Doctorow's depiction of J.P. Morgan doubles down on the irony and dramatics, successfully using one of the richest historic figures to dismantle what he stood for and what the world associates him with. This can be seen with Doctorow's depiction of J.P. Morgans internal dialouge, where he's characterized by his extreme ego, wealth, and views of the world. Doctorow makes a point to convey just how wealthy and succesful J.P. Morgan was, while also undermining his achievemnts in practically the same breath. "Pierpoint Morgan was that classic American hero, a man born to extreme wealth who by dint of hard work and multiplies the family fortune till it is out of sight... He was a monarch of the invisible, transnational kingdom of capital whose sovereignty was everywhere granted." Morgan is described as a "classic American hero," which is usually characterized as someone who, through hard work and selflessness, created a better America. This character is not someone who was already born into great wealth, like Morgan, who then increased it exponentially through the exploitment of others. The idea of an "American Hero" that Doctorow references would be more fitting, if anything, to someone who fought against the wealth gap and poverty that Morgan fostered.
The irony in Morgan's depiction peaks with his obsession with reincarnation and egyptian gods. He believes that his wealth and success, a level of which is shared by no one, gives him an understanding of the world that distinguishes him from his peers. This is true -- it does indeed differentiate him, but not in a way that makes him better morally than those around him. Throughout history, wealth has been associated with morality, even occasionally reaching extremes where a specific individual or group is worshiped. Even if people don't worship kings or pharaohs like they did in the past, capitalism's glorification of wealth and the accumilation of it can lead to a similar reverence of the wealthy, like J.P. Morgan. Doctorow makes a point of reminding the reader that Morgan is still human, often at his expense, like with the running gag of his nose. By showing the absurdity of his ego and emphasizing his imperfections in spite of his wealth, Doctorow uses irony and the face of capitalism in that era to dismantle a core aspect of a mindset that perpetuates capitalism. Even though Ragtime doesn't limit itself to historical accuracy, with frequent creative liberties and overtly fictional elements, it incorporates very real historical figures and issues to send a message. Having an agenda like this is inheret to both history and fiction, which like any piece of media, has an unextricable bias due to being a human creation, for the better or the worse.
You make an excellent point about how Doctorow's strongest irony in this novel is typically delivered in a mock "omniscient" voice--the "godlike" perspective that is somehow present on the deck of the ship, alone with Morgan and the seagull; or deep in the chamber at the core of the Great Pyramid at Giza; or in Morgan's "secret room" where he keeps his stolen sarcophagus. There's this sense of an unhindered narrator who can expose these characters in less flattering moments, with no sense of restraint--and Doctorow often likes to flaunt his "access" to these hidden pockets of history, later flexing in an essay about how he's convinced that all the stuff he's "made up" is actually true.
ReplyDeleteBut this same quality is precisely what makes his narration around Coalhouse really stand out: not only does he not treat Coalhouse with the same kind of palpable irony that you discuss here--he also doesn't assume the "godlike perspective" with this one character. As we discussed, he treats this fictional creation as "historical," claiming to have limited info on his early years; never getting into his head directly; scattering qualifying phrases like "must have" or "perhaps" when narrating Coalhouse's decisions. So I see a connection here between irony and a kind of ironic (!) omniscience, and a lack of irony and a kind of "humility" on the narrator's part. (Some readers get really irked by what they see as the "arrogance" of Doctorow's ironic narrator--his arrogance is tamped down when it comes to Coalhouse, for some reason.)
Hi Chloe, I agree that Doctorow's approach to history is super unique. I like the examples you picked of how he uses irony to portray a message. Although he doesn't directly address the audience, Doctorow definitely has a sense of humor.
ReplyDeleteHey Chole, I like how you walked us through an example of Doctorow's usage of real historical people to make a point about society, which in this case was Morgan and his ego. One of my favorite moments in Ragtime of Doctorow using history in an ironic way was when Houdini meet the Archduke, who congratulates Houdini for inventing the airplane. Aside from being a funny scene, it highlights how confused and stupid the rulers of Europe were, which is something Morgan also realizes. Doctorow uses moments like these to tie the book in with the real world, while also bringing in his own interpretations. Overall, nice post!
ReplyDeleteI agree with your interpretation of Doctorow's understanding of literary bias being ever-present in history as well as fiction, and how he toys with that by satirizing it. Like how he enters some historical figures heads with certainty or how he treats Coalhouse with the uncertainty of history. Also, I like the idea of Doctorow undermining capitalism through his satire. How do these points connect? I think that perhaps the connecting factor between his undermining of capitalism and undermining of bias is the way Doctorow uses historical figures to display true disparities-- as well as to play with certainty of their thought.
ReplyDeleteThank you for this post Chloe! I think this topic is absolutely worth noting throughout the novel. I was particularly intrigued by the limitations of the narrator's omniscience. It is very interesting which character's inner dialogue as you mentioned with Morgan. It really changes our view of the character, or rather historical figure. I appreciated your view of the irony Doctorow uses when writing about important historical figures, especially those who were very wealthy or powerful and that the reader would almost certainly already know.
ReplyDeleteHi Choel!!! I really liked your blog. I thought it was interesting how you used Morgan to show how Doctorow was trying to send a message. Even though Doctorow likes to add fictional ideas to historical characters. He does this with Morgan, and I think that you analyzed it well. Good job!
ReplyDeleteHey Chloe! I really liked how you used Doctorow' use of J. P Morgan to highlight the irony in how society glorifies wealth. I also think your point about Morgan's obsession with reincarnation and Egyptian Gods was great, since it underlines just how absurd his ego was while tying it back to a broader theme of wealth being treated like godliness or divinity. The detail you mentioned about his nose was a super nice touch as well, because it shows how Doctorow uses even small, even mocking, details to cut through the myth of Morgan's power! I think you did a great job on this blog!
ReplyDelete