The Narrator in Ragtime
One of the factors that makes Ragtime so unique is its narrator and narration style throughout the book. Personally, I can’t pinpoint the narrator into exactly one category.
Although the narrator could be considered as objective, it
still seems to lead the readers to a certain conclusion in some matters, almost
narrating situations to us from a modern perspective. For example, in the
passage on page 34, the narrator recites facts, which are indeed truthful, but
in such a way that leaves the reader disgusted at the state of America. The
narrator tells the story of working America satirically from employers'
perspective, emphasizing that even children are dehumanized into being more
“agile than adults” but “most likely to lose their fingers”. The narrator also
hits readers with issue after issue with America, overwhelming us with the
dreadfulness that used to be normalized in the early 1900s. Even though the
facts themselves are horrific, the way the narrator presents them to us is as
if telling us, “you SHOULD be disgusted by this.”
This type of modern perspective continues to show in other
parts of Ragtime. When Father sees the immigrants on the boat on his way out on
his expedition, the narrator describes the immigrants as “filthy and
illiterate. They stank of fish and garlic. They had running sores. They had no
honor and worked for next to nothing. They stole. They drank. They raped their
own daughters. They killed each other casually”, portraying the general view of
immigrants that an American would have around 1912 (17). However, the narrator
soon goes on to tell the hardworking and genuine spirit of these immigrants:
“People stitched themselves to the flag. They carved paving stones for the
streets. They sang. They told jokes” (18). This opinion on immigrants is more
likely to be told by someone in the later 1900s, showing the historical
perspective of the narrator being able to contrast how certain things were
viewed at the time, then how they’re viewed “currently” (whenever these events
are being narrated to the reader).
Based on the historical perspective, my guess as to who
would be narrating this book is someone in 1975, around when the book was
published. If the narrator does however end up being someone in the storyline
of Ragtime, I would consider the narrator to be the little boy or the little
girl, as they would be the only ones young enough to provide a modern
perspective on the current matters. However, I look forward to more clues in
the narration that might suggest who our narrator is.
I agree that the narrator is most likely someone from 1975, probably even Doctorow himself. The main plot of the story seems to be a flashback to the early 1900s, and we even see small interjections of the 'present day,' like when he talks about it being '50 years after Houdini's death' and other similar moments. I agree with your analysis on the narrator's objectivity or lack thereof. Great post!
ReplyDeleteYeah I agree, the narrator is such a subtle technique Doctorow uses to influence the reader. By putting in writing the subconscious though processes of racists or factory owners of the 1910s, the narrator gives us a much more modern take on things. I think the thinking is pretty progressive even for the 1970s so I feel like the narration is designed to make people in the 1970s self reflect on prejudices or bad ideas they have. That was just my take.
ReplyDelete