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

A Failure to Hide One’s True Motives in The Lame Shall Enter First In the short story The Lame Shall Enter First, author Flannery OConnor describes a widowers attempts to mask his grief over his wifes death. In order to fill the void in his heart, the widower, Sheppard, throws himself into miscellaneous charitable endeavors. He shows this philanthropy most notably in his treatment of a young delinquent named Rufus Johnson, whom he takes in and cares for as his own son. Through his treatment of Rufus, Sheppard also tries to teach his son Norton-whom he judges as extremely selfish-about sharing. What Sheppard fails to realize, however, is that he is actually just as selfish as he judges his son to be-they are using the same coping mechanisms to try to deal with their loss. Consequently, his generosity and kindness will not profit anyone; in fact, it will actually cause harm. OConnor uses devastating irony-manifested through parallel descriptions of the characters and various interactions between them-to convey the idea that artificial philanthropy wil l accomplish nothing. O Connor uses parallel descriptions of Sheppard and Norton in order to expose the same character flaws in Sheppard that he scorns in his son. Throughout the story, she describes them in such similar ways that their shared traits become obvious. Nortons apparent self-centeredness is revealed at the very beginning, when he gorges himself until he vomits (Walters 103). Sheppard then looks upon him with disdain, thinking, his own child, selfish, unresponsive, greedy, had so much [food] that he threw it up (OConnor 374). Although Sheppard is criticizing his son for being selfish, he later realizes that he had stuffed his own emptiness with good works like a glutton (403) and had thus behaved no better than his son had in attempting to cope with his wifes death. Though this shared reaction to their loss is their most obvious similarity, Sheppard and Norton also have other parallel characteristics. Sheppard criticizes Nortons lack of intelligence near the beginning of the story when he lam ents, Norton was average or below and had had every advantage (374). When Rufus (whose intelligence Sheppard revered, in stark contrast to his own sons lack thereof) joins the household, however, Sheppard finds that the tables have been turned and he is now the one being criticized for his stupidity. Rufus insults Sheppards intelligence several times and in fact compares him unfavorably to Norton when he says, He [Sheppard] dont know his left hand from his right, he dont have as much sense as his crazy kid! (402). He later verbally attacks Sheppard to his face when he tells him, You aint any smarter than that cop (396). Through these descriptions, OConnor paints similar pictures of father and son-making Sheppards criticisms seem even more ironic and his character less credible. In addition to juxtaposing the characters of Norton and Sheppard, OConnor further reveals Sheppards flaws and inconsistencies through various interactions with Rufus. From his first meeting with the boy, it is obvious that Sheppard seems to take pleasure in analyzing Rufuss motives and behavior, failing to realize how it mirrors his own. For example, Sheppard, of course, seizes upon the foot as the unquestionable source of Rufuss delinquency, interpreting his criminal behavior as simple compensation for his physical defect (Walters 103). What Sheppard does not immediately see, however, is that he is also trying to compensate for his own defect-his overly philanthropic gestures are an attempt at filling 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 also the object of Rufuss discrepancy between the Christlike image Sheppard tries to co nvey and his actual selfish motives, and he openly accuses Sheppard of confusing himself with Christ (Walters 102). He first does this behind his back during a conversation with Norton, exclaiming, God, kid, how do you stand it? He thinks hes Jesus Christ! (383). In a subsequent conversation, while explaining to Norton the concept 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 even further, later calling Sheppard a lying stinking atheist (403)-a stark contrast to the Christlike character Sheppard attempts to show. In the midst of Rufuss criticism, Sheppard valiantly attempts to maintain his image as a genuine humanitarian by saying, If I can help a person, all I want is to do it. Im above and beyond simple pettiness (383). Rufus, however, does not believe anything Sheppard says, as he tells Norton: Yaketty yaketty yakand [Sheppard] never says a thing. Gas. Gas (279). T hrough these and other insightful, yet derogatory comments, Rufus reveals Sheppards selfish, hypocritical character. As Rufus helps to point out, Sheppard is so entrenched in his grief-induced selfish ambitions that he completely loses sight of his son Nortons struggles and makes himself a hypocrite; however, with Rufuss further assistance he is able to begin the process of self-discovery that eventually leads to his revelation. Sheppard is arguing with Rufus when he begins to see the first glimpses of his true self-and he is understandably taken aback. He thinks, The boys eyes were like distorting mirrors in which he saw himself made hideous and grotesque (397) and a moral leper (398). His violent epiphany comes shortly after this moment of clarity. He realizes that he had done more for [Rufus] Johnson than he had done for his own child (403) and that in so doing he had failed to help Norton through his grief like a loving father would. He also realizes how self-centered he had been-even as he had lectured Norton about being selfless, he had ignored his own child to feed his vision of himself (40 3). The hypocrisy in his actions is readily apparent-although he was preaching generosity and compassion, he was in reality practicing selfishness and thoughtlessness. This is in itself ironic, and OConnor takes advantage of this throughout the story. In fact, she uses mankinds innate selfishness as the source of nearly all her irony (Malin 36), and nowhere is this more apparent than in Sheppards situation. OConnors final, most heart-wrenching use of irony occurs when Sheppard at last realizes his grave mistake through a violent revelation and is overcome with love for Norton-only to learn that his epiphany has come too late and all his apparent benevolence has failed him. He is shocked and horrified when he recognizes how he has neglected his child in the name of charity, and he promises, He would make everything up to him, He would never let him suffer again. He would be a mother and a father (404). Sheppard immediately rushes to Nortons room to begin making amends for his past behaviors-only to discover that the child 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 mother in heaven. Sheppard is absolutely devastated, because he knows that Nortons extreme action is evidence of his acute longing for love (Walters 103). Sheppard grieves because h e had deprived Norton of the love he so desperately needed-and when he is ready to give that love, it is too late. It is also cruelly ironic that he had previously thought, in his efforts to reform the intractable Rufus, he had fatally neglected his own son (103). The most frustrating irony of all, however, is that of the timing of Sheppards revelation-had he recognized the error of his ways only minutes 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 Enter First an unforgettable tale of hypocrisy, frustration, and ultimately tragedy. Bibliography Frieling, Kenneth. Flannery OConnors Vision: The Violence of Revelation. Contemporary Literary Criticism, Vol. 2. Detroit: Gale Research Company, 1974. Malin, Irvin. Flannery OConnor. Contemporary Literary Criticism, Vol. 13. Detroit: Gale Research Company, 1980. OConnor, Flannery. 3 by Flannery OConnor. New York: New American Library, 1983. pp. 371-404. Walters, Dorothy. Flannery OConnor. Boston: Twayne, 1973.