What makes a man?
What starts off this whole book is Miss Emma saying she wants a man to sit in the electric chair in response to the lawyer defending Jefferson's comparison of the accused man and a hog, and Grant is tasked with turning Jefferson into a man. However, this raises the question: What actually makes a man?
The Biblical (and I'm assuming Reverend Ambrose's) definition of a true man is someone like Jesus who exemplifies sacrifice, servitude, love, gentleness, yet someone who has the backbone to defend righteousness, truth, and weak ones. It requires complete devotion to and dependence on Christ, as well as having this sort of "cry out to the Lord during times of trouble" ideology.
The secular definition of a true man and the one Grant seems to agree with more is someone who doesn't cry or show weakness. It is someone who is "alpha" rather than meek and gentle; someone powerful. Secular men are supposed to depend on themselves and go down with glory.
These views aren't entirely mutually exclusive, but the differences are still noticeable enough for there to be conflict between Grant and the Reverend: Up until Jefferson's last days, the two men seem to be odds on what they want the man to do and how they want him to act in his final moments.
Ambrose wants Jefferson to cry out to God and confess his sins during his last moments alive in fear that his soul will be condemned to hell if he does otherwise. On the other hand, Grant doesn't want Jefferson to do anything that will make him look more weak or guilty than he is or that will give the white men in the room any reason to justify his death.
However, the man Jefferson becomes through his journey locked away and eventually led to the chair is different from both of those definitions and exemplifies a more human definition of what it means to be a man. In death, he's able to impact a community through his actions. He's able to move people emotionally, through words and also through the journal he leaves behind. He isn't influential because he's macho or tough or religious: He's just human. Jefferson dies with dignity that reflects well on his community not because he wants to necessarily get back at the white men who did this to him as revenge (though that may be part of it) but because the people he loves are depending on him. Throughout his journey in jail, he has learned how to love people and has learned how it feels to be loved. Which definition does that fit?
This takes me back to the beginning of the book when Miss Emma tasks Grant with turning Jefferson into a man. Now that Jefferson is dead and that arc of the story has come to an end, the readers can see the type of person he was when he sat in that chair compared to who he was when he was first imprisoned and met Grant. He doesn't wholly fit the secular definition or religious definition of what it means to be a man, yet he has undoubtably changed and made at least me very proud of him during his final moments.
Maybe when Miss Emma said she wanted a "man" to sit in the chair she simply meant someone human; someone with emotions, thoughts, and dignity--bearing no resemblance to a hog or any other animal. I hope that's what she meant because all in all, that's the type of man we got.
The Biblical (and I'm assuming Reverend Ambrose's) definition of a true man is someone like Jesus who exemplifies sacrifice, servitude, love, gentleness, yet someone who has the backbone to defend righteousness, truth, and weak ones. It requires complete devotion to and dependence on Christ, as well as having this sort of "cry out to the Lord during times of trouble" ideology.
The secular definition of a true man and the one Grant seems to agree with more is someone who doesn't cry or show weakness. It is someone who is "alpha" rather than meek and gentle; someone powerful. Secular men are supposed to depend on themselves and go down with glory.
These views aren't entirely mutually exclusive, but the differences are still noticeable enough for there to be conflict between Grant and the Reverend: Up until Jefferson's last days, the two men seem to be odds on what they want the man to do and how they want him to act in his final moments.
Ambrose wants Jefferson to cry out to God and confess his sins during his last moments alive in fear that his soul will be condemned to hell if he does otherwise. On the other hand, Grant doesn't want Jefferson to do anything that will make him look more weak or guilty than he is or that will give the white men in the room any reason to justify his death.
However, the man Jefferson becomes through his journey locked away and eventually led to the chair is different from both of those definitions and exemplifies a more human definition of what it means to be a man. In death, he's able to impact a community through his actions. He's able to move people emotionally, through words and also through the journal he leaves behind. He isn't influential because he's macho or tough or religious: He's just human. Jefferson dies with dignity that reflects well on his community not because he wants to necessarily get back at the white men who did this to him as revenge (though that may be part of it) but because the people he loves are depending on him. Throughout his journey in jail, he has learned how to love people and has learned how it feels to be loved. Which definition does that fit?
This takes me back to the beginning of the book when Miss Emma tasks Grant with turning Jefferson into a man. Now that Jefferson is dead and that arc of the story has come to an end, the readers can see the type of person he was when he sat in that chair compared to who he was when he was first imprisoned and met Grant. He doesn't wholly fit the secular definition or religious definition of what it means to be a man, yet he has undoubtably changed and made at least me very proud of him during his final moments.
Maybe when Miss Emma said she wanted a "man" to sit in the chair she simply meant someone human; someone with emotions, thoughts, and dignity--bearing no resemblance to a hog or any other animal. I hope that's what she meant because all in all, that's the type of man we got.
Honestly, I don't even think Miss Emma really knew what she meant by a "man." She was just so upset by Jefferson being called a hog that she wanted to prove them wrong. All she wanted was for Jefferson to not be what the white men thought he was. And I think you're right: she wanted Jefferson to be human. Not necessarily a hero, but just someone who is proud of himself, has emotions, and is wholly and unequivocally human. In the end, Jefferson did become a bit of a hero, but overall he was a human that I was proud of and loved, and I hope Miss Emma felt the same.
ReplyDeleteBeing a man is a difficult thing to define. However, I agree with your idea of what Mrs. Emma's version of a "man" is. It's clear in the first few encounters with Jefferson, that he doesn't think of himself as a human anymore. He acts like a hog. He thinks that he's a hog. At the end of the book, he's displaying more human behaviors and believes he's a man too. He accepts Mrs. Emma's food. He even calls himself a man. I believe that this end goal is what Mrs. Emma really wanted.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe task that Grant has been assigned to is difficult to contemplate. I can't blame him too much for wanting to get the hell out of dodge so much. It's hard to to define what exactly being a man entails. Does it mean making Jefferson a stereotypical man with big muscles, stone face, and chiseled jaw? Or perhaps does it mean molding him into a entirely different set of characteristics? How does Grant now what to do when he doesn't even know what the goal looks like?
ReplyDelete