Visions and Revisions: Reading Flannery O'Connor's “The River” as an Amendment to T. S. Eliot's Critique of Modernity

Abstract

T. S. Eliot and Flannery O’Connor are known as critics of modernity. A comparison, via close reading, of “The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock,” the work that established Eliot’s reputation as the poet who captures the emptiness of modern life, and one of O’Connor’s most remarkable short stories, “The River,” reveals that the similarities between the two writers’ critiques go far beyond a common dislike of contemporary society. “The River” can be read as O’Connor powerfully employing and reaffirming all of the specific elements of Eliot’s anti-modern lament: Her story, like the poem, portrays a world where people are faceless, uncaring masses that don’t connect yet constantly judge, inducing anxiety and paralysis in the protagonist. “The River” furthermore aligns with “Prufrock” by linking superficial modern culture to the city and showing a loss of meaning, sincerity, and belief that leads the respective protagonists to feel that they do not matter. However, O’Connor does not simply apply Eliot’s ideas; her critique of modernity, while agreeing with the poet’s principles, is arguably both more radical and more effective. Whereas the modern tedium—the endless repetition of trivial tasks—never ends for Prufrock, O’Connor’s child-protagonist Bevel manages to escape it by drowning, and the readers being urged to accept this, in the logic of the narrative, as a triumph, can be seen as a more consequential attack on modern life than Eliot’s.