Some of this may have been discussed in class. Fill me in on anything I'm missing.
O'Connor seems to be illustrating both the problems and benefits of modernist thought. She provides two contrasting characters as the illustration.
The grandmother, a religious woman, claims a relationship with Christ. Her nature is like the pre-moderns: faithful and unquestioning. Unfortunately, as the occasion arises where her faith should be most helpful, she fails. Her faith and moral standard collapse. This is a common belief about the religious. They are often considered hypocritical.
The Misfit is modern. Although he challenges religion and the beliefs, he is unchanging. Unlike the grandmother, his actions are consistent. To him, they hold more value. Because he admits that all actions are subjective, he is able to live as he truly is, unlike the religious grandmother who attempts to live as someone she is not.
His behavior results in murder, but a modern would say that this is actually more acceptable than a false self that the grandmother has.
Ad augusta per angusta,
Will
P.S. I commented on Mallory's "hermeneutics."
That is definitely what much of popular belief would say about Christianity today. Especially in our society, many claim such arguments as "you just dont know what i've been through" or "if you've seen what i've seen then you'd feel differently." Unless we're completely ignorant to the implications of these statements, they can be very challenging ideas. We all would like to believe that we would hold on to our faith in spite of anything. Realistically though, we can never know until it actually comes to that.
ReplyDelete