Is Sex the Root of Racism?: An Essay about Shirley Jackson's: Flower Garden

    
The Lottery and Other Stories by Shirley Jackson
My rating: 5 of 5 stars


 "The Lottery" was stunning.  I read it twice to make sure I picked up on the clues that foreshadowed the ending.  At first, I didn't understand how the other five works were even in the same book.   I just didn't understand what was so scary about "The Other Stories" Then something happened in my life.  And the chill of the Lottery suddenly stood out to me much more clearly.     

       Shirley Jackson writes horror for polite white women.  She teases them for being tight lipped and proper, pokes at them for being terrified of what what other people might say or think.  "The Lottery and Other Stories" are tales of what happens when you find yourself on the outside of the society that raised you.  When you make just that one wrong choice and suddenly you are "Put Out".

 

   Among the other stories "Flower Garden" stood out to me the most.  A young woman, Mrs Winning, is the newest member of the Winning family, the oldest family in a of their small  Vermont town.  She makes friends with a new comer, Mrs. MacLane.  Mrs. MacLane is a widow from the city. She's beautiful and has bought the lovely cottage that Mrs. Winning has always wanted to live in.

photo by Ksena Chernaya 

     They become fast friends and get along well until the widow MacLane defends Billy Jones, a mulatto boy, from being harassed by her son and the Winning's boy.  Mrs. Winning is stunned.  She can't believes that MacLane went so far as to make her own son apologize to the "colored" boy.  To make it worse she then hires the boy's father, Mr. Johns, as a gardener.

       Mrs. Winning tries to warn Mrs. MacLane; she points out that all of Johns children are mixed with white, and that their mother moved away. Mrs. MacLane doesn't hear the warning.  She continues to behave "oddly".

    The story is told from Mrs Winning so we can see her react in horror as the town suggests that she warn Mrs. MacLane, seeing as how they are friends.  Mrs. Winning doesn't want the community to think she'd be friends with someone they are obviously turning against. 

    When Mrs. MacLane finally catches up to Mrs Winning she asks her if her new gardener is
the reason everyone has suddenly turned on her.  Mrs. Winning smiles and lies.  She even promises to visit.    In her head though she's disgusted that Mrs. MacLane would openly complain and even more so that she'd blame the poor Negroes for her troubles.    

    "The nerve of her, trying to blame the colored folks" (99) After all between Mrs. MacLane and Mr. Johns, she's the one with the all the power. It's not the Negro's fault that she is taking advantage of them. 

      This is how so many white people talk about race, even today.  "I'm not racist but -"  "I'd never say that word."  "I just don't see why they can't get over it."  "We just want everything to stay "nice" and "pleasant", equal and never ever changing."  

    What puzzled me, after reading this, was the hypocrisy.  The black man is a handy-man in town. Others had hired him before.  What was the big deal?

      The problem, I gradually realized, wasn't what he was doing - it was who everyone thought he was doing.  Mrs. Winning was trying to warn MacLane that the man was unmarried, and that he already had a history of sleeping with white women.    They'd be alone together in that house without any supervision. "People will talk!" 

    

    The problem is sex!  

    Is sex the root of a racism?

   

    "Flower Box" by Shirley Jackson goes hand in hand with  "The Boy Detective and the Summer of 74 by Art Taylor. 

 In this story a young man at the cusp of puberty stumbles upon a mystery that no one cares about but him.  He discovers several large bones in the neighbor’s yard and wonders where they are from.

  He throws himself into the mystery to distract himself from the fact that this is the last summer of his childhood.  His friends are too interested in a torn page from a playboy magazine to help him. His father is always lecturing him about the approaching responsibilities of manhood.  A new girl in town further complicates his feelings by taking interest in the case he's trying to solve. 

     Everything comes to a head when Cooper learns that he is to meet this girl for a play date.  His mother is nagging him with questions about her when, thanks to his rising hormones, Cooper solves the mystery.  To distract his mother from his personal thoughts and feelings he blurts out his conclusion. Thus, utterly ruining the lives of two adults that have nothing to do with him, the girl, or the end of his childhood.  

*spoiler!**spoiler!**spoiler!**spoiler!**spoiler!**

    Cooper discovered that the Negro butcher from the far side of town visits the lonely white widow next door after dark.  The butcher brings a soup bone to keep the widow’s dog quiet when he comes into the yard. It's that chewed up soup bone that capture's Cooper's curiosity.   

*End of Spoiler***End of Spoiler***End of Spoiler**

    Because Cooper was nosey and insisted on being a detective, he may have gotten the butcher killed. Because of the racism of the rest of the town, that lonely woman was probably
left traumatized and further ostracized when Cooper's father, and the other men of the town, descended on her home to reinforce their social order.   No one cared about the widow, and she’s not likely to ever marry again after this incident.  The butcher was a threat purely because "We can't the other's think it's ok.  We let one get away with it, others may try". 

And because Cooper's just a little white boy, he moves on with his life oblivious to the damage he's done until well into adulthood. and is reflecting on the last summer of his childhood.  The worse thing that happened to him, was that his father stopped going to the black side of town to get stakes after that.  

    Like the Flower Garden the characters in the story do not acknowledge the injustice of the situation.  The characters are on the side of the status quo.  They keep the their side of town pure.  A black man vanishes and everyone just goes on with their lives as though nothing happened.  

    The horror lies in the shadow of innocence.  That's what Shirley Jackson was writing.   I didn't understand it fully until I myself was married to a white man, gave birth to our little light skinned daughter, and began to experience the disguised kindness of “well meaning” strangers - the doll-like smiles, the out of nowhere compliments "Oh what a beautiful child!" "What lovely hair!" from people who would not otherwise have seen me.  It's my own family code switching in front of me to talk to my husband, then getting hand-written responses declining the invitation to our wedding.  It's the not really being welcomed at Christmas anymore because my presence makes a certain uncle fighting mad.  It's folks on the white side of the family not existing until after the election in 2016, then suddenly being very vocal about their beliefs, but not about me or us.  I'm “one of the good ones".

    Its idiots marching in the streets, and barking online about being replaced.

It's about a black man being gunned down while jogging, not because he looked at house being built, but because his killer's daughter was dating a black guy.  

    Racism is about sex.  About keeping the races separated so that we always know who’s them and who’s us. 

How would Shirley Jackson have written the years following the 2016 election?  What young Art Taylors will grow up to speak of the horrors outside of their bedroom windows that they didn't see until they were older?  Where do we go from here, now that the curtain has been pulled back, and we see how nasty the glass has been all this time?  

Photo by cottonbro studio:

View all my reviews

Review: Children of Virtue and Vengeance

Children of Virtue and Vengeance by Tomi Adeyemi
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

  

*spoiler alert* 

Children of Virtue and Vengeance by Tomi Adeymi  will leave you ready to fight!

    This book two in the series.  If you have not already please check out my reviews for Book 1 Children of Blood and Bone as well as Book 3 Children of Anguish and Anarchy.

What I liked:

    The writing is great!  The mental illustrations, the scenery, the idea of the dark mountains against the indigo sky - the setting of the rooms and buildings, were all very vivid and beautiful.  

 You really feel the emotions of every character.  All of their motivations are clear - even if I don't agree with them.

What I loved:

        This plot was very surprising.  Talk about stepping up the tension from the previous volume.  Not only to do the royals have  magic now, their magic is stronger than the that of the maji people!  What are the God's trying to say with that move?  

    Amari's mom is worse than her father ... and because her father was killed the mother is a maniac?  With no idea that her husband was in love with his general.  The drama!

        Amari isn't able to just be natural chosen leader of the rebels.  If she was male or on TV I'm sure this would have gone differently, but Tomi is making her main characters work for every win they get.  Even Zelie who is the natural leader of the rebels is having her emotions about it challenged.  This is great for tension.  

         

    What I disliked:

    All the characters are infuriating!  I know that they are desperate teenagers fighting a war against evil adults who are stronger and smarter than they are. But it is still a frustrating read.  I was yelling at this book begging Inan to do something helpful, and pleading with Amari to NOT fall for her mother's traps. I shook my head at Zelie so much I got a cramp in my neck.

    Don't get me wrong!  I totally understand!   All the adults these kids would have relied on were killed before the first book started. Baba was a sickly, destroyed, old man being cared for by his kids. He therefore was not really a role model. He was someone who needed protecting. The only role model Zelie had was Mama Agba her fighting/sewing instructor- so all she knows how to do really is fight.

    Amari and Inan were raised by monsters. They behave like children who were abused every moment of their lives, because despite being royalty they were. The fact that Amari held it together as long as she did was testament to her willpower. 

The council of elders are all less than 20 years old and just chomping at the bit for revenge.

    But it's so frustrating, and a little cliche', that not one of the young adult characters stops to think:

    "Maybe we shouldn't leave the sacutuary completely unprotected now that the evil queen knows where we live"!

    And  Amari pulling a full Daenerys Targaryen, technically killing all those people, is very so disappointing!  I don't know how her character comes back from that.   I can, at the very least, see how she thought the ends would justify the means . . . had it worked but she couldn't have thought, for a moment, that she would be cheered for actions or seen as any less crazy than her mother.  

Without decent parents these characters are just charging straight at death without consideration of the consequences and that made the lader half of this book very hard to read.

     I supposed, my raised emotions is a sign of good writing.  I don't like to judge a trilogy series based on the second book, because it's supposed to the most frustrating story, how else to get anyone to read book three?. 

 I'll wait til the third book in the series to judge weather or not it was a worthwhile adventure.

Here's hoping it turns out better than Rise of Skywalker *-*

Book Recommendations 

Children of Blood and Bone - by Tomi Adeyemi

Children of Anguish and Anarchy - by Tomi Adeyemi

Court of Thrones and Roses - Sarah J Mass

Monstress - Marjorie Liu and Sana Taked

View all my reviews 

Review: Madam Ricketts: A Story of Murder, Deceit and Dark Humor

Madam Ricketts: A Story of Murder, Deceit and Dark Humor by C.D. Hancock
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

I just finished this book and  I ran to my computer just to come here and say “Wow!”

   

    I did not see that ending coming.  C.D. Hancock writes from multiple points of view in this wild, weird, not-quite-western novel.  The base of the story is set with two unreliable narrators, a madam with questionable motives, and the reporter whose recalling her story but has been denied paper, pens, recorder, and sanity.  It delves into a history of heroes who become villains, families that become enemies, and ghosts that thirst for vengeance long after they’ve decayed.  

     What I liked 

    The diverse characters. There are cowboys and Indians but this story is not a typical western.   

     Black people not only exist in this wild wilderness, they surprise you.  

      There are wives, daughters, and whores but no damsels in distress waiting for a white knight, these ladies have good aim and are as patient as snakes waiting for the perfect time to strike.  

What I loved: 

    The adult themes are not introduced for shock value.  Due to the nature of the story there is violence and sexual abuse, but both are used as common sense plot points that move the story.  The violence isn’t gruesome for the sake of horror.  The sexual abuse is mentioned and implied, but never dwelt on in pornographic detail.  I did not come away from this book with post traumatic shock like I have some other novels.  

What I hated:

      Was the ending!  Not in a  Game of Thrones “Why did he do that!?” kind of way.  

But in “No!  How?  What!? No!” kind of way. It’s more like the last minute of the first Saw movie kind of way.   

    No neat button endings here. It’s as messy and satisfying as a crushed roach.  And I’m happy to find that there is a sequel.  

This was a fun read that I obtained for free and was asked to give feedback on!  I'm happy I was able to help.

If you every need feedback or a review for your work please contact me:

pbyeary.com

or s Porsche Yeary on Upwork.

Thanks for reading.  I'll see you on the next page.  

View all my reviews

Review: Mama Solves a Murder

Mama Solves a Murder by Nora DeLoach
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

  This book took a while for me to into.  It has a slow some what choppy build up to the plot, so I was tempted to put it down at first.  But once they started really detecting I was into it.  And the stakes elevated nicely as the clues were collected and put together.  

    The main character Simone puts herself as the "Watson" to her mother's "Sherlock".  She calls herself the "Della Street" to her mother's "Perry Maison".  As a writer, I understand this method for writing a mystery.  You want your genius detective to be able have cloak and dagger element.  You want to hide the "ah-ha!" clue from the audience until the big reveal.  The best way to do that is to have the reader follow an assistant that isn't quite as quick as the detective.  To be honest that is exactly what I find frustrating about Sherlock Holmes mysteries.  

What I Liked:

Simone is a paralegal.  She has a job that requires her to follow the book when it comes to collecting evidence.  That ads a bit of tension to Mama's intuition and instincts method which I found enjoyable. 

I currently live in Atlanta.  The atmosphere was pretty accurate, though not a time was spent on building the setting.  The foods were accurate.  The character of Mama was very familiar.  In fact a lot of time spent on character building which I did appreciate.  

What I Loved:

Both mysteries were very intriguing.  Mama is busy studying a series of arsons that killed her cousin, and niece.  Both women had reason to suspect that the elder cousin's neighbor was molesting his daughter.  The elder cousin told her daughter just before her house was burned to the ground.  Later, after telling Mama, aka Candy, about it the daughter is also a victim of arson.  Mama suspects the neighbor but she has to prove it.  

Simone, meanwhile, finds herself trying to help an old college roommate whom she hasn't spoken to in ages.  The classmate admits to having shot and killed a man in cold blood.  All the evidence points to her having being a cold blooded stalker and murderer.  

Simone, feeling under qualified  to pull the information she needs out of witnesses, inlists her mother's help as Mama has maxed out her speechcraft tree.  Through these interviews Mama starts to believe that maybe Cheryl wasn't the killer after all.  

What I Didn't Like:

    The first two acts of the story as a big rushed.  The result is a lot of telling, and not a lot of showing.  We are told over and over at the beginning that Mama is a genius, and a charmer, and that she can talk anyone into teller her their secrets - but we don't see her do it.  Simone just summerizes things Mama has done in the past.  We are told that Simon's boss is a legal eagle obsessed with finding the truth of things, but we aren't really shown it by his actions.  We are told that Simone is just as smart and quick witted as her mother.  But when she bows out of most testy situations to let her mom handle them, even when it's her job, we don't see it.  

  

In fact it isn't until after the above mentioned build up, that the story actually starts to really get interesting.  It feels as though the author, Nora, just wanted to hurry up and get to the mystery.  But as a result it takes half the book to get interesting.  That being said, once it starts to build up, it really builds up. Once Mama is on the case, interviewing very willing witnesses and asking the questions few other people have time for, the story does start to pull you along.   

The editors did this book no favors.  It feels as though a lot of good stuff was cut out, and lot of bad stuff was left in.  There are typos, and small plot holes.  There are places you can tell were shortened for word count but left unanswered questions.   There was a plot point or two that could have been omitted, and character building for characters we didn't really care about.  For example, the point  of Simone's friend Donna insisting on taking her on a double, half-blind- date knowing that Simone has a boyfriend.  It was a big deal, worth a chapter of dialogue that Simone didn't want to go.  But does when her boyfriend Cliff says he is ok with it.  But the story does not follow the date.  In fact no part of that situation leads to a clue, or follows the mystery at all.   The only possible reason for it was to show that  Simone's boyfriend Cliff was willing to trust her because he's also a lawyer and working on a nasty divorce case. Or to show that Donna didn't care about her bff's relationships?  Idk.

***SPOILERS!***

   

         I also didn't care much for the endings. At first I thought both mysteries were a bit heavy handed with the dramatic bad guys.    But after learning that Norma DeLoach worked as a social worker in Hampton South Carolina the horror of these cozy mysteries makes more since.  

     

            Turns out that in the arson case, the neighbor to the elder cousin, wasn't just molesting his daughter, and beating his wife.  He was also molesting his son... a sixteen year old is now, because his house burned down, murder cats and starting fires in his new foster home.  Mama concludes that since he's murder cats, and starting fires, he's likely the one who strangled his little sister and left our body to bloat in a stream for three days near where he camped in the woods.   Mama and Simone arrive for a "wellness check" just in time to save his foster mother from being killed by him!  

    It makes me wonder how often do social workers come across murders who are teenagers, or even children!  I bet it's more often than we'd care to think about.  

    In Simone's case, it turns out that the man Cheryl shot was not only a serial child stalker, kidnapper, rapist, AND murderer!!! He was also born a hermaphrodite and hated women.  Turns out Cheryl was one of his victims - the only one who ever managed to get away.  She remembered him when she saw but she didn't remember why she knew him.  She says that she got intensly sexual feelings from the sight of his face!    So she stalked him trying to recover her memory.   She shot him...but she did not kill him.  

    At first I was disturbed and insulted by the idea, that a victim of molestation would be arroused by the sight of her attacker so many years ago.  But knowing the author's background she likely pulled this detail from real life research she's done, maybe real interviews.  The idea is iky, but profound; scary and educational and all those things I love in a good book.  

    And while I appreciate the driving force  behind the mystery....how did she shoot him without killing him!  I do not like the conclusion. 

    This monster of a human being had a heart attack meer seconds before Cheryl should shoot him to death?  He set her up to come to his office and watch him die to escape justice for his crimes?  How infuriating!  

     Again, I'm sure that as a social worker Norma DeLoach may have dealt with unsatisfying endings in her real world cases.  I'm not so much upset at how the woman was denyed justice.  That would be wishing she had shot him, and therefor would have had to go to jail for his murder.  No I like that she didn't (or may not have) killed her abuser.   I'm up because I honestly feel like there were a few too many coincidences in this plot that were ignored.  

Namely this:

      Cheryl and her friends just happen to take the same exact vacation as the man who molested her twenty-five years ago - a vacation that the he didn't want to take but his wife Irene planned from start to finish?  Cheryl and her friends just happen to make friends with the wife of the man who raped her when she was five, and hung out with her most of the trip because he was "sick" in his room.  A wife whom we later learn was beaten into a miscarrage when her husband learned she was pregnant and is now suspicious that her husband was a monster, and has been looking into his behavior?  A wife who was more than happy to spill all of her beans to Mama TWICE?  

 

         I'm just saying, that after convincing the jury that the molester died of natural causes before Cheryl shot him, there should have been a last and final chapter with Mama telling Irene, in Simone's presence, 

     "I know you set your husband up to be murdered by Cheryl". or. "I know you poisoned Harold and agitated his heart condition in some undetectable way... I saw this clue last time I was here."  and "Maybe you did or didn't expect Cheryl to take the fall for what you did". "But I'm giving you a pass because you stopped this monster before he could kill anymore children."   

 Without this as the ending the book leaves me unsatisfied.  

View all my reviews