I want to make a good list - not a complete one, but a solid one - of the people in our stories who have been represented as either intellectuals or as morally superior people, and I want to see how many of them fit in with the pattern of being lame-o. I understand that "lame-o" is not a very academic word, but I think it fits. Many of these stories seem to have been written in a way that will leave the reader feeling like one of the characters is undeniably messing things up and isn't doing what he/she really ought to be doing. Basically, I'm using the word "lame-o" for any of the figures who made their mark on the stories by doing things that the reader (okay, maybe just I) disagreed with.
Porter
Maria Concepcion: The apparently morally superior person in this story is Maria herself, and while she ended up committing a mortal sin by killing the other Maria, I wouldn't really identify her as "lame-o." She doesn't, in my opinion, kill the Maria Rosa because she hold herself higher or to rid the world of the sin Maria and Juan had committed; she does it out of grief and jealousy.
Rope: Both husband and wife consider themselves as morally superior, and in that identification, I believe they do lean slightly more toward lame-o than okay.
He: Mrs. Whipple, in her closeness to the preacher and her talk of "Lord's mercy" and "Lord knows," stands out as the supposed morally superior person in this story. She is lame-o because she neglects her son whilst claiming to cherish him.
Theft: I'm exempting this story from my analysis. Personal choice. In my opinion, this isn't a story that leaves opportunity for figuring out who's good/bad/right/wrong, and none of the characters earns a lame-o or non-lame-o rating.
That Tree: Miriam is, in her way, lame-o, but my closeness as a reader to Joe leaves me to focus on him. Even though his pride comes from being down on his luck, being down on his luck is only a source of pride because it is his preference, his choice, and it can only be his choice because he is (dum dum dum) an intellectual. On page 73, in reference to his sexual relationship with Miriam: "His intention to play the role of a man of the world educating an innocent but interestingly teachable bride was nipped in the bud." Being smart makes him better, and it's important to him to be both smart and better. So, the question: is Joe lame-o? Hmm ... well, as far as comparing him to the lame-o characters we've encountered in other stories, I think any lame-o factor in Joe is pretty tame. I'll mark this one as a 'no.'
The Jilting of Granny Weatherall: As we discussed in class, the way this story is related is rather scattered, and for good reason. I don't really know what to make of it as far as who's an intellectual/morally superior character, though I think I could make a case for Doctor Harry filling that role in Granny Weatherall's eyes. Still and all, no one gets a lame-o rating from me.
Flowering Judas: Braggioni is an intellectual, as is Laura. I think they're both lame-o to an extent. Laura's indifference toward the people of Mexico, while perhaps not entirely in her control, still casts her in an unfavorable light. Braggioni is more responsible for his misbehavior, and therefore, more awful. Speaking in reference to the men who work for him, "They are closer to him than his own brothers, without them he can do nothing -- until tomorrow, comrade! Until tomorrow. 'They are stupid, they are lazy, they are treacherous, they would cut my throat for nothing,' he says to Laura." This, I believe, is his excuse for abandoning his men. Lame-o.
Noon Wine: Mr. Hatch is the one I've pegged as villainous in this story. He's a bounty hunter, but he makes overtures of being a morally upright man. He claims to be motivated by lawfulness and loyalties to Helton's family. I think this is all done to prove his trustworthiness and superiority; he makes a more concerted effort at this when he devalues Mr. Thompson's choice of tobacco. Though it's not as evident here as in some of the other stories, I think Mr. Hatch qualifies as someone who thinks himself morally superior, and his lame-o-ness is clear. Check.
Pale Horse, Pale Rider: The only ones I can peg as "morally superior" and "lame-o" are the men who pressure Miranda to buy a war bond. Still, I don't think this story really fits the formula. There's no one to side against; Miranda and Adam have and deserve all of our loyalty.
The Fig Tree: Grandmother and Harry both sort of perform the same function as an intellectual or morally superior person. I'm thinking of Neena's post about how children are a class of their own. What I sort of took from that is that children are left to be ruled over by adults. So, in this story, Grandmother and Harry are the privileged ones, and in disregarding little Miranda's requests to return home, to save the little bird, they are portrayed as lame-o.
And in my next post ... O'Connor's stories.