Life of an Inventor
Tateh becomes an entrepreneur, creating movies to support his family. Tateh used to be an anarchist working at a textile mill. One day he realizes that labor strikes would never lead to anything beyond “a few more pennies in wages” (131). So he quits to make flip books instead. Society rewards him accordingly: these efforts blossom into a popular short film company and he gets a happy family. Tateh’s success comes with a cost—he abandons his past beliefs and identity along the way. Tateh even takes the title “Baron” to hide his Jewish name, presumably to gain credibility in the movie industry.
On the other hand, Younger Brother becomes a revolutionary, advancing social causes by using the weapons he invents. Dissatisfied with his job making fireworks, Younger Brother leverages his bomb-making expertise to join Coalhouse Walker’s Black revolutionaries and the zapatistas. In this way, Younger Brother challenges systemic racism and government corruption (albeit illegally). However, stubborn radicalism has problems - both movements fail and Younger Brother dies in obscurity. Furthermore, his explosives damage the very society he’s attempting to fix - Doctorow warns us about Younger Brother’s puttied nitro, which “undoubtedly contributed to the monstrous detonations” (318) that killed 1200 people on the Lusitania.
Tateh and Younger Brother each chose how much they would sacrifice personal gain to combat injustice. Tateh perpetuates the inequality he once condemned. Yet Younger Brother’s commitment to revolution ends up hurting himself and innocent people. Given technology’s profound ability to both save and kill millions, I must understand my responsibilities as an inventor. If Tateh and Younger Brother are any indication, there is no perfect balance between my duties to loved ones and society. At least I can try.
This post raises some complicated and important questions. It sure is a strange and challenging footnote to the story of MYB"s career as a revolutionary that he allegedly invents all of these futuristic war technologies, which he donates to Father (who then uses them as part of the war effort, which an anarchist revolutionary like MYB would have definitely opposed). And I feel a similar disappointent when I learn that the Baron is making war-propaganda films rather than pacifist socialist critiques of U.S. involvement in the war (the socialists were the largest anti-war bloc in the country at the time). I kind of want a "neater" ending for both stories, so I'm not as confused about what to make of these characters. You're right that the novel seems to find no "perfect balance" of innovation and ideology/ideals.
ReplyDeleteTateh's self-reinvention is complicated, too, though. His renaming of himself does evoke many Jewish filmmakers and film-industry people who indeed Anglicized their names in order to conceal their Jewish roots (this has continued throughout the 20th century, with Robert Zimmerman better known as Bob Dylan, or Jonathan Stuart Liebowitz better known as Jon Stewart, or Perry Bernstein better known as Perry Farrell). But Doctorow adds a twist: "The Baron" still gives him a "foreign" and exotic vibe (to Americans, who would be wowed by the title even if it's meaningless), and "Ashkenazy" hides his Jewish identity in plain sight (a clear allusion to the Ashkenazi group of European Jewish diaspora). We know that Tateh initially has a very Jewish/ethnic-sounding name that no one could pronounce, but he hasn't exactly "Anglicized" by calling himself the Baron Ashkenazy.
It is really interesting how Tateh and Mother's Younger Brother almost switch places throughout the novel. I find it equally as interesting how Doctorow sort of sympathizes with both of them. While he does critique Mother's Younger Brother more, he doesn't mock him like some other characters like Morgan. I think that this shows that Doctorow truly believes that it is very hard to find the perfect balance between personal gain and fighting injustice, which you touched on in this post. Nice job!
ReplyDeleteThroughout the novel, I really liked tracking almost the likability of these characters. Doctorow definitely emphasizes with both of the, and writes them that way, but still lets their actions speak for themselves. The fact that Tateh started out more likable but turned more sour, and Mother's Younger Brother did the opposite serves to show that these characters are well-developed and open to positive/negative development.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI thought the parallel you drew between Mother's Younger Brother and Tateh was really interesting. From the first glance, these two seem like completely different stories: MYB goes on to become basically a terrorist and dies in obscurity, whereas Tateh becomes a successful movie director with a happy family. However, these stories aren't as black and white as they seem and both narratives are instead a grey area. As you mentioned, Tateh sells himself out in the process of becoming successful, ignoring his previous ideologies in order to build a happier life for himself and his family. Similarly, while MYB's ending seems sad, it ended the way MYB wanted to. He had finally found a purpose in life that went further than stalking women and he died fighting for a cause he truly believed in. While Tateh sells himself out and becomes a respected member of society, MYB stays true to his own terms and dies a peaceful death, albeit after causing the deaths of many innocent people.
ReplyDeleteYou make many good points about both Mother's Younger Brother and Tateh. I hadn't really thought about the contrast between these two before. Tateh lives a peaceful life but at the cost of reinventing himself, while Mother's Younger Brother lives a very not peaceful life, though he does so precisely *because* he has managed to find himself. It makes one wonder whether it's worth it to give up your identity to live in peace. Is it worth it to assimilate if it means losing yourself in the process?
ReplyDeleteThroughout the novel, the concept of "identity" and having your own beliefs is quite important as readers analyzing the narrative. In many ways, Ragtime is defined as by the actions and storylines of its characters (both historical and fictional) and how those storylines interact and challenge one another. Within this society that Doctorow has illustrated, it's interesting to see, as you mentioned, the social pressures and the reasons for wanting to change one's identity in both Tateh's and Younger Brother's cases.
ReplyDeleteI personally never would have thought to connect the stories of MYB and Tateh, but I can definitely see some of the similarities you point out in the lessons the characters seem to try to teach us. Another thing that I think these character's teach us is how people were rewarded in society based on their actions. Tateh decides to assimilate into society, disregarding labor strikes. In return he becomes well to do for the rest of his life. MYB takes the side of the revolutionary. He dies an ugly death. Is the outcome of these characters' lives somehow Doctorow telling us about how people's attitudes towards society are rewarded?
ReplyDeleteI love the analysis on this post – I'd never thought about the parallels between Tateh and Mother's Younger Brother, and how they ended up doing damage to something they were once passionate about. They also had major differences, such as how they characters ended up at the end of the story, what they were passionate about, and their origins. I think it shows that sometimes, you have do give up something (like Tateh did) or else bad things will happen (Lusitania explosion).
ReplyDeleteThe connection between Tateh and Younger Brother yields a lot of questions and assumptions. They seem to be inverses of each other in the way that they progress. Tateh realizes that his revolutionary attempts bear little fruit while Younger Brother starts focusing on a cause rather than Evelyn. They both seem to leave their past lives behind to start anew (Tateh even abandons his old name). It’s great how you mentioned these similarities and differences throughout the novel. Great job on the blog, Lawrence!
ReplyDeleteTateh's success and Younger Brother's failure both represent the principle of give and take. Tateh "took" money and success by using the system and had to "give" up personal principles (this could also be viewed as power/money corrupting Tateh but that is a different topic). Younger Brother radically changed, and in a way the give and take was still in effect, just not in a way advantageous for Younger Brother. He got a relationship with Evelyn but then had to give up his hope in society. He took action against the society and eventually gave up his life. This all centers around the institution, though the institution did change, it could not be felled; by using the system, Tateh (and Ford, Houdini, and Morgan) were able to rise.
ReplyDelete