Ragtime

320 pages later, here we are—finished! Ragtime was an interesting read, to say the least. What struck me the most was how Doctorow melds history with fiction to create an elaborate narrative that comments on society in the early 20th century.

Let's start with the family. We have Mother, Father, The Little Boy, Mother's Younger Brother (MYB), and Grandfather. At the beginning of the novel, we are introduced to this family, with Father acting as the patriarch and Mother, as well as The Little Boy, falling into their typical roles. This family is meant to represent a wealthy white family in the early 20th century. Even their names, or lack thereof, point to the idea that they are meant to be representative of the basic family unit. As the story progresses, this typical upper-class family falls apart before our eyes. Doctorow dismantles this family in a way that exposes the dysfunction hidden within each character. To maintain conciseness, I'll focus on Father.

At the start of the novel, Father embarks on the typical 'I'm a Man' journey to the North Pole. Doctorow uses this journey to reshape Father from simply a character whose role is a father to a troubled man with a profound sense of inadequacy. This inferiority complex is exposed through Father's jealousy of Matthew Henson. This silent rivalry with Henson is unbecoming of a father and leaves the reader with a lingering feeling of disrespect for Father. Doctorow further undermines Father in the eyes of the reader by emphasizing that Father's inclusion in the expedition was solely due to his payment rather than his competence. This illumination makes Father seem frivolous and incompetent in the reader's eyes. Father's inadequacy is further accentuated when he repeatedly catches frostbite and is forced to journey back home without actually reaching the North Pole. His inability to properly conclude his trips brands him as a failure. Doctorow's final blow to Father is his return to the family home in New Rochelle. Upon his return, Father realizes he has become estranged from his family. His son has grown older, Mother actively regards him with disgust, and Sarah and her baby have recently become residents of the home. Father becomes alienated and no longer has a distinct role in his family's affairs; he has essentially been stripped of his title as patriarch. Through the destruction of Father's character and, by extension, the New Rochelle family, Doctorow makes a subtle commentary about the modern nuclear family and the issues that often plague these families behind closed doors.

Throughout this novel, Doctorow also uses his unique style to comment on racial inequality. He plucks Coalhouse Walker from another novel and plants him right in the middle of our New Rochelle family, ready to blow things up (see what I did there?). With Walker's character, Doctorow creates a compelling yet tragic story that highlights the unjust and preposterous nature of racial inequality. By making the center of Walker's grievance the destruction of his Model T and expanding his discontentment to the justice system as a whole through the death of Sarah, Doctorow shows that the expectation for equal treatment –whether it be over vandalized property or unwarranted murder– was absurd to the majority of white society during this time. Doctorow only further drives this point home by allowing Coalhouse to be perceived as a madman by both Father and the general public.

Doctorow's blend of history and fiction also provides commentary on a multitude of other topics, but I wouldn't want to risk boring you by expanding on each of these points, so I'll just list them for your reference: immigration/the American dream through Tateh, gender inequality through Evelyn Nesbit and Emma Goldman, and the obsession of marginalized groups in society by white society (Evelyn Nesbit, Mother, Mother's Younger Brother).

So what do you think? Is Doctorow commenting on society during the Ragtime era through this novel, or am I imagining connections that don't exist?