Though I wouldn’t go as far as to say that this book is
capitalistic propaganda, I think it is safe to say that it definitely
subscribes to and perpetuates many of the (mythical) assumptions relating to
capitalism’s supposed ability to stimulate and aid people in their goal of
improving their life circumstances. It is rather unnecessary to comment upon
the absurd amount of luck inherent in Dick’s story—it is so obvious that it
does not actually make a case for capitalism’s greatness—but I think giving a critical
eye toward the behavior of Dick as compared to his peers, as well as the
behavior of the upper class we are able to see, illuminates the underlying
assumptions about capitalism that ultimately lead to this book being a
strapping praise of the ideology.
Firstly, Dick has many of the characteristics of a “model
minority.” Obviously I am not going to actually assign that identity to him, as
he is white and likely not a minority, but he is parallel to it in that he
consistently behaves as an “acceptable” or “good” poor person; one who does not
criticize the rich (only idolizes them), never causes trouble for others
despite arguably having reason to (through stealing, fighting, etc.), and is
grateful for even the slightest bit of help. Dick is set up in contrast to
other boys like Micky or Johnny, who behave uncouthly or are simply lazy, and
those negative characteristics are given as the reason that their fortunes have
not improved. It is their attitude, rather than any other overarching
issues, that is keeping them where they are. This is a dominant belief amongst
those who support capitalism and would argue that the content of someone’s
character is more important toward the end of changing their circumstances
rather than any outside sources such as cultural stigma, a failing economy,
discrimination, etc., etc., etc.
The rich, aside from one or two outliers (such as the woman
who unfairly accused Fosdick and Dick of stealing her purse; it is worth noting
here, though, that everyone else on the train sided with the boys), are
generally portrayed as generous, responsible, and good-natured. They are
constantly giving Dick money and opportunity, and while a good many of these
actions can fall under the umbrella of unbelievable luck, it is relevant to the
discussion to point out that the people dolling out the luck are the upper
class. They, as an entire class, are characterized in a positive and helpful
light—another indication of the success of capitalism, a system that produces
good people willing to help others gain the fortune that they have.
I understand that this book was aimed at young boys, and
thus had to have a clear system of punishment and reward for good behavior;
this is perhaps the most obvious reason that Dick’s good behavior seems to get
him so many good tickets upward. However, that, in combination with the wider
characterization of the two classes (upper and lower) and the individuals that
make them up creates a singing praise of capitalism as a system that values
individual grit and character over societal issues and facilitates movement
upward as long as good behavior is present. Rather unrealistic, if you ask me,
but definitely a product of the times.
While Ragged Dick does seem a bit unrealistic in some senses, I would argue that the story serves to highlight the values of hard work and discipline more than as capitalist propaganda. It cannot be overlooked how lucky Dick gets, from meeting Frank and his uncle (Alger Chapter III) to accompanying Mr. Greyson and his family to Church and to their house (Alger Chapter XVII), but above all of this, there is still a sense of reality to the story. Despite the generosity that he receives, Dick remains a bootblack for nearly a year before he finds another job, and that only happens because he saves Mr. Rockwell’s son’s life. The job is not simply handed to him. The same can be said for Fosdick, who takes over “fifty applications and as many failures” to find a job as an errand boy (Alger Chapter XIX).
ReplyDeleteThe fact that things do seem to work out for Dick is undisputable, and his story seems more ideal than realistic, but there are certainly elements of real life in Ragged Dick as well. His change of heart to begin saving his money and the sense of accomplishment that he feels from doing so is something that I can personally relate to, and although it is slow, his money does accumulate once he begins saving it. To me, Ragged Dick more than anything else shows what can come from an honest, hardworking and disciplined lifestyle. That is what Dick embodies, and it yields positive results.
I think you have a good point here, as far as how Dick serves as a kind of “model minority” in a sense, and also how the rich are portrayed within the novel. It is interesting as a follow up to note how Dick acts at the end of the book towards Johnny Nolan, which shows him following down the path that the book seems to have deemed “correct” for rich people to follow—he decides to help out someone whose prospects are not as good as his own.
ReplyDeleteHowever, in helping out Johnny Nolan specifically, it seems that this book kind of undercuts its own “hard work will lead you to success” moral. It is said again and again how lazy Johnny Nolan is, and yet Dick plans to impart his regular customers upon Johnny, something which will obviously help him to be successful.
It seems in this sense, at least, that what’s valued isn’t hard work—it’s charity. Just as people helped Dick despite his shortcomings throughout the novel, Dick will now help Johnny Nolan, despite that his laziness is what has kept him from success throughout his whole life. Does Dick expect Johnny to stop being lazy and work hard, if he gives him the clients? Or is it just valuable for us as readers to see Dick do something for the poor man who can’t seem to make as much of himself as Dick can?
I think that this action on Dick’s part is simply to show him following the footsteps of the other idealized rich people in the book, to show that he is good and charitable even once he has been successful.