Toni Morrison’s position as an African American women in a society controlled predominantly by white males, gives her a unique perspective in critiquing it. In ‘Sula’ (1973) Morrison uses her unique perspective to develop the idea that sacrifice can led to power through her characterisation of Eva. She then explores the role of the scapegoat through Sula, and sacrifice in the context of identity with Shadrack.
Morrison effectively explores how sacrifice can be used to manipulate people through the character of Eva. Eva is missing one leg and one of the stories behind it is that she “sold it to a hospital for $10,000” (31). This creates the impression Eva is a role model who sacrifices her body parts so that she may obtain income to provide …show more content…
When Sula returns from her time in the city, she becomes Bottom’s ‘Other’, a scapegoat who can be blamed for every evil which happens in the town. The people of Bottom accuse Sula of sleeping with white men, something which fills them with “choking disgust” (113). To the people of Bottom white people are a form of evil which they need to overcome just like “floods…tuberculosis, famine and ignorance” (90). One of the ways that the people overcome this evil is to externalise their fears of white people onto Sula. In this way the community of Bottom gains a tangible figure of evil, someone who can be repelled by “broomsticks …and sprinkled salt on porch steps” (113). Sula becomes an evil which is “recognized, then dealt with, survived, outwitted, triumphed over” (118), her evil can be controlled unlike the myriad of natural disasters such “floods”, that the people of Bottom have to deal with. Initially this works for the people of Bottom as Sula becomes “a moral standard, a limit marking off right from wrong. Perceived as a generalized evil, Sula serves to make other people appear relatively good” ( McKee 22). Sula’s evil has a positive consequence on the people around her, as they strive to be better than her. Thus they feel a renewed sense of purpose by having their evilness dumped onto Sula. Sula’s evil causes them to “cherish their husbands and wives, protect their children (and) repair their homes” (117). Her death is the ultimate sacrifice, as the perceived ugliness, the perceived evil of Bottom is seen to have died with her. Yet when Sula dies, the town crumples, “wives uncoddled their husbands” (154) and mothers beat their children. This is because Sula’s sacrifice is not enabling or enlightening, it just causes the people of Bottom to lose their identity. Without a shared evil reuniting them, the people of Bottom lose their purpose and let go of the
Morrison effectively explores how sacrifice can be used to manipulate people through the character of Eva. Eva is missing one leg and one of the stories behind it is that she “sold it to a hospital for $10,000” (31). This creates the impression Eva is a role model who sacrifices her body parts so that she may obtain income to provide …show more content…
When Sula returns from her time in the city, she becomes Bottom’s ‘Other’, a scapegoat who can be blamed for every evil which happens in the town. The people of Bottom accuse Sula of sleeping with white men, something which fills them with “choking disgust” (113). To the people of Bottom white people are a form of evil which they need to overcome just like “floods…tuberculosis, famine and ignorance” (90). One of the ways that the people overcome this evil is to externalise their fears of white people onto Sula. In this way the community of Bottom gains a tangible figure of evil, someone who can be repelled by “broomsticks …and sprinkled salt on porch steps” (113). Sula becomes an evil which is “recognized, then dealt with, survived, outwitted, triumphed over” (118), her evil can be controlled unlike the myriad of natural disasters such “floods”, that the people of Bottom have to deal with. Initially this works for the people of Bottom as Sula becomes “a moral standard, a limit marking off right from wrong. Perceived as a generalized evil, Sula serves to make other people appear relatively good” ( McKee 22). Sula’s evil has a positive consequence on the people around her, as they strive to be better than her. Thus they feel a renewed sense of purpose by having their evilness dumped onto Sula. Sula’s evil causes them to “cherish their husbands and wives, protect their children (and) repair their homes” (117). Her death is the ultimate sacrifice, as the perceived ugliness, the perceived evil of Bottom is seen to have died with her. Yet when Sula dies, the town crumples, “wives uncoddled their husbands” (154) and mothers beat their children. This is because Sula’s sacrifice is not enabling or enlightening, it just causes the people of Bottom to lose their identity. Without a shared evil reuniting them, the people of Bottom lose their purpose and let go of the