Coalhouse is an extremely interesting character in Ragtime. He is a fictional character, yet is portrayed as being more real than some of the historical figures depicted in the book. The narrator speaks of his past as if it is something you could find in an encyclopedia despite his fictional status. But arguably the most interesting part of his character is the morality behind his actions. He starts an entire revolution due to the events that occurred after his encounter with the firemen. While many people say that the main motive behind his actions wasn't just his car, it can't be denied that his car does seem rather pivotal to his motives. Part of his demands has consistently been to turn over Conklin to him for his own personal justice, and the second is to have his car back in pristine condition. As a result, I feel like this affects the morality of his actions to some extent. But let's assume first that the car wasn't a motive at all. Even in that case, I would still say that his actions are morally gray at best. He and his crew are essentially acting as domestic terrorists right now, and they're killing people. I understand the reasons why, but blowing up firehouses doesn't seem like a proper way to achieve that. However, this could also be a level of postmodernism in this book. Doctorow might be showing the insanity behind society and revolution by making Coalhouse's broken car such a centerpiece to his revolution. It could also be poking fun at the materialistic nature of the American capitalist system, as we see with his depictions of Ford, Morgan, and others.
Personally, I always found his revolution and his character interesting just because of how he contrasted with every other character around him. Father says that he acted as if "he didn't know he was black," and the way he courted Sarah always seemed rather unusual. He didn't really fit in, and then he goes on to throw a revolution, which is completely unlike every other character except for Tateh and Emma Goldman. Even then, he's the one who initiates it, unlike Tateh or Mother's Younger Brother who get convinced to join one. This all contrasted with his portrayal as a historical figure, despite clearly not being one. As a whole, I found his character interesting and compelling, and wish we saw a little bit more about him.
It does seem like a wry and ironic commentary on 20th century American culture to have such a massive ordeal take place over damage to a car--like an early example of road rage taken too far, or a joke about how deeply our identities are associated with our cars in this culture. But beyond that, I always say that the Coalhouse conflict IS "about the car," but it's not *only* the car itself--this isn't an insurance dispute over damage to property in an accident. It's about what the car *represents*, and specifically the "provocation" that it represents in this context, with the proud, successful, professional Black man whose pride offends the racist firefighters (who are also jealous because they still have horse-drawn carriages to fight fires). For a man in Coalhouse's position, the car is a VERY big deal, an assertion of pride and identity and defiance of stereotypes, and so damage to his car (in such an explicitly racist way) is very much an attack on *him*. It's not just a question of property damage. It's what we'd call today a hate crime.
ReplyDeleteWe talked a bit in class about how Coalhouse's story was roughly based off of the fictional Michael Kohlhaas' plight. The destruction of Coalhouse's car paralleled the seizing of two of Kohlhaas' horses, and I really like the usage of an event like this in both the stories because the problem isn't really the vehicle, it's the stubborness of the corrupt government. Replacing the car or the horses is realistically very doable by the governments, and by making the replacement of those one of their only demands, they can really easily argue that all the damage and uproar happening is the government's sole fault.
ReplyDeleteI was struggling with trying to decide whether Coalhouse's actions were justified or not. On one hand, I can try to put myself in his shoes (as best I can) and understand the rage that built inside of him, but I think you're right: becoming a terrorist doesn't seen to be the right way to go about this. One of Coalhouse's goals in burning down the fire stations and getting into Morgan's library was to draw attention to himself, but we learn from the narrator that soon after, the situation is entirely forgotten about. I think Doctorow made a very conscience choice when writing Coalhouse's character. He's treated as a historical figure but "forgotten" in the way that so many similar injustices in the past have been. His character is certainly very interesting and, even now, I don't know where I stand in support of him. Great post!
ReplyDeleteIt’s interesting how you mentioned the fictionality of Coalhouse’s character and how he fits into this historical fiction trend. It seems that Coalhouse Walker is definitely fictional, but represents a greater historical trend, a revolution that challenges white expectations of African-Americans. Although he is fictional, he seems to have more purpose than any of the historical characters. This post really made me question what I know about Walker’s morality and historical fiction. Great job!
ReplyDelete