“…the gaunt trunks appeared to be raised in a pool of red light that gushed from the almost hidden sun setting behind them…He saw it, in his hallucination, as if someone were wounded behind the woods and the trees were bathed in blood.”
This moment occurs the third time Fortune takes a look at the woods. Laced with powerful sight imagery, the scene symbolizes the story’s greater message by casting a precautionary light on the dangers of rural development.
Situated in Georgia, the rural landscape is filled with vast pastures, farms and densely wooded areas. Development of the space has begun and no one is a bigger advocate for progress than Mr. Fortune. To his surprise, he discovers a firm resistance from his young companion Mary Fortune which is vocalized upon her discovery that Fortune intends to sell their lawn. Fortune holds a high disregard for preserving nature and would rather see it replaced with a more urban setting. What he defines as progress, the author demonstrates as mere destruction. O’Conner writes, “red light,” “wounded,” and “trees were bathed in blood” to describe the woods, the most definite symbol of nature in the story, to forewarn a devastating future that will occur should people continue to uproot the land for commercial ventures. Also, the author’s descriptions also evoke sight imagery preluding to death which is shown to be a consequence of disturbing the processes of nature.
Until his death Mr. Fortune held fast to his belief in “progress.” Should Mr. Fortune be considered a protagonist or antagonist in the story? Why or why not?
In that context I definitely think Mr. Fortune is the protagonist. I get the sense it's from the combination of wanting progressive development of the land with his hatred for Pitts (526). I believe Mary to the protagonist because she sees that land as home. Also despite her father beating her, she still cares about him when she tells Fortune "[M]y daddy grazes his calves on that lot" (532).
ReplyDeleteThe word that Mary uses to refer to the latest land being sold is "lawn", a more personal choice of a word. Whereas Fortune refers to it as "lot", suggesting he doesn't have an emotional attachment to the land. Does Fortune not care about the land even though he owns it and can do whatever he wants with it, in this case, develop an urban area?