Great American Books

This is the official blog for the students of Monica Osborne's Great American Books course at Purdue University.

Wednesday, November 08, 2006

Doctorow: Ragtime


In reading Doctorow's Ragtime we're given a controversial form of access to the past. By blurring the boundaries between fact and fiction, Doctorow pulls readers into a historical setting and enables us to identify quickly with the characters. This is certainly an effective technique for obvious reasons, but it's also true that any time a writer draws from "real life" or from history to create his or her characters, exactly what constitutes "truth" becomes the next question, one to which everyone has a different answer. As you can see, Doctorow takes great liberty in imagining alternative lives for historical figures. For instance, the interaction between Emma Goldman and Evelyn Nesbitt (and Younger Brother, hiding in the closet) is a bit racy, and the conversations between Pierpoint Morgan and Henry Ford are somewhat provocative as well.

So I'd like you to think about the idea of fact vs. fiction, and respond to Doctorow's method of storytelling and boundary blurring.

Please post your response no later than Saturday, November 11.

posted by Monica @ 11:51 PM  

22 Comments:

  • At 1:23 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    I believe that Doctorow uses a very interesting blend of fact and fiction. Because throughout his telling of Evelyn Nesbit he keeps referring back to fact. He doesn't start with a few facts then take her story completely off the factual path. For example, After Thaw's trial for murder Doctorow throws in the facts about Thaw's mother and Evelyn trying to settle the divorce for one million dollars. Nesbit was in life promised this money from Thaw by her mother-in-law in return for a quiet and quick divorce. However Nesbit never received this money.

    I think that Doctorow's intent is to take facts in the beginning to get the readers attention from a historical point of view, then to twist the story around. However he keeps them intrigued in the middle by throwing in facts along with the fiction to keep the audience wanting more.

     

  • At 1:34 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    I think it is very interesting how Doctorow takes real people and gives them fictitious lives. The fact taht he draws from real people helps grasp my attention. I don't have to worry about learning a lot of different characters because in some sense I already know the characters.
    Also, I read a lot of historical fiction and I find that any time real people are used as characters I want to find out what part of the story is true and which part is fiction. This causes me to look up some information and to learn more about history. Even though history may be blurred, I think that as long as he is not trying to say that his story is factual, it is okay for him to make up fictitious lives for real historical figures.

     

  • At 2:40 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    I agree with Brittany. When a reader selects this book or any book that is in the genre of historical fiction, he or she should know that the book does not contain all facts. (hints, why the book is still categorized as fiction) I do feel like I know the characters in this novel better and that is why when I start reading I cannot put it down. I believe Doctorow uses these historical characters and facts to give the reader a historical reference of what was going on in the world when the novel takes place. This allows the reader to better understand why characters react in the ways they do.

     

  • At 3:22 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    When I first started reading this I asked myself, "Is this EVEN legal?" Well, if the book has lasted this long without getting any huge legal critisism, then it must be. I think that Doctorow used this technique, not only to put the narrative into a historical perspective, but to help the reader take the fictional story seriously. It allows the reader to connect the novel to real life and take meaningful themes from it. If we imagine reading this novel with made up names, we might not take it as seriously and we may not be able to draw as much from it as we would otherwise. Also, I feel that incorporating famous names into the narrative make the story more memorable.

     

  • At 3:35 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    My only issue with historical fiction is really my own problem. I tend to read it and then 6 months later forget where I read it...and then actually remember it as if I learned it in class. I do, however, really enjoy this book so far. I keep wanting to know which parts are real and which ones are not. Whitney is right about it still being in the fiction section, but when you see famous names, it is hard not to be more intrigued about the real people.

    So yes, blurring the lines of history does draw me into the story, but makes me feel kind of like I am reading a James Frey novel. (What parts are real??)

     

  • At 3:37 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    I think that using real people as characters in the book along with other characters who are without names shows the contrast of the times. The only people worth knowing about where the rich and famous ones. Plus, if Doctorow wrote about an escape artist magician, a famous oil tycoon, or a man who developed the first major assembly line, we would all know who he was referring to anyway, so why not just use their names. I also think it shows that everyone else was deemed unimportant at that point in history. The immigrants were just immigrants. By referring to characters by their position in a family, they become anonymous and could be anyone who is a grandfather, mother, younger brother, or child. Naming characters doesn't make them more important in this book, only in the time in which they lived. The blurred lines between fact and fiction also push this idea of contrast. The named characters have crazy things happening to them. They are all a little bit off. The unnamed characters are more normal, what most people would have experience with. I think that this was done to create more of a contrast between the everyday and the exciting. What was fascinating to people who lived in the time of the turn of the centurty is mild compared to what it takes to fascinate today's audiences. Because of this, I believe that blurring the lines between fact and fiction was essential in order to get the point across to today's readers of the differences between the lives of the two groups of people.

     

  • At 4:15 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    When I began this book I thought it was fiction because the characters started out as mother and father, but like everyone else who has posted so far, the other character names are of real people in history. Of course the plot and actions of some of these characters are of course not true. I like the idea of fact and fiction in the same book. Although it could be controversial, I think it makes the book better. I honestly don't read a lot of fiction and I like nonfiction better. So this has just enough of both to keep me interested.

    I think Doctorow's way of storytelling is beneficial because it gives a new way to look at the past besides just reading facts. Who knows maybe something like this could have happened.

     

  • At 12:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    I think combining fictional characters with real characters helps pull people into the story. I also think he uses this technique to help challenge or knowledge of history as well and historical figures. he doesn't lay out nor define who the people are. He automatically assumes you know who they are. He also uses major characters who had a major impact on American culture. For example Booker T. Washington, Sigmund Freud, Henery Ford and others. I think all these characters represent a time line through history.

     

  • At 9:34 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    I agree that he used famous historical characters to give us a sense of reference about the time period of the book. I also think that he wants us think more about these characters than what we currently know. Like Brittany said, sometimes you look up information about characters after reading a book like this. So maybe Doctorow wanted us to learn more about the historical figures than we currently did. Monica told us about Henry Ford and his hatred of the Jews, which I knew nothing about. In this book, I think Doctorow wants to challenge our current thoughts about the figures that have shaped history.

     

  • At 1:54 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    The way Doctorow blends fact and fiction is very interesting. He uses real figures in history that many people are familiar with. For example, everyone knows about Houdini and that he was an escape artist. However, Doctorow keeps you questioning whether or not the escapes he made in the book were also made in his real life. I think this style of writing can really captivate a reader, but may also lead to some confusion about fact or fiction.

     

  • At 4:43 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    I believe also that Doctorow uses fact and fiction in a particular way. While you read this book you have to know that it is fiction because in the book he uses names that are famous and have been known. So if someone reads this and does not know that it is fiction then they will get a false point of view of these famous people in the book. However, I think facts in a fiction book makes it more believable and interesting because you as a reader can take your knowledge from those events and apply it to the book as well.

     

  • At 5:23 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Doctorow's book Ragtime, pushes the boundaries of the "normal" novel. This novel entices it's readers by allowing them to become encompassed in the characters that appear. Characters like Houdini and Ford, are figures that many people know something about. This prior knowledge makes the reader feel as if the information in the book is factual since much of the prior common knowledge that people have about the characters is included. Thus, the knew info that is presented makes the reader wonder whether or not it is true. Doctorow, also blurs the boundaries by not coming out and fully telling the reader what occured, for instant the scene with Evelyn and Emma, a reader might think that Evelyn and Emma were in a realtionship, however this realtionship is unclear.
    I think that Doctorow's use of familar names and blurred scenes, makes Ragtime a novel that will allow for questioning, and discussion along time to come.

     

  • At 7:52 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    I agree with Brittany, who makes the point that including real people as characters in a fiction novel helps to grasp the reader's attention. Historical fiction novels are usually somewhat controversial, and they owe much of their success to the author's strategy of giving real historical figures fictitious lives.

    I think that one of the main reasons why Doctorow chose to use this method of storytelling is because he wanted to make his novel more effective as a mode of social commentary. In this respect, it would obviously be much easier for him to display his opinions about actual people and events than fictitious ones. The addition of details of the historical characters' fictitious lives also helps to develop a flowing plot line and provides the reader with more to consider when determining the lessons learned from the book.

     

  • At 7:53 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    I agree with Ashley R. who said that after reading a historical fiction book, she somewhat forgets what happens after a certain time and then recall parts of the book in class and considers it 'truth' in a way. Doctorow has definitely blended truth and fact and it is hard to distinguish them.

    I think that by placing all of these important historical figures in the book it draws a larger audience in, since many people know who these people are, thus they are drawn to read the book.

     

  • At 1:27 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    I think that authors do this to get the readers attention and then to keep it. The problem arises when the readers forget to seperate fact from fiction and begin to believe everything. In Doctorow's case he mainly just keeps the reader intrigued with all of the characters.
    Also today, we are all engulfed by celebrity life. What they are like, what they are doing? We are constantly taken in by the gossip about them. The reason a lot of people can read this book i believe is because they are thrilled with the idea of being immersed into these lives.

     

  • At 2:04 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    I really enjoy how Doctorow uses historical figures in his novel Ragtime. I think he uses these figures to make his novel seem more realistic that his readers can relate to. Sometimes it is hard to get a bunch of characters straight with their distinct personalities, but having characters that we have previous knowledge on makes it easier to keep reading. I think he does that on purpose by giving us someone we know from that time period and adding a more a fictional personality with them. I definitley like this way of writing because it is easier to jump into it quicker and harder to put it down

     

  • At 3:04 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    I like how Doctorow uses both fact and fiction to weave his novel into life. Although it is difficult to decipher what is real and what is not, the commonality of historical figures puts readers at ease and keeps them involved in the story. I think that the danger is that readers often have the same experience that Ashley R. spoke about, remembering the details in a hazy manner and ending up considering them to be true rather than fiction. People often assume when historical figures/events/places are used in literature that suddenly the novel becomes reality (a good example is the DaVinci Code). As long as the author and readers recognize the story as that, a STORY-there is no harm in combining history and fiction.

     

  • At 4:11 PM, Blogger Mia said…

    I really have enjoyed how Doctorow has brought his novel to life by using the literary device of adding historical characters. I agree with Wendy that it draws in a large audience due to people being able to recognize people from history. Like most students have said so far I believe that it is important to read this novel with a grain of salt and to remember that this is a fictional book told from the perspective of Doctorow.

    This is a great novel and I like the vitality that this novel has due to the mixture of reality and fiction.

     

  • At 6:07 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    I think Doctorow's incorporation of historical characters is very effective. As many others have said, when I encounter an unusual scene in the novel, I question how much of it is based on fact. This causes the reader to think, "How much of what I know about this person and this time period is accurate." This helps Doctorow in his attempt to give us another perspective of history. He shows us the viewpoint of the underpriveleged during the Progressive Era, and helps us see that there were certainly times when it was less than progressive.

     

  • At 10:11 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    I agree with Brittany in that it is a lot easier to follow the characters in the book, due to the fact that I have heard of several of them previously. I think that this is a very fun approach to literature, and it makes the novel a very easy and interesting read. I feel this way because by incorporating real live people and portraying them in a fictisous manner it sort of puts the reader in a place where they can relate better to the character because they feel that they already know them in a sense, and the book just further enables that. The problem with this style of writing is that the reader needs to be aware that it is in fact a fictisous portrayal of the real life person in the text.

     

  • At 12:24 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    I do not like the way Doctorow makes up certain things about the famous characters lives. I think that these people probably had a lot of interesting things happen in their lives and it would be easy to write about actual things that have happened to them. I also like to know if what I am reading is fact or fiction, and while reading this novel I am just left guessing about what things actually occurred. I think DOctorow should make a note of what is fact and what is fiction. HE should not only due this for the reader, but also for the character. If he makes up stuff about a famous persons life in order to get readers to read a novel, how is that any different then a cheap newsstand magazine which tells false stories about celebrities to sell copies.
    However, I do believe the fiction makes the novel a better read. I just think he could make it enjoyable with real occurrences as well.

     

  • At 12:57 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    As many people said, the way Doctorow blends fact and fiction is effective in the particular way. We can image the novel’s scenes and the features of characters easily. In addition to that, this technique makes us feel reading real history though it’s fiction. I think this ambiguity between fact and fiction let us know that the history is not merely events we studied on the textbook, but it really happened in the past. In addition to that, we can also recognize that we are the one who live on the history same as those famous characters.
    In my opinion, Doctorow’s attempt to get pay attention to this novel and create the ambiguity between fiction and fact succeeded.

     

Post a Comment

<< Home