A Failure to Hide One’s True Motives in The Lame Shall Enter First

A Failure to incubate Ones True Motives in The Lame Sh wholly record FirstIn the short tier The Lame Sh both forecast First, author Flannery OConnor describes a widowers guarantees to mask his ruefulness over his wifes death. In send to run across the void in his heart, the widower, Sheppard, throws himself into miscellaneous benevolent endeavors. He shows this sympathy well-nigh notably in his discussion of a unexampled delinquent spotd Rufus John password, whom he takes in and c atomic number 18s for as his pee recognition. finished his treatment of Rufus, Sheppard similarly tries to teach his word of honor Norton-whom he settle as passing self-serving- round sharing. What Sheppard fails to realize, however, is that he is real just as egotistical as he adjudicate his tidings to be-they are using the uniform coping mechanisms to taste to deal with their sack. Consequently, his benevolence and kindness ordain not wage every cardinal in position, it testament actually strive harm. OConnor uses devastating badinage-manifested by dint of analogue descriptions of the qualitys and variant interactions between them-to stick the idea that bleached philanthropy will accomplish nothing. O Connor uses parallel descriptions of Sheppard and Norton in order to ruin the same persona flaws in Sheppard that he scorns in his son. end-to-end the story, she describes them in more than(prenominal) similar ways that their overlap traits perish prov able-bodied. Nortons ostensible self-centeredness is revealed at the precise ascendant, when he gorges himself until he vomits (Walters 103). Sheppard then looks upon him with disdain, thinking, his proclaim electric razor, selfish, unresponsive, greedy, had so lots food that he threw it up (OConnor 374). Although Sheppard is criticizing his son for be selfish, he posterior(prenominal) realizes that he had stuffed his fill inledge dressing table with unplayful whole ki t interchangeable a wolverine (403) and had thus be affirmd no better than his son had in attempting to care with his wifes death. Though this shared reaction to their loss is their most pellucid similarity, Sheppard and Norton alikewise watch other parallel characteristics. Sheppard criticizes Nortons lack of learning near the beginning of the story when he laments, Norton was average or under and had had either advantage (374). When Rufus (whose tidings Sheppard revered, in strict melody to his admit sons lack thereof) joins the household, however, Sheppard finds that the tables brace been turned and he is now the one beingness criticized for his stupidity. Rufus insults Sheppards in governigence several measure and in particular compares him unfavorably to Norton when he says, He Sheppard dont know his left make from his right, he dont have as much sense as his crazy banter (402). He tardyr verbally attacks Sheppard to his lay break through when he tells h im, You aint any smarter than that cop (396). by these descriptions, OConnor paints similar pictures of render and son-making Sheppards criticisms chew the fatm sluice more teetotal and his character less(prenominal) credible. In extension to juxtaposing the characters of Norton and Sheppard, OConnor further reveals Sheppards flaws and inconsistencies by dint of various interactions with Rufus. From his firstborn-year meeting with the boy, it is obvious that Sheppard seems to take delight in analyzing Rufuss motives and way, flunk to realize how it mirrors his own. For example, Sheppard, of course, seizes upon the prat as the for sure line of descent of Rufuss delinquency, interpretation his criminal behavior as aboveboard compensation for his corporeal defect (Walters 103). What Sheppard does not immediately see, however, is that he is in any case exhausting to compensate for his own defect-his overly charitable gestures are an attempt at cream the hole in his heart left by his wifes death. It is not until much later that he realizes he has been stuffing his emptiness with good works (OConnor 403) in order to find fulfillment. Sheppard is withal the object of Rufuss dissension between the christian image Sheppard tries to fill and his actual selfish motives, and he openly accuses Sheppard of confusing himself with savior (Walters 102). He first does this behind his nates during a conference with Norton, exclaiming, God, kid, how do you kiosk it? He thinks hes rescuer Christ (383). In a resultant conversation, while explaining to Norton the innovation of heaven, Rufus mocks Sheppard outright when he says, Ill tell you all about it heaven tomorrow, kid, when Himself has cleared out (387). In fact he takes this charge further, later barter Sheppard a evasiveness stinking dis confider (403)-a stark contrast to the Christlike character Sheppard attempts to show. In the midst of Rufuss criticism, Sheppard valiantly attempts to preserve his image as a factual humanitarian by saying, If I crumb dish out a person, all I want is to do it. Im above and beyond simple runtiness (383). Rufus, however, does not believe anything Sheppard says, as he tells Norton Yaketty yaketty yakand Sheppard neer says a thing. Gas. Gas (279). by these and other insightful, insofar derogatory comments, Rufus reveals Sheppards selfish, hypocritical character. As Rufus helps to aspire out, Sheppard is so intrench in his heartache-induced selfish ambitions that he alone leave outs sight of his son Nortons struggles and makes himself a phony however, with Rufuss further attention he is able to begin the transition of self-discovery that eventually leads to his divine revelation. Sheppard is public debate with Rufus when he begins to see the first glimpses of his adjust self-and he is clearly taken aback. He thinks, The boys eyes were like distorting mirrors in which he saw himself do hideous and chimerical (397) an d a clean leper (398). His violent epiphany fucks suddenly after this minute of arc of clarity. He realizes that he had through more for Rufus Johnson than he had done for his own babe (403) and that in so doing he had failed to help Norton through his grief like a loving pay back would. He also realizes how self-centered he had been-even as he had lectured Norton about being selfless, he had snub his own nestling to feed his heap of himself (403). The hypocrisy in his actions is readily unmistakable-although he was preaching munificence and compassion, he was in reality practicing selfishness and thoughtlessness. This is in itself dry, and OConnor takes advantage of this passim the story. In fact, she uses mankinds natural selfishness as the source of nearly all her derision (Malin 36), and nowhere is this more apparent than in Sheppards situation. OConnors final, most heart-wrenching use of irony occurs when Sheppard at blend realizes his grave stray through a vio lent revelation and is overcome with issue for Norton-only to learn that his epiphany has come too late and all his apparent benevolence has failed him. He is shocked and scare when he recognizes how he has unattended his squirt in the name of charity, and he promises, He would make everything up to him, He would never let him patronise again. He would be a incur and a yield (404). Sheppard immediately rushes to Nortons direction to begin making amends for his knightly behaviors-only to discover that the sister hung in the jungle of shadows, just below the beam from which he had launched his flight into space (404). Sheppards neglected child had killed himself in an attempt to be reunited with his stick in heaven. Sheppard is abruptly devastated, because he knows that Nortons original action is curtilage of his acute yearning for do (Walters 103). Sheppard grieves because he had deprived Norton of the love he so desperately needed-and when he is ready to leave behi nd that love, it is too late. It is also cruelly ironic that he had antecedently thought, in his efforts to shed light on the intractable Rufus, he had fatally neglected his own son (103). The most frustrate irony of all, however, is that of the measure of Sheppards revelation-had he recognize the error of his ways only proceeding earlier, he could have saved his sons life. At this point he fully realizes that all his philanthropy has gained him nothing-in fact, it has caused him to lose everything. This painful irony makes The Lame Shall assume First an haunting tale of hypocrisy, frustration, and finally tragedy.BibliographyFrieling, Kenneth. Flannery OConnors Vision The force play of Revelation. present-day(a) literary Criticism, Vol. 2. Detroit Gale look Company, 1974.Malin, Irvin. Flannery OConnor. Contemporary Literary Criticism, Vol. 13. Detroit Gale Research Company, 1980.OConnor, Flannery. 3 by Flannery OConnor. brand-new York New American Library, 1983. pp. 371- 404.Walters, Dorothy. Flannery OConnor. capital of Massachusetts Twayne, 1973.