Appearances can tell us a lot about someone in today’s
world, but most especially in New York in the 1800’s. During this time it was
easy for someone to judge and decide where another person belonged on the
social class scale based on how they looked, and further deciding how much respect they
deserved. This is presented well in Ragged
Dick by Horatio Alger who Carl Bode says, “Your slogan wasn’t rags to
riches, but, more sensibly, rags to respectability” (p.IX).
Dick is living on the streets, in ragged clothes,
working as a boot black, but when he comes across Frank and Mr. Whitney, his
appearance changes, and so does his identity in a sense. When he sees Johnny on
the street after changing and washing up, Johnny doesn’t even recognize Dick. With
his new wardrobe, he has opportunities that would never have been presented to
him before. “In his ordinary dress, Dick would have been excluded, but now he
had the appearance of a very respectable, gentlemanly boy, whose presence would
not discredit any establishment” (57). In a way, I think he has a new
confidence in himself because he knows he’s now looked at differently by others
and can do more than a dirty boy living on the streets.
I found it very interesting how there are parallels between the role clothing played in Ragged Dick as well as today. Clothing has long been a wealth indicator in society, something that immediately allows you to have an idea of what walk of life they come from. While it is not as extreme today as it was back then when there were literally ragged clothes with tears in them, there is still a definite difference between the wealthy and the poor.
ReplyDeleteIn response to the second question, I feel that people can become ashamed of their clothing and lifestyle after seeing what it’s like for other people of a higher class. If all you’ve ever known is people dressing and living similar lifestyles as you then you think nothing of the things you have. Yet as soon as you are exposed to a lifestyle that allows for nicer things and luxuries you begin to question what you have. Our natural nature is to want to have the best things and not be looked down upon by society. Whereas we thought our things were just fine before, once exposed to higher class living everything we have starts to look worse, even though nothing has changed except our perception of it. Dick is a great example of this because he had no problem with his clothing before meeting Frank, but after getting his new suit and being around a more sophisticated lifestyle he no longer thought his old clothes were acceptable.
I did some research after the fallout of the election to try and figure out why people voted the way they did. I didn't get a satisfying answer to that question, but I did come across an interesting study arguing that a person votes for the good of their idealized self.
ReplyDeletePeople probably vote for politicians that don't actually support their interests for the same reason people put effort into their appearance. It's a way to perform our idealized selves. The question that follows is, "how close does that performance get us to actually becoming our idealized selves?" That's a question I'll leave for a braver and better informed classmate.
But I'd like to tackle that final question, 'Are appearances a true deciding factor in respectability?' My answer is, 'absolutely.' It's probably not the only factor we use to gauge one's respectability, but it's definitely present in our judgements. Humans are visual creatures. It's in our DNA There's no escaping Mother Nature, no matter how shallow she might seem to 21st-century college students.
But it's also important to mention that everyone has a different idea of what respectability is, and what factors contribute to it. For a while, I had the misguided notion that a collection of faded indie rock tees were a good gauge of someone's respectability. I don't think like that anymore. Someone who wears a tuxedo to their prom is probably considered respectable by everyone else at prom, but wear that same tuxedo to school the next day and most people will question the decision. I think that respectability differs from person to person and from environment to environment.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete"But Dick was too sensible not to know that there was something more than money needed to win a respectable position in the world" (70). The narrator reveals at this point that Dick knew that it wasn't just his new clothes and his new bank account that suddenly vaulted him into a position of respect in the world. However, it does seem that these are clear signs that Dick feels like he is on the right path. Your question about if appearances are a true factor in respectability is an interesting one. It does seem that throughout the novel Dick is treated differently because of his new suit. Numerous times throughout the story the narrator reveals that a previous character didn't recognize him, or that somebody expected him to be a gentleman because of his clothes. "Dick was well dressed, so the other did not regard it as at all improbable that he might possess that sum" (34). The street con-artist also suspected that Dick was a respectable wealthy man because of his appearance.
ReplyDeleteFosdick, however is somewhat the opposite. He also was a shoe-black but Dick had great respect for him because he could read and write, regardless of his ragged appearance. Fosdick later buys a new suit. He applies for a job at the hat shop and gets the job not because he appeared to be respectable but because his Sunday school teacher spoke highly about him as a person.
I don't think that appearances are a deciding factor in respectability, but it does seem to be a sign of it.