Saturday, February 21, 2015

The Moral Dilemma in Freeman's "Old Woman Magoun"



Can innocence survive in the midst of evil that is so pervasive that it corrupts everything it touches? Is the death of a precious grandchild preferable to sexual defilement at the hands of malicious predators? Is allowing a loved one to die in order to prevent sexual abuse morally justifiable? These are questions that vex Old Woman Magoun in Mary Wilkins Freeman’s story. They are also questions that vex her readers.

Lily Berry is Magoun’s granddaughter. Lily’s mother was married to Nelson Berry, who is described as a “fairly dangerous degenerate of a good old family” (419). She died when Lily was a week old. The men of the hamlet of Berry’s Ford are heavy drinkers and indolent, a slovenly lot. They have lost their masculinity to alcohol and slothfulness. There is an old saying that “the devil finds work for idle hands,” and that is the case for the men of Berry’s Ford. 

Lily, who is fourteen years old, looks no older than ten. She is sheltered by her grandmother. Lilly carries a tattered rag doll with here wherever she goes. The story’s narrator describes Magoun’s moral character and her situation: “Old Woman Magoun had within her a mighty sense of reliance upon herself as being on the right track in the midst of a maze of evil, which gave her courage” (419). Magoun is an oasis of virtue existing in a wasteland of corruption and evil. She survives because of her experience and moral fortitude, qualities that Lily is yet to fully develop at such a young age. 

When her grandmother sends Lily to the store for some salt, she meets an apparently nice man who takes her by the hand and walks with her to the store. She has her rag doll with her. Freeman skillfully creates a sense of dark foreboding during this scene. The reader senses that there is something sinister about this outwardly nice and handsome man. The stranger, Jim Willis, inquires about her age. Lily’s father is at the store when she arrives. He gives her some candy. Willis evidently finds the little girl attractive when he learns that she is fourteen years old. 

It turns out that Nelson Berry lost money in a card game to Willis. He arranges to take Lily from Magoun in order to settle his debt to Willis. We presume that Willis is to have his way with the child sexually, which is more than Magoun can countenance. Berry gives her a week to turn Lily over to him or he will take her by force. Magoun unsuccessfully tries to have Lily adopted by a nice family in a neighboring hamlet. She is out of alternatives. 

We learn that Nelson “reflected that Old Woman Magoun had a strong character, that she understood much better than her sex in general the futility of withstanding the inevitable” (424). Magoun would rather her precious grandchild die than see her defiled by a lustful sexual predator, as had happened to Lily’s mother. On the way home from the neighboring hamlet, Lily sees some delicious blackberries that she picks and eats. Amongst them are some poisonous nightshade berries, which Magoun sees her eat, and she says nothing. Lily dies that night, as her mother had died a week after her birth from the same deadly nightshade berries. 

My interpretation of Old Woman Magoun’s apparently immoral actions is that knowingly allowing her granddaughter to eat those poisonous berries is analogous to euthanizing an animal companion that is in agony and without hope of recovery. Far from committing a sin, Magoun’s action was a final act of love that was morally justifiable. After all, she had done it before. This must lead to a discussion about moral relativism, the idea that there are no fixed essential truths. All is culturally constructed in the heat of the moment.

5 comments:

  1. The only way that innocence could remain is if it was removed from the corrupt world which Magoun and Lily inhabited. I think you're comparison between what Magoun does and putting down an animal when it's in pain is a great analogy. I think the only reason why Magoun's actions settle so unwell in many individual's stomachs, is because humans have a tendency to think of ourselves as something different than animals. I believe this leads to the belief that putting a human out of it's misery is wrong, but putting any other animal out of it's misery is okay.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I agree, this was an act of love and maternal instinct by Old Woman Magoun. Magoun wanted to keep Lily pure and did not want her to become a commodity. She did not tell Lily to take the nightshade, so is it wrong?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Morgan, I obviously concur with conclusions. In my opinion, your views are highly evolved. They are not derived from an anthropocentric point of view but from a more bio-centric perspective that assigns inherent value to all living beings, whether they are human or non-human. I think this perspective is unusual in western cultures like ours; however, it is common to indigenous cultures such as the native American Indians, whose perspective and spiritually I greatly admire.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Well, this is embarrassing. I have just realized that I have spelled Nelson Barry incorrectly as Nelson Berry in my post. I will attribute this to either one of three possibilities:a brain fart, a senior moment, or a Freudian slip. I think that on a subconscious level I may have associated Barry with the poison nightshade berries in the story!

    ReplyDelete
  5. The reason I disagree with this is because I feel Magoun never gave Lily a chance to really live. She sheltered her in order to protect her yes, but how long can you truly keep protecting someone in a flawed world without doing them harm? The character of Old Woman Magoun reminds me in a way of the mother from the Stephen King novel and Brian De Palma film Carrie. Both characters believe they are helping the child, both have a hatred or fear of what men will do to their children, and both have strong religious convictions. Magoun is not painted nearly as abusive as Margaret White (Carrie's mom), but there are definite similarities between these characters. Would we argue in defense of Margaret as much? I seem to doubt that.

    ReplyDelete