Introduction
A Good Man is Hard to Find is one of the most outstanding works by Flannery O’Connor, a writer whose blood-chilling stories confront the usual stereotypes about religion, the good, and the evil. Indeed, in A Good Man is Hard to Find, O’Connor condemns the conventionalism of faith and proclaims victory over Catholic dogma. Adrienne argues that in the story, the notion of evil incorporates social prejudices and societal stances.
Hani argues that religion serves as an instrument of social criticism, exposing the society of strangers and portraying the collapse of ‘neighborly’ ties between people in modern American social life. Zhao suggests that absurdity and hypocrisy are the main topics raised in the story. This paper hypothesizes that all the authors, though from different angles, depict the story as an allegorical description of society based on conventions that are seen as primary sources of social evil.
The Bailey Family as Personification of Dogma and Convention
The story depicts a family – Grandma, her son Bailey, his wife, and three children – who set on a journey from Atlanta to Florida. The grandmother is aware that a dangerous criminal – the Misfit – is roaming about the area, but she does not cancel the trip. Hani suggests that the grandmother’s interests revolve around the outer entourage of the trip. It is important for her to look like a lady and be perceived as a good person while she does not mind the danger her family is likely exposed to at her whim (Hani). Her definition of what it means to be “good” is symbolized by her very correct travel outfit. O’Connor writes: “In case of an accident, anyone seeing her dead on the highway would know at once that she was a lady” (3). Thus, with the help of Lexis, the author conveys the fact that goodness, for the Bailey family, is narrowed down to following certain norms accepted in society.
The author narrates the story in the third person and, at the same time, gives glimpses of Grandmother’s inner world using phrases such as ‘she thought, ‘she believed. The descriptions are detailed and convey the idea that the façade, the dogma, is more important to Grandmother than the inner world (Hani). The language Grandmother uses is high-flowing; thus, she begs the Misfit not to shoot a ‘lady’ and names Mr. Teagarden a ‘gentleman,’ which shows the importance of outer societal stances and ‘norms’ adopted in the society. While speaking of a lady does not seem adequate in the context of killing, the use of this word depicts how far from reality Grandma’s dogma is. Grandmother does not treat killing as an ultimate evil but perceives it as a matter of etiquette, something which should not be done not because of its moral value but due to its societal inappropriateness.
The Misfit’s language sharply contrasts that of Grandmother’s; his sentences are rasp and short; the words and grammar he uses may be incorrect but understandable. Hani believes that this mode of speech characterizes him as a man who looks behind the façade and to whom it is more important what is said than how it is said. Thus, the author characterizes him as a person who “is going to be into everything” (O’Connor 10). He is not a usual villain because he tries to understand God, the nature of sin, and his place in the world.
As the language of the characters is contrasted, there is a sharp contrast in what they stand for. While Grandmother, with her high-flowing language, may be seen as a symbol of hypocrisy and dogma, the Misfit, on the contrary, is a person who finally defeats conventionalism and dogma. He crushes the outer façade of conventions revealing their true essence and confirming that true feelings are more important than the outer decorum (Hani). Killing all the family, he kills all the family stands for: focus on material values, hypocrisy, and outer entourage.
Convention and Decorum as an Ultimate Social Evil
Merchant believes the idea that conventions and decorum are an ultimate societal evil is developed on two planes: in a symbolic way through epithets and allegories and in a more down-to-earth, reasonable mode where Grandma’s love for convention ultimately leads all her family to their deaths. There are many symbols in the text connected to the family that point to the ‘evil’ family members stand for and herald their terrible end.
Thus, on the way, the family sees “a big black battered hearse-like automobile,”; and hearse-like automobiles are used in burials for carrying corpses (O’Connor 9). The driver “look[s] down with a steady expressionless gaze” a phrase that can be associated with death since death messengers are usually portrayed as black-hooded figures, expressionless and unemotional (O’Connor 9). At the same time, the phrase may stand for dogma, which is unmovable and unemotional, and within which certain actions are committed without any emotional qualms, heartlessly and irrevocably.
As the narration progresses, the feeling of doom is enhanced through the use of comparisons. Thus, the author says that “the Misfit pointed the toe of his shoe into the ground and made a little hole and then covered it up again,” the process that copies burial on a small scale (O’Connor 9). The action is part of a burial ritual that remains unchanged from times immemorial, covering people’s emotions and suffering. The journey undertaken by the Bailey family can be seen as the personification of the journey from a rich spiritual life towards the death of the spirit.
The author speaks about “the sharp curves on dangerous embankments” that symbolize the joys and sorrows of life now replaced with merciless tradition where there is no place for genuine feeling. (O’Connor 6). On the road, the family passes six graves, equal to the number of people in the Bailey family. Finally, the family arrives “in a red depression with the dust-coated trees looking down on them” (O’Connor 6). The imagery here represents a cemetery where corpses lie under the trees watching over them. So, even while the family is alive, the author shows that they are already dead to all real feelings, sympathy, understanding, and compassion, and what remains is the outer decorum, an ultimate evil that transforms people from feeling individuals into heartless zombies.
From the logical viewpoint, we see the family trapped in an impossible situation by the conventions they follow and out of which they cannot find the way out. Indeed, when meeting a dangerous criminal who is as likely as not to kill them, family members behave in a socially appropriate way as if nothing happened. They do not shout, lose their self-control or try to run away but hold a polite conversation with the people who are about to kill them. Their behavior is highly illogical but can be well explained by dogmatic principles they have followed all their lives and cannot now break (Merchant). The death of the family may be seen as a result of their passiveness and unwillingness to break social norms even in a critical situation, the norms that, according to O’Connor, are the sources of more evil than good in society.
Breaking Conventions as a Way to Freedom
On the face of it, the Bailey family, religious and sticking to conventions, should symbolize goodness, while the Misfit who kills them is a villain, but the story goes beyond such simplicities. Zhao states that the story revolves around absurdity as the family that stands for beliefs generally seen as good ones symbolize evil. In fact, by portraying the family’s reverence for material things as opposed to inner beauty, their sense of superiority over others, as well as their infamous end, O’Conner shows them worthy of their fate. The Misfit, vice versa, is seen as the angel of death (Zhao). The very fact that “[the Misfit’s] face was as familiar to [Grandmother] as if she had known him all her life” can be construed as an association with God or Heaven (O’Connor 9).
Usually, it is the face of Jesus that can be described this way. This allusion is further supported by the fact that though the Misfit kills the family, he gets no pleasure from the action. To him, it is some kind of duty he performs by putting an end to hypocrisy, superiority, and dogma. Thus, the death of the family in the story is not tragic; rather, it is seen as a necessary evil committed for the general good.
Conclusion
In her story A Good Man is Hard to Find, O’Connor dwells into the nature of evil, painting convention and dogma as ultimate social harm. The concept of outer decorum is explored through the story of the Bailey family, who would rather die than give up the pretenses they live in. While Hani states that the story revolves around the social problem of alienation and decorum, Merchant believes O’Connor portrays social evil through religious dogma and conventions adopted in society. Zhao echoes this idea, adding that hypocrisy and absurdity find their central place in the story. All the researchers agree that the Bailey family embodies the worst human qualities and personifies ‘the ultimate evil.’Moreover, their death is seen not as a tragedy but as a liberation from dogmas and conventions imposed on society.
Works Cited
Hani, Mohamad. “Analysis of Social Problem in “A Good Man is Hard to Find” by Flannery O’Connor.” English Community Journal vol. 3, no. 1, 2019, pp. 342-349. Web.
Merchant, Adrienne. “Good vs. Evil as Seen in the Characterization of “A Good Man is Hard to Find”.” PEN, p. 58-62. Web.
O’Connor, Flannery. A Good Man is Hard to Find: And Other Stories. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 1955.
Zhao, Yang. “The Absurd Theme in “A Good Man is Hard to Find”.” 2017 3rd International Conference on Economy, Management and Education Technology (ICEMET 2017). Web.