I love O'Connor, I really do. Even though I prefer the Violent Bear it Away to Wiseblood.
Her writing is disturbing, though. She was writing also to convert the southern protestant and used exaggerated examples. But she was an amazingly talented woman.
To me Wiseblood is sort of about fate, or more appropriately Providence, and Hazel's inability to escape from his destiny.
I definitely admire O'Connor as a writer -- I think her style is brilliant, and she really captures the spirit of the American South. I just feel like I don't always "get" her. :)
I agree with you about the theme of Wise Blood...and [SPOILER ALERT] I love the irony of how Hazel doesn't believe in sin and atonement, yet in the end he punishes himself in an effort to "pay" for what he's done.
I'm a new reader to your blog and I've really enjoyed going through all your reviews and getting great book recommendations. I read Wise Blood a few months ago and I remember having similar thoughts at the end of the story. I was partly disturbed, partly amused, and partly amazed at O'Conner's ability to make the disease of nihilism and materialism seem so visible in one character. I don't really think that the theme was destiny...Hazel seems to think that it is his destiny to behave the way he does, and O'Conner seems to laugh at him. Most of Hazels troubles are self-inflicted, and Hazel doesn't have to accept the fact that he is forever miserable. Rather than it being about Hazel's inability to escape from his "destiny", I think it is more about Hazel's pride which keeps him from any sort of reconciliation with God. He dies, like Judas, repenting unto himself and completely alone - physically, emotionally, spiritually.
Apologies for the lengthy comment. Once I get started it is hard to stop. ;)
Spoilers aboundchristina_readsFebruary 18 2010, 14:25:58 UTC
Thanks very much! :) I agree with you that a lot of Hazel's problems were self-inflicted, but I also got a sense of destiny plaguing him; no matter where he ran, he couldn't escape the problem of belief.
Regarding the ending, I'm not sure Hazel died unredeemed. When the cop pushed Hazel's car off the cliff, I thought that might have been a turning point for him; it's after that incident that he blinds himself, lives in poverty, and starts mortifying himself. I thought that maybe he realized all the bad things he'd done (notably running over the copycat prophet!) and was trying to atone for them. Obviously he didn't do it perfectly! Also, at the very end, his landlady Mrs. Flood perceives him as being able to "see" something that she can't.
Of course, as I said in the original post, I have no idea whether I've interpreted this book correctly! These are just some of my impressions...I think I'll have to read it again at a later date and see if I get any new insights.
Re: Spoilers aboundknightleeFebruary 18 2010, 15:12:03 UTC
That is true, he did feel plagued, and you could even feel that. Perhaps I was more harsh on him than O'Conner intended the reader to be. I think his father had a great deal to do with the mess Hazel entangled himself in, because his father was both extreme and hypocritical. Hazel doesn't really seem to have the tools to get out of the mess that he is in, so he tries to fix it in the only way he knows how. I think I completely missed the meaning of the ending. I remember reading the last few words and thinking "Whaaa?" Your comment about the ending put it into a different perspective. Even after reading some of O'Conner's personal letters, I wasn't really sure how I was supposed to react to the story. It does deserve a second read, though.
Comments 6
Her writing is disturbing, though. She was writing also to convert the southern protestant and used exaggerated examples. But she was an amazingly talented woman.
To me Wiseblood is sort of about fate, or more appropriately Providence, and Hazel's inability to escape from his destiny.
Reply
I agree with you about the theme of Wise Blood...and [SPOILER ALERT] I love the irony of how Hazel doesn't believe in sin and atonement, yet in the end he punishes himself in an effort to "pay" for what he's done.
Reply
I read Wise Blood a few months ago and I remember having similar thoughts at the end of the story. I was partly disturbed, partly amused, and partly amazed at O'Conner's ability to make the disease of nihilism and materialism seem so visible in one character.
I don't really think that the theme was destiny...Hazel seems to think that it is his destiny to behave the way he does, and O'Conner seems to laugh at him. Most of Hazels troubles are self-inflicted, and Hazel doesn't have to accept the fact that he is forever miserable. Rather than it being about Hazel's inability to escape from his "destiny", I think it is more about Hazel's pride which keeps him from any sort of reconciliation with God. He dies, like Judas, repenting unto himself and completely alone - physically, emotionally, spiritually.
Apologies for the lengthy comment. Once I get started it is hard to stop. ;)
Reply
Regarding the ending, I'm not sure Hazel died unredeemed. When the cop pushed Hazel's car off the cliff, I thought that might have been a turning point for him; it's after that incident that he blinds himself, lives in poverty, and starts mortifying himself. I thought that maybe he realized all the bad things he'd done (notably running over the copycat prophet!) and was trying to atone for them. Obviously he didn't do it perfectly! Also, at the very end, his landlady Mrs. Flood perceives him as being able to "see" something that she can't.
Of course, as I said in the original post, I have no idea whether I've interpreted this book correctly! These are just some of my impressions...I think I'll have to read it again at a later date and see if I get any new insights.
Reply
I think I completely missed the meaning of the ending. I remember reading the last few words and thinking "Whaaa?" Your comment about the ending put it into a different perspective.
Even after reading some of O'Conner's personal letters, I wasn't really sure how I was supposed to react to the story. It does deserve a second read, though.
Reply
Overall, I doubt there's only one "right" interpretation of this book...it's definitely complex enough to support multiple interpretations!
Reply
Leave a comment