Sample Research Summary
English 101 / Woodman
Leckie, Ross. “Plot-Resistant Narrative and Russell Banks’s ‘Black Man and White Woman in Dark Green Rowboat.’” Studies in Short Fiction 31.3 (Summer 1994): 407+. EBSCOhost. 21 Jan. 2004.
In “Plot-Resistant Narrative and Russell Banks’s ‘Black Man and White Woman in Dark Green Rowboat,’” Ross Leckie argues that Russell Banks’s short story uses a lack of narrative detail, a sexual and racial conflict, and specific symbolism in order to spur the reader into questioning his or her own place in the specific cultural narrative of the story and the general cultural narrative in which he or she lives.
Leckie begins his article by analyzing Banks’s narrative framework and argues that Banks chooses not to provide a specific narrator (who could conceivably provide exposition of the characters) in order to remove the promise of “intelligible action”: as a consequence, the reader feels anxiety and frustration at being unable to know exactly what is taking place. This ambiguity then defamiliarizes the idea of cultural narrative, drawing close attention to the specific details of the narrative itself. Leckie points out one way in which Banks presents this confusion: the story takes place between the “action” of the story. Leckie posits that “the story’s temporal sequence” is framed by “their sexual encounter and her abortion” and argues that the reader expects the narrator to focus on these two events; when Banks’s narrator does not, the reader’s surprise forces him or her to become more engaged.
Leckie then switches to an analysis of the “dialogic relationship” between the two characters and argues that each is an object for the other. He argues that the woman values the man for his “totemic significance” and enjoys him for the romanticized image—“a sheik”—he projects and with which she can interact. Leckie claims that the man values the woman as a sexual object, one he wishes to control for purposes of his own self-esteem. Leckie concludes that both the woman and man must fail in their attempts because each is controlled by the “conventional social network” in which they reside. For Leckie, the unborn baby is the symbol of these two characters’ attempt to make a new system outside society, and the abortion is the symbolic failure of that attempt. Consequently, Leckie’s interpretation hinges on the unspoken racial and economic divisions that permeate the society of both the characters and the readers.
I found Leckie’s article to be both insightful and a bit misleading. His attention to the deliberate omission of narrative detail is interesting; I hadn’t considered how Banks may be doing this to engage the reader. I also agree with his insight into the racial dynamic of the story, but I disagree with amount of emphasis he places on the racial component as an explanation. In my opinion, the story goes to a more elemental level—as can be seen in the story’s title—in which conflicts of meaning itself are engaged. The unborn baby isn’t just a symbol of racial harmony; it is a symbol of life itself, and Leckie misses this because he considers the story in isolation. The characters in Trailerpark do struggle with conflicts of race and class, but they also struggle with questions over the fundamental value and nature of life, and the fact that this story takes place above the lake’s waters (with all the symbolism that entails) is significant. I agree with Leckie that this story forces us as readers to question our own place in cultural (racial, economic) divisions, but I also feel that Banks is forcing us to ask questions of a more existential nature: of what value is life? Does my life have meaning?