). [Reflection of ideas present in essay and reiteration of thesis statement] While O’Connor brands this “wholeness” to be salvation, it seems just as likely that Tarwater has had some life experience and chosen an identity, which can transform with the ebb and flow of life events. [Final sentence that reflects on main ideas of the essay] Perhaps salvation merely involves accepting and becoming conscious of one’s internal pendulum that dances between good and evil.
[List of works cited including primary and secondary sources.]
Works Cited
Dowell, Bob. "The Moment of Grace in the Fiction of Flannery O'Connor."College English 27.3
(1965): 235-39. JSTOR. Web. 20 Feb. 2015.
