The recursive, naturalistic pragmatism displayed in Maggie:
A Girl of the Streets is Crane's way of contrasting with the American ideal.
Much like Sinclair in The Jungle, Crane's road to the American dream is full of
potholes and oncoming traffic. Here, Crane illustrates his American dream
through Maggie, who wants exactly the antithesis of her surroundings: a stable
family life with her "beau" Pete, where they go out to theater and
dancing (instead of always going to the bars and then home in a drunken rage),
and some wealth (in chapter 6, she thinks that "He must have great sums of
money to spend," because of his perceived "elegant occupation").
The American dream is then stability, some semblance of monetary success and
"elegance", none of which Maggie or her family possess.
The reader sees at first the violence in the home resultant
of a deadly cocktail of alcoholism and poverty, and afterwards Jimmie's and
Maggie's reactions indicate both their familiarity and horror with the
situation. They shudder in the corner or outside the apartment, not yet
realizing the extent to which the recursion of Crane's naturalistic pragmatism
applies. That is, through enough experience or knowledge of failure breeds
violence, anger, and bitterness, which are among the few things her family does
have. Her parents already believe this, especially seen when their young child
Tommie dies and there is little mourning; we later see Jimmie realizing this,
easily taking the place of his father after his death. With Maggie, though,
this pragmatic belief is non-existent: she is still out searching among the
dregs and darkness for a client, some solace or hope, on the lowest levels of
society. She is always controlled, whether by her mother and father, mother and
brother ("goin' to the devil" incidents), her work in the factory,
her clients as a whore, necessity to leave, and her mortality, which runs
exactly opposite of the American dream (freedom, stability) and individualism
(forging your own destiny). Thus, when Mag's mother forgives her in the end,
she is at least in part forgiving her for still believing in the American
dream, that she could leave her surroundings and poverty, despite the failure
of her forbears and the constant reminders of her station (i.e. through enough
failure, you should learn to change your worldview, in the mother's mind). The
only way out of Crane's impoverished naturalism is death, and Maggie finally
exits in this way.
From a pragmatic point of view, I see Parker and Higgins' writing as pointing to something that might elude readers at first. It was evident that Maggie was on a downward spiral the further into the book I read. At the end, it becomes even more evident that she has no bottom. The writing becomes darker and darker, as do Maggie's actions and brutal ploys to solicit even the most grotesque persons on the darkest streets. It became evident to me that Maggie was making a transformation into her mother. The irony, or possible lack thereof, is overwhelming. I think the novel is written in a naturalistic light as well, and Maggie is a product of her environment. The only thing that was stopping Maggie's ultimate, complete transformation into her mother was death. I think this point alone suggests a naturalistic theme and tragically illuminates a point that is worse than death itself for Maggie. I think Crane shows, in a darkly naturalistic light, that the American dream is unachievable for the people of the Bowery. No matter Maggie's intentions to break free of the cycle she is sucked in deeper than the rest and spit out in death alone. I think Crane taunts the hope for the American dream in the form of optimism for Maggie to break free of her surroundings in her death. Crane is instilling in the reader that the world is an unforgiving place. There is irony in this because I believe Crane is trying so hard to show the point that the world is unforgiving so that he may forge some forgiveness for the characters in the minds of his readers.
ReplyDelete