Jennifer brings up a great question. Why is the sexual assault of Tarwater implied at the end of "The Violent Bear it Away"? O'Connor is so graphic in other instances, but why so subtle here?
I have two thoughts. The first has to do with the timing of the story. Sexual assault is a much more accepted topic in literature and film these days than it was back then. For better or worse, audiences are accustomed to graphic sexual violence. O'Connor may have had to tone it down for the times. Especially as it was homosexual in nature.
Another possible explanation is that it parallels the assault on Bishop. As graphic as this story can be, when Tarwater kills him, we are left on the bank of the lake with Rayber. The death is implied and confirmed later. Same with Tarwater. I suspected he would be murdered, but in the end we learn he is assaulted.
There is also the notion that implied violence is more frightening than witnessed violence in literature. Could anything be creepier than the image of Bishop disappearing into the darkness, being taken away by Tarwater while we're left on the bank? Same for the sexual assault. The image of a 14-year-old boy getting dressed after being driven down a remote dirt road is more disturbing than anything O'Connor could have given us in way of description of the assault itself.
I liken this to "A Good Man is Hard to Find," when the Misfit has his henchmen systematically take the family into the woods to execute them. We don't see their deaths, and this makes it all the more unsettling.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I totally agree with you on how the violence within this story due to the fact that she vaguely mentions it is more unsettling. It just surprised me that within this story she decides to be vague about the assault and murder due to how repetitive O'Conner was with the kidnapping and all the time leading up to the murder, she continuosly has the stories repeated by the characters.
Post a Comment