Taylor 1

Kelly Taylor

---

ENG 314

17 November 2017

Revere or Destroy: Forced Binary in The Violent Bear It Away

That Francis Marion Tarwaters life was wrongfully commandeered by his great-uncle is

a subject of little debate, even in literary circles. That the young boys binary worldview

divinely appointed fate versus self-determinationsignifies the violent tension between his

religious indoctrination and relentless impositions of identity is a subject of somewhat more.

Mary Flannery OConnor, a devout Roman Catholic and prolific author of the late 40s and 50s,

knew precisely what she was doing when she repeatedly wrote about ideological clashes between

religious zealots and nonbelievers. Nowhere is the resultant violence more clearly exhibited than

in the case of Tarwaterhalf-religious zealot, half-nonbelieverin her sophomore novel, The

Violent Bear It Away.

The young antihero of the novel presents a dangerously dualistic personalitythe result

of his starkly dogmatic upbringing and his latent escape to the city, where his uncle Rayber (a

little too) earnestly attempts to root out Masons religious influence. As a result, Tarwater acts

out in impulsive attempts to decide his own future, free from the absolutism of both Rayber and

Mason. Tarwater, post Powderhead, feels keenly the difference between the fate hes been

assigned and the destiny he desires to forge himself. Tarwaters attempt to burn Masons corpse,

refusal to look at anything for too long, and hasty decision to concurrently drown and baptize

Bishop are all desperate responses to grotesque moral dilemmas. But what exactly is OConnor

saying about the violence through these forced binaries? Are good people fated to submit to
 Taylor 2

forceful persecutors as they bear it away? Through forcing Tarwater to choose between rigid

moral absolutism and perceived amorality, OConnor shows that violence is endemic to the

pursuit of sanctity. Because Christian sanctity is typically regarded as non-retaliatory, its

pursuants are usually the victims of said violence, whether it be self-inflicted or a mark of

outward oppression.

This theme imbues the body of OConnors work; the characters inevitable suffering is

not needless or accidental. OConnor herself, speaking of her short story, A Good Man is Hard

to Find, said, I have found that violence is strangely capable of returning my characters to

reality and preparing them to accept their moments of grace. Their heads are so hard that almost

nothing else will work (Brinkmeyer 86). This trope means that violence in OConnors work

almost inevitably has a purifying effect on her characters. Richard H. Brinkmeyer, Jr. put it best

when he surveyed OConnors pervasive purges in her stories:

Violent acts that cleanse the world of significance, paving the way for and

announcing the entrance of the divine, occur throughout OConnors

fictionAny number of OConnors works conclude with bodily injury that

signals the penetration of the divine: the goring of Mrs. May in Greenleaf; the

grandmothers terrifying duel with The Misfit that brings insightand deathin

A Good Man Is Hard to Find; the striking of Ruby Turpin and her heavenly

vision in Revelation; the rape of Tarwater and his acceptance of his prophetic

calling in The Violent Bear It Away. (84)

OConnor herself has been quoted as saying, To the hard of hearing, [Christian writers]

shout, and for the... almost-blind [they] draw large and startling figures (Gordon 1). This use of

grotesque or shocking situations is an identifiably deliberate convention of OConnors work,

 Taylor 3

and critics as well as historians often use this as proof of OConnors intent: Presumably, to

persuade her mild, Christian audience of the dark implications of redemption through Christ.

OConnor was interested in binaries outside of her literature. She was a notably dynamic

person outside of her writing career (if such separation is possible), and made it clear that her

unwavering Christian faith was the foundation for all other pursuits. She famously said, I see

from the standpoint of Christina orthodoxy. . . I dont think that this is a position that can be

taken halfway or one that is particularly easy in these times to make transparent in fiction (Cash

xiv). Nevertheless, OConnor considered herself a New Critic, and hesitated to grant an authors

circumstances much merit in literary interpretation of his/her work.

Still, its impossible to distill OConnors religious ardor from her literary exploits. The

Violent Bear It Away is prefaced with a scripture, Matthew 11:12, that, in OConnors version of

the Douay-Rheims Bible, discusses the sacramental necessity of self-perpetrated violence, or,

more specifically, violence against ones own sinfulness. This adds an important dimension to

ones reading of the novel. In her attempt to subvert the negative connotations of violence, the

harsh conflicts that arise from the binaries of righteousness and self-indulgence are seen as

necessary steps in spiritual salvation.

OConnors story is therefore rife with biblical references, as old Tarwater compares

himself and Francis to Old Testament prophets. This is particularly significant considering the

clear contrast of tone between the New Testament and Old Testament. The Old Testament. The

New Testament focuses mainly on Jesus Christs mortal ministry and his acts of love and service

to his followers and sinners alike. By contrast, the Old Testament prophets often use aggression

or violence to convey the word of God. A notable example, which OConnor uses to demonstrate

the old man and Francis relationship, is that of Elijah and Elisha, prophets who punished the
 Taylor 4

non-penitent by calling forth she bears and pillars of fire to destroy their oppressors. This

attention to biblical imagery establishes, for readers, an uneasy feeling of forthcoming violence.

Knowing that Francis himself feels that he must burn clean the children of men (including

himself) sets the stage for the biblical violence of the book.

After Mason dies, Francis faces his first dilemma with the stranger, which we later

discover to be a manifestation of Satan himself (OConnor 39). The stranger tries to dissuade

Tarwater from his task of digging his great-uncles grave, offering him the following poisonous

counsel:

The way I see it, he said, you can do one of two things. One of them, not both.

Nobody can do both of two things without straining themselves. You can do one

thing or you can do the opposite.

Based solely upon this monologue, one might say that Tarwaters binary thought is, quite

literally, of the devil. It is inevitably destructive, and the way OConnor attributes this

philosophy to Satan is particularly meaningful considering an overreaching theme of the book:

the simultaneous triumph and defeat of violence against godly characters. Tarwater responds to

this perceived dilemma in an act of impulsivity, getting drunk and burning the shack where

Mason raised himan act which, he believes, violently liberates him from old Tarwaters grasp

(50). Incidentally, the drunkenness and impulsivity is an act of violence against Tarwater

himself; at least, against the part of Tarwater that has already accepted his prophetic call. It isnt

enough for Tarwater to burn Masons body; he must, in his mind, burn the entire stage of his

childhood, where the Christian faithif we can truly call it suchwas planted. OConnor uses

this to demonstrate just how dynamic Francis mind is; he doesnt want to comply with old

Tarwaters wishes, so he goes to great, even excessive lengths, to do the opposite. We cannot
 Taylor 5

ignore these binaries role in not only progressing the story, but also adding a dimension to

Francis character that is approachable from the position of natural rebellion against

indoctrination.

Moreover, OConnor uses events such as Francis regular expressions of opposition to his

great-uncles wishes to tempt readers themselves to adopt a painfully binary view of Franciss

fate: will he revert to the eccentric hyper-morality with which Mason imbued him from infancy,

or will he, as Rayber hopes, undergo a profound awakening and renounce his faith? Having been

abducted by old Tarwater as a baby and raised by him alone, Francis is in a position of

powerlessness. Old Tarwater commonly belittles Francis and robs him of his identity in subtle

ways, such as the dialogue on page 74, when Mason has, for the umpteenth time, told Francis

about the unusual circumstances of his baptism.

And what did I do? Tarwater asked.

You didnt do nothing, the old man said as if what he did or didnt do was of no

consequence whatsoever.

It was me that was the prophet, the boy said sullenly.

This is a somewhat benign example of aggression toward Francis view of himself as a

prophet, but it is an example nonetheless. Young Tarwater is undermined by the very man who

has prepared him to be a seer, resulting in another act of moral violence. Francis is attracted to

prophecy by the promise of power (in the form of influence and of passion) and has been

indoctrinated with the idea that, as a prophet, he will hold a title of importance, but he is ever-

watchful of heavenly signs that involve destruction or the threat of violence, the most notable

example being the burning bush.

 Taylor 6

While it may be said that the entire rising action of The Violent Bear It Away is

manifested by Francis inner turmoil regarding whether or not to baptize young Bishop, the act

ultimately surfaces as another binary dilemmanot of leaving Bishop alone or baptizing him, but

murdering him or baptizing him. Overcome by emotion and, again, Satanic influence, Francis

simultaneously drowns Bishop, mumbling the baptismal rite in the moment, and effectively

satisfying the demands of both his religious persona and his violent egocentrism (OConnor 214).

Constant destabilization wears on Francis and ultimately provokes his rash and impulsive

decisions, which he makes primarily to undermine external forecasts of his fate. Put simply,

Francis acts out violently to escape others hefty expectations of him. Francis young and

confused, and often overestimates the role of violence in his ability to forge his own identity.

Francis been taught one mentalityreligious absolutismwith one outcomereception

of a call to prophesy. Having been carefully guarded from and inoculated against other

philosophies, such as Raybers allegiance to pure reason, Francis is marked for a sudden

intellectual awakening upon his departure from Powderhead.

Important to note, however unpleasant to consider, is the ultimate act of violence

Tarwater suffers on his spiritual journey to prophecy: his drugging and rape (232). This

unexpected apex of the story combines all forms of violence and oppression: Perhaps in

OConnors eyes, this is the ultimate subjugation of mind, body, and spiritsave the religious

awakening that the young, defeated boy undergoes afterward. Here, the theme of violence spans

the binary void. Tarwater is confronted with violence from either side. In his quest to

individuality, he has now suffered the worst violation of which he can likely conceive;

alternatively, his acceptance of the prophetic call requires violence against his own pride and

identity.
 Taylor 7

Perhaps unsurprisingly (yet no less strikingly!) Tarwater ultimately decides to follow in

the bleeding stinking mad shadow of Jesus, presumably burned clean: figuratively, by the

horrific events of the previous evening, and now more literally, as he sets fire to the scene of the

violation, as well as his prideful pursuit of an identity free from the pull of religious duty as well

as secular morality. If one thing may be said about this apparent cause-and-effect relationship

between the rape and the acceptance of a prophetic call, it should be that this was an

unbelievably daring move on OConnors partespecially as an orthodox Christian. That the

long-awaited convergence of the binaries is accomplished through the sexual exploitation of a

vulnerable boy is shocking enough; that the violence appears to be the key to his spiritual

awakening is unduly earth-shattering. Yet, this is precisely what OConnor had intended. The

violence of the binaries now extends to readers, who, perhaps expecting a more agreeable

resolution to Tarwaters troubles, now must reconcile the terrible act of violence perpetrated

against him with his subsequent decision to prophesy.

While numerous psychoanalytical interpretations could apply here, I doubt OConnor

intended The Violent Bear It Away to be a statement on regression or Stockholms Syndrome.

Instead, we should choose to consider the novel as a profoundly moving exploration of the

inevitability of violencewhether ideological or physicalthat plagues those aspiring to divine

potential, and, monitoring closely our own destructive, binary thought patterns, seek to mitigate

the suffering.
 Taylor 8

Works Cited

Brinkmeyer, Robert H. ""Jesus, Stab Me in the Heart!": Wise Blood, Wounding, and

Sacramental Aesthetics." Kreyling, Michael. New Essays on Wise Blood. Cambridge,

UK: Cambridge University Press, 1995. 71-89.

Cash, Jean W. Flannery O'Connor: A Life. Knoxville, TN: Library of Congress Cataloging-in-

Publication Data, 2002.

Georgia Women of Achievement. "Flannery O'Connor." Georgia Women of Achievement (2016).

Web.

Gordon, Sarah. "Flannery O'Connor (1925-1964)." New Georgia Encyclopedia (2017). Web.

Hyman, Stanley Edgar. Flannery O'Connor. Minnesota: North Central Publishing Company,

1966. Book.

O'Connor, Flannery. The Violent Bear It Away. New York, NY: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux,

1960.