In the class discussion, we briefly
mentioned that Dick is considered better than the other black-booters because he
has morals. Throughout the novel, Dick, other characters, and the narrator
refer to Dick as having morals and becoming respectable. This focus on respectability
and morality as being the most important things a person has to offer discounts
the experiences the other black booters have, as well as any lessons that can
be learned from helping others despite their morality and respectability; they
are all children who are living in extreme poverty. Dick is lucky to have met
Frank, as he says by calling Frank “a jolly good fellow” (18). Dick himself
helps the others by giving them food throughout the novel, as well as trading
Fosdick tutoring for a place to stay.
Dick’s luck in having Frank and Mr.
Whitney help him, as well as having the trust of those around him, gives him an
advantage that the other boys do not receive. In this novel, Alger argues that
both hard work and help are needed to get ahead. In order to convey this
message to his readers, Alger portrays another black-booter, Johnny Nolan, as
lazy (9). As was discussed in class, Alger’s audience was likely not boys like
Dick, let alone the other black-booters, who likely did not know how to read
and could not afford the novel. The novel was instead aimed at boys like Frank,
who learn to help others. This help and charity, however, does not extend to everyone.
It is supposed to be focused at boys like Dick, who show that they have both a
strong set of morals and are extremely hard-working.
It is important to note that Alger
places importance on education, as Frank is educated when he meets Dick and
convinces him to “think more about it” (40). In addition, the only other
black-booter that Alger portrays in a positive light, Fosdick, is highly
educated above his age-group (75).
The combination of viewing only
those who have received an education and those who have a high sense of
morality, especially considering the various ways morality can be considered, as
deserving of charity is dangerous. It means that those who could most benefit from
an education, i.e. the black-booters, who are children and may not know any
better, are not receiving any aid. While teaching the audience that charity,
education, and having a set of morals are good things that will benefit them in
life is helpful, it is also harmful for society’s most disrespected and neglected
groups of people. Even for today’s audiences, it perpetuates the idea that only
those who are like-minded are deserving of charity. If
morality is this important when selecting who deserve charity, then it should
be as important for those handing out charity.
I shared similar thoughts when we discussed Ragged Dick’s almsgiving theme. Alger presents an incredibly narrow view of who deserves charity. While Ragged Dick establishes the basic principle of prioritizing the morally sound, it also allows the middle/upper middle class and the rich to continue justifying selective and minimalist standards of welfare. For example, Mr. Whitney advises Dick that “poverty in early life is no bar to a man’s achievement’” (53). However, nearly all the characters who repeat such a sentiment also received some sort of initial, basic help. If finances really did not impede success, the impoverished would be able to escape destitute circumstances themselves. Today, many would dismiss such a view as not capturing holistically the systemic oppression those in poverty or belonging to certain minority groups experience. Furthermore, as you mentioned, Dick’s sudden good fortune largely happens because obscenely giving people recognize his good moral standing. Though in the end, Dick is the person who offers the most help. While Dick receives considerable charity, Dick himself provides the most charity in the novel’s second half. He pays for Fosdick’s lodging and loans Tom Wilkins emergency funds. Dick states that he “[feels] a justifiable pride in his financial ability to afford so handsome a gift” (109) as helping Tom. Dick may have earned enough money to be labelled somewhat financially stable, but as a less-than-rich child, he cannot shoulder this responsibility. Dangerously, Alger asserts that grey area exists between those who can give and those who cannot.
ReplyDeleteAlthough Alger is strict on who should receive charity, he does it to highlight that charity should be a worthwhile investment.
ReplyDeleteAlger uses Dick to exemplify why children such as himself should receive charity. When Mr. Whitney provided Dick with 5 dollars charity, Dick was concerned about repaying him, but Mr. Whitney told him "Sometime when you are a prosperous man, you can repay it in the form of aid to some poor boy, who is struggling upward as you are now"(57). This exchange (of both money and words) exemplifies that the true purpose of charity is to make a difference. Mr. Whitney knew that his charity/investment would be put into a good cause and felt confident that Dick would grow up having the same philanthropic beliefs as he. His reason for picking Dick over any other boot-black had to do with his characteristics: his humbleness, honesty, credibility, and selflessness (all of these are seen in the book with him sharing meals, never stealing, and keeping true to the promises he makes to strangers and friends alike). Had Mr. Whitney provided the money to any other young boy, it easily could have been spent on unnecessary items (rather than Dick’s apartment) and not aided in the intention of charity in the long run.
I believe Alger is saying that charity should act as an investment; it should be used to provide long-term help and cause a greater impact on society, even if it means carefully choosing people who receive it.