Flannery O’Connor and Sin
Sin is concept which reaches into every aspect of society, exposing itself as being a part of every person’s internal and external existence. In a collection of short stories Flannery O’Connor seeks to illustrate this pervasiveness of sin and the great variety of ways which it can exhibit itself in specific communities, as well as the different depths of sin individuals can exhibit. She does this by taking everyday type characters, people not particularly out of the ordinary, and showing to what extent sin and evil interacts in their lives. In this brief review I will look at one her stories, “Good Country People”, and seek to discover her portrayal of sin in a rural southern community. I will then look more closely at sin itself and attempt to analyze her portrayal of sin as compared with an evangelical theological perspective.
For O’Connor sin does not seem to be a “black or white” kind of issue. Rather, we discover in her writings vast gray areas, and the different levels and forms in which sin can expose itself, from the mildly irritating to the distinctively evil. She does this by developing various characters and through this development and their interactions with each other we see the diverse effects sin can cause. The first character we are introduced to is Mrs. Hopewell. She is a woman who “had no bad qualities of her own but she was able to use other people’s in such a constructive way that she never felt the lack.” Overall, one must say that Mrs. Hopewell is rather morally neutral, she does not exhibit what we might call negative qualities, but neither does she seem to be a positive influence on those around her. Her world is one of clear lines, pithy statements, and an almost unawareness of the thoughts and feelings of those around her. The one clear negative one might say about her concerns her stubbornness. She does not admit mistakes, and will always try to come out on top in her interactions with others, often by using her trademark aphorisms as general responses, or by disengaging entirely when she feels too challenged.
We are next introduced to the first set of people referred to by the title of the story. Mrs. Freeman, and her two daughters Glynese and Carramae, are what Mrs. Hopewell calls “good country people.” This implies a wholesome quality not found in city folk or in whom Mrs. Hopewell thinks of as trash. It is essentially an idealization of the values and ideals which are assumed to be held by rural folk. However, Mrs. Freeman is not a perfect woman. She has the annoying tendency to want to know everything about everything, leading people to tire quickly of her nosiness and incessant gossiping. Her two daughters are left as a bit of an enigma to the reader. The general impression, however, is that they are genuine “good” people who, though simple, try to act in an upright manner. But, of course, we do not get to know them very well.
Mrs. Hopewell ’s daughter, Joy, is character who is more clearly representing a life of sin. However, this is not a life of rampant hedonism, but rather one which is distinguished by her philosophy of life. She spent much of her life in school, ending with a PhD in philosophy. Having sought the answers of life, she seems to come to the conclusion that there are no answers. After receiving her degree she gave up on living, though she still walks, breathes, and talks. Her life is characterized almost as an “anti-life”. She lives to put down others and to repress the positives in their lives, spending her days in the same old outfit, continually reading and descending ever deeper into her own worst qualities. As an example, she chose to change her name to Hulga solely for the ugly sound it made and to spite her mother. Joy/Hulga considers herself an atheist who despises whatever meaning people have in their lives. There have been a series of difficulties in her life, but rather than choosing to overcome these issues, she allows them to overcome her.
Her apparent opposite is found in the person of Manley Porter, a Bible salesman from a small rural area “near a place.” He is a seemingly wholesome teenager, whose tales of his life reflect that of Joy’s, but rather than being beaten down he seeks to make the most of what he has been given. Although mildly irritating in his sales manner, he slowly ingratiates himself to Mrs. Hopewell as a true example of “good country people”, whose innocence is found to be extraordinary. Joy/Hulga sees this not as ingratiating, but as infuriating. Over dinner she decides to do use him as a source for her destructive instincts. She decides to first corrupt him, and then rebuild him in her own model. The next day they found themselves in a barn, where she thinks she can seduce and ruin this lad. His innocence, however, is stronger than her malevolence. He transforms her way of thinking, and gets into her very soul. Yet, at the very moment she is transformed, he reveals himself not as an angel, but as a demon, using her depths to achieve his own ends. He casts off his innocent personality as if it was a weighty costume and exposes himself as a person who truly does not believe in anything at all, and thus has no moral encumbrances. The façade of innocence hid the most diabolical of the whole group.
How, then, does this portrayal relate to a general theological description of sin? Stanley Grenz discusses one definition of sin as being a disruption of community, and I think that this is the model which is being narrated to us in the story. We do not find in this story a major act of evil per se, nor are the characters consumed with evil as typically it is typically defined. Rather, we find an overall portrayal of people unable to relate to each other in a way which builds the others up, people “exploiting and being exploited”, and generally alienating each other, whether intentionally or unintentionally. They use each other for their own means and ends, whatever these might be, with the final act of the theft of the artificial leg being a heightened illustration of what the characters have been doing at to each other the whole story. It is not necessarily specific actions, but rather a deeper level of attitudes and outlooks which prevent the characters from finding community either with each other and, ultimately, with God.
We find the two mothers as being irritating, distasteful, boorish, and generally not the kind of people one would like to have lunch with, but not necessarily overall bad people. Their sin, however, is great. Their own relationship is almost that of a “cold” war. Neither will let the other get the upper hand and will toss back and forth aphorisms as ammunition in their battles. Mrs. Freeman seeks to control those around her by knowing and getting involved with everyone’s business, setting herself up as a person who is privy to all and can therefore look down upon the problems and sicknesses of others. She destroys the communities in which she is in by her machinations to gain the knowledge she seeks, leading those around her to despise her presence in general.
Mrs. Hopewell is less of a clear illustration of sin. She does not do anything necessarily sinful, but rather her whole attitude is one of selfish regard. She places judgment upon people in her mind, while generally friendly, completely unable to reach a deep level of interaction. There is a continual seeking of the top position, so that she can have the moral high ground in her internal pronouncements about people. There is also the unique quality of being able to bring out and somehow utilize the worst aspects of everyone. This exploitation of people is very subtle, but goes to the depth of her being. There is not single action which alienates, but rather her whole persona prevents the formation of substantive community.
Joy/Hulga is a striking illustration of what Grenz calls hubris. He defines this as being “the pride which makes a man defy God, and the arrogant contempt which makes him trample on the hearts of his fellow man.” While she claims to be an atheist, her vehemence against God and Christianity seems to be more than a simple lack of a belief in a god, but rather an active defying of the God who brought her into existence and through various harsh experiences. Her response to this is to study Him out of existence through philosophy, and at the same time to seek to destroy those around her. The contempt which she has for others keeps her from developing herself, thus we see a clear example of what a rejection of community can accomplish. Whatever good she once had has been overwhelmed by the embracing of this sin, with her contempt for God and humanity reaching to the core of who she is, and completely preventing her from finding community with either man or God. Her seeming opposite, “Manley”, however, is not her opposite at all, but rather one who is her superior in the direction she wishes to go. He has broken all ties to community with people and God. He lives a life which is natural for a true atheist, and uses people for his own selfish ends. His alienation is complete, which is why his sin can be masked as innocence. .
Sin is often thought of as being specific actions or thoughts which are thought of as offending either God or society. A bad person is one who breaks the “rules” and a good person is one who follows them. Thus we find the title description of “good country people” referring to an ideal of wholesomeness and innocence as opposed to city folk or “trash”. Yet, as Grenz contends, sin is more pervasive than simple actions or lack thereof. It reaches to the core of our being, and at its essence seeks to destroy a feeling of harmonious existence. The actions which are often characterized as “sins” are oftentimes merely the physical outworking of a deep seated internal orientation of the self being more important than others. The fellowship we were meant to have with God and others, is destroyed by our own sinful selves acting against our own best good. Thus, in this story we find each character actively or passively acting in a way which prohibits harmonious relationship with others. Each character has a varying level of sinful actions which they actually do, but each character is virtually equal in their failure to pursue community and to live in harmony with others and with God. Thus, we find that there are no good people in this story, but rather people who “miss the mark”, and who are in need of salvation.
