For the purposes of comparison the two texts being discussed are Graham Greene’s “The Destroyers” and Mildred D. Taylor’s “The Gold Cadillac”. Both texts are set in the 1950’s but on different sides of the Atlantic: ‘The Destroyers’ in east end London and ‘The Gold Cadillac’ in Ohio, USA. The settings are as appropriate to each story as the differences in narration. In ‘The Destroyers’ the story is based around a gang of boys, the Wormsley common gang, during a period of post-World War II rationing. The telling of the story is omniscient, narrated by an unbodied, all-knowing author.
As the tale unfolds, the reader learns of events that have happened from an impartial distance: “the next time the gang became aware”, “the gang were puzzled”, and “he was vaguely aware of a voice”. The whole story is focused on the gang’s actions in relation to Mr Thomas’s house. The gang gut and set up the absolute annihilation of a whole house, and yet with the boys as the centre of the story, sharing insights into their strange morals and standards, the reader comes to have a degree of empathy towards their behaviour.
So although despicable by deed, the narration offers the chance of impartiality, some distance with which to observe the context in which this conduct could occur. The reader’s reaction to the complete wilful destruction is justifiably shock at the sheer extent of the damage and the narration helps to keep the story unemotional and factual – the deeds and reasons behind them are the story. This differs entirely in style to ‘The Gold Cadillac’ in which the whole story is told first hand by not only a member of the family, but a young girl.
The story is essentially about the family’s purchase of a new, somewhat ostentatious car, but realistically the story is about a young girl’s loss of innocence and a window to what living in 1950’s America would have been like for a member of the black community. It also highlights the large differential not only between the laws within northern and southern American states, but also the alarming difference in the attitude of the people residing there.
The use of first person narrative in ‘The Gold Cadillac’ has the effect of making the story personal, not only bringing the reader into the experience but by seeing the changes and feelings through the author’s eyes. The differences in narrative technique are both equally effective to both short stories as they add a different dimension as required. ‘The Gold Cadillac’ deals with the feelings of a child, stigmatisation, and the family unit so it requires a degree of feeling and engagement from its audience.
Although set in similar times historically, ‘The Destroyers’ have altogether different issues to face and the actions within the story are relayed from a more distant voice, seeing all the wrongdoing that the gang carry out upon an innocent man, for no apparent reason other than because the house still stands, despite much of the surrounding property having been destroyed. The reader is required to try to understand their motives and morals but not necessarily to bond or agree with them. The added benefits of the narrative styles in the stories are that of perspective.
In the Graham Greene piece, the narrator knows of the history of all the characters and their unspoken beliefs, “the leader, who was known as Blackie, claimed to have heard it fall”, and “Mike, fell quiet, daunted by the serious…gaze”. The boys find money in the house but choose to destroy and burn it rather than take it because, as ‘T’ says, “we aren’t thieves”; this gives a strange idea of the boys’ base morality. If the story had been told in first person narrative then this view would be further complicated by the idea that the story teller is skewing the truth to add heroic effect to the boy’s actions.
In Mildred Taylor’s work the perspective is of a young girl telling a story about the actions and reactions of both her parents; people she looks up to. She also describes her neighbourhood and extended family, “since just about everyone on the block knew someone else. ” Her father is the first person with whom she has interactions in the story when he comes home in the new Cadillac. Due to ‘lois, the narrator’s, astonishment and pride at now owning the gold car, obviously her father, Wilbert, is held in high esteem. ‘Lois does not immediately comprehend her mother, Dee’s, reaction to the car.
We learn initially that her mother’s contention with the flashy purchase is because the money was supposed to be saved for “a house in a better neighbourhood”. The materialistic pride of the young girl comes through during the first few days of ownership when she’s excited about everybody seeing the car and Wilbert, her father, takes them out in it frequently so even as an adult, he clearly shares her pride. Arguably some of his pride in owning the car could be from the hard work it must have taken to be able to afford it.
Wilbert, ‘lois’s father, is interesting as a character, because he sits on both sides of the key issues of the story. As a grown man in the 1950’s he must have been aware of the racial inequality and tension of the period, and yet it is he who suggests the trip down to relatives in Mississippi. “The Uncles stopped laughing”, at this proposed trip so despite having worked hard enough to buy and enjoy the vehicle, all the extended family are aware of the danger faced by a black man driving this car in the deep south.
This may go some way to highlight the vast changes existing at these times. The narrator is shown upsetting things in regards to segregation on the trip, something Wilbert must have been aware of, but still agreed to take his family on the trip, thus exposing the girls to the racial hatred and, potentially, danger. This seems a strange decision for a family man, and one ‘lois does point out that he initially struggled with because although he accepts his brothers objections and dismisses them, his response to the whole family going is “No! ”, “it seemed he didn’t want us to go. Wilbert’s points of view about why he should be able to drive to Mississippi are perfectly valid: he has worked hard and should be free to go where he pleases. However, his objection to the whole family making the trip shows that he is fully aware of the bad feeling he anticipates, when he could be seen “trying to lord (the) fine car over them! ” Wilbert is a proud man and feels pride in his Cadillac, so it is understandable that he would want his parents to see how well he has done for himself. So, with the support of the rest of his family, the decision is made to go on the trip to Mississippi.
The two girls are unprepared for what they start to see from Kentucky onwards so do not truly understand but things slowly dawn n them as they travel further. After realising they couldn’t eat in restaurants or sleep in motels then “suddenly the picnic did not seem so grand. ” Wilbert tells the girls not to talk when white people are around and answers their questions honestly, about not being able to drink at the same water fountains or eat in the restaurants, but does not seem to have discussed these differences with his children prior to travelling.
When the family is challenged by the police, Wilbert is arrested for allegedly stealing his own car, and taken away, leaving a policeman to drive his family to the station. For Wilbert, it must have been a terrifying experience, and he appears to be very brave to get through it. Through the eyes of ‘lois, we see Wilbert’s stubbornness and pride to make the trip in the first place, and we see the pride dissipate enough that they drive to Memphis and change cars for the remainder of the journey. After the trip, Wilbert’s adoration of the car seems to have waned then disappeared altogether as it’s kept in their garage and then sold.
Wilbert has been on a metaphoric journey as well as the physical one. There is further evidence of the absence of Wilbert’s pride when 2my father said to hold my head high”, in respect of the neighbourhood’s attitude to their apparent fall from grace, going back to the Ford Mercury, but “we were a family again”. Through ‘lois’s telling, we see the total injustice that the family faces. Wilbert should have been able to show the car to his parents, he had worked hard and earned his right to drive his own property, but the audience also see the difficult choices he faces first-hand, and the decision he makes for the greater good of his family.
Wilbert is key to the story as he personifies the feeling at that time. He’s a family man, an American citizen, but as his brother says they “fought a war to free people overseas, but we’re not free here. ” Wilbert follows his heart and pride and goes on the trip that he should be allowed to make, that he should have been able to make, but in the face of such hatred and danger to his family, he stops, eventually getting rid of the object of his hard work and being seen to drive and live as was appropriate for his position in life in order to protect his family.
Wilbert’s emotional journey is the very essence of the story and the indignation that it stirs in the reader is perhaps more so for his bowing to the system and losing what was rightfully his rather than fighting and potentially being punished far more harshly. The underlying value of the story is ‘family’; Wilbert gives up his pride in order to protect his family, “we were a family again. ” The attitudes addressed within the story however are far more difficult to narrow down so succinctly. There are many different attitudes presented within the story.
On the matter of equality, Wilbert feels entitled to drive his car wherever he pleases, although once out of Ohio and into Kentucky he does start to warn the girls not to speak and to let him and Dee do all the talking to white people so he is expressing caution whilst possibly antagonising the racial tension. The challenges faced by Wilbert and his family highlight the attitude of the time. In his home town of Toledo, Ohio, it is unusual but acceptable and lauded for a black man to own, and drive about safely whatever car he can rightly afford.
His family are proud of him and praise him yet when he suggests the plan to travel south they all warn him off. The family are all aware of the injustice and the likelihood that “those white folks down south’ll lynch you”, yet their attitude is accepting of these injustices and discrimination. Through ‘lois’s eyes we see a terrible example of inequality, that ends with Wilbert finally accepting his position and accepting the inequality of his life. The same could be said about the neighbourhood on the whole.
Everybody is impressed about the purchase of the car, “Mr LeRoy and Mr Courtland from down the street were there too and all were admiring the Cadillac. ” Yet, as no-one else owns such a car in the block, it must be unusual for a man from that neighbourhood to better himself in such an outwardly fashion. There is a brief glimpse at the racist attitude displayed by the policemen who arrested Wilbert and scared the girls and how unjust and irrational it was of them to assume the car must be stolen merely by the colour of its driver.
To have this level of, thankfully non-violent, discrimination is shaming. Most interestingly, there is the attitude of Dee. She categorically refuses to ride in the car that she so vehemently disapproves of; she feels the purchase to be wasteful and extravagant when they are trying to better themselves and move neighbourhoods. However, when Wilbert decides to make the drive down south then she agrees to join him. She does not appear outwardly spoken in terms of racial equality but seems to address her principles for familial unity.
Once they are back and she can see the change in Wilbert, she softens in her attitude and says “Wilbert, you keep the car. ” Perhaps, because having suffered through the same experience, she now sees the car as a symbol of their fight and independence. For a short story about a car journey, the values and attitudes, shown through key figures who develop and change within such a short period of time are serious and very thought provoking and summed up well by the sentiment that “I would remember that ride and the gold Cadillac all my life. ”
