"WHEN IS A HAT NOT A HAT?" EXPLORING THE SYMBOLISM OF FLANNERY O'CONNOR
by Moriah Parker
Before O’Connor’s writing can be directly studied for symbolic meaning, it is useful to consider what research has already been done on the topic. Scholars who study O’Connor’s writing do not always specifically address the hats in Wise Blood, The Violent Bear it Away, and Everything That Rises Must Converge. However, some scholars do consider other clothing items in these stories, as well as the clothing in other stories. One example of this can be seen in Martha Stephens’ analysis of Wise Blood. In O’Connor’s Wise Blood, the character Enoch puts on a gorilla costume. Stephens believes this represents a religious rebirth as a “lower animal” (Stephens 67). This demonstrates that some literary scholars have found specific symbolism behind the clothing (or costuming as the case may be) in O’Connor’s work. Another scholar of O’Connor’s work, Ted Spivey, similarly addresses Wise Blood. He argues that the hat of the main character further emphasizes the importance behind the symbolism of an article of clothing by saying “the hat for O’Connor is a symbol of the young backwoods male’s sense of selfhood and masculine energy” (Spivey 113). This continues to illustrate that there is indeed some meaning behind O’Connor’s literary fashion choices.
Furthermore, some scholars also analyze the symbolism behind clothing in other works by O’Connor. Leanne Smith’s analysis concurs with the sentiment that clothing is indeed symbolic. Smith even goes so far as to say that “[f]ashion is fickle—transitory and sometimes cyclical—so it is not the particular pieces the characters use, but the effort to use fashion to create and maintain an identity and the belief that they can be successful in doing so, that are lasting” (par. 15). While Smith does not address a specific instance of symbolic clothing, she does express a need to acknowledge the importance behind the symbolism of fashion in O’Connor’s writing. For scholars that discuss Wise Blood, The Violent Bear It Away, and Everything that Rises Must Converge, and even other works, these analyses do seem to help answer the question of whether or not clothing is symbolic.
However, not all of the scholarship about O’Connor agrees with this sentiment, particularly the literature that references O’Connor’s own thoughts about her work. While much of the literature about O’Connor’s work agrees with the idea of symbolic clothing, O’Connor herself would probably disagree with such a notion. Robert Evans posits that “Flannery O’Connor always contended that her work’s value depended far less on its messages or meanings than on its artistry” (4). This would indicate that O’Connor felt the importance of a text was not about themes or symbolism, but about artistry and the writing itself. O’Connor further agrees with this sentiment by saying that “I think a serious fiction writer describes an action only in order to reveal a mystery” (quoted in Magee 9). That is to say, O’Connor does not explain the meaning of her work, but she says that a writer should be revealing a mystery, not the answers. O’Connor further disputes any notion of symbolism in an interview with James Andreas who quotes O’Connor as saying, “The writer does not presume to invent his or her plots or words: he or she speaks plainly and conceals nothing: the hell with symbols. Nothing is deliberately hidden, especially with the aesthetic intention to conceal or to allegorize” (27). So, what does this mean when O’Connor’s work seemingly contains symbolism, yet O’Connor herself might dispute this notion? Simply put, O’Connor’s use of symbolism is not designed to provide an answer but to highlight the question. And this can be clearly seen in O’Connor’s stories.
Flannery O’Connor’s 1952 novel, Wise Blood, follows the story of a young man named Hazel Motes. Hazel is a complicated character who throughout the novel often grapples with his religious identity. One of the most prominent things about Hazel is the clothes that he wears, specifically, his hat. Hazel’s clothes and hat are pointed out from the very beginning of the novel, and they are mentioned repeatedly throughout. A few paragraphs into the first chapter Hazel is described as wearing “A stiff black broad-brimmed hat—a hat that an elderly country preacher would wear” (O’Connor 3). It is curious that the actual name of this type of hat is never given as it makes Hazel’s religious denomination and his belief system difficult to determine.
In fact, in the early chapters of Wise Blood, Hazel claims that he is not religious at all. Despite the fact that almost every character who meets Hazel assumes he is a preacher because of his hat, Hazel always denies this idea. This can be seen many times throughout the text. One line of dialogue reads:
“You look like a preacher,” the driver said.“That hat looks like a preacher’s hat.”
“It ain’t,” Haze said, and leaned forward and gripped the back of the front seat. “It’s just a hat” (O’Connor 16).
Hazel’s constant denial of the fact that the hat he wears is not a preacher’s hat is what makes the identity of the item important. At the specific point in the novel when Hazel is wearing this large black-rimmed hat, he is adamant that he is not a preacher. In fact, Hazel doesn’t want anything to do with religion at this point. Hazel’s conversation with the driver ends with, “Get this: I don’t believe in anything,” (O’Connor 17). Yet Hazel continues to wear this particular black hat that gives off the impression of an elderly country preacher.
At a turning point in Wise Blood, Hazel’s distinct black hat gets vandalized, and he goes to buy a new hat. “He wanted one that was completely different to the old one. This time he was sold a white Panama with a red and green and yellow band around it. The man said they were really the thing and particularly if he was going to Florida” (O’Connor 63). Now, Hazel is wearing a specific named style of hat, a Panama, and it is a hat that is clearly not associated with religion, but more with vacationing in tropical areas. What is most notable about this change in fashion is that this is also when Hazel does decide to become a preacher. Hazel begins his own anti-religion religion called the Church Without Christ. Yet now, instead of wearing the ambiguous black hat that identified him as a preacher, Hazel is wearing a fashionable white Panama hat. Hazel wanted a hat that was “completely different from the old one” perhaps in an effort to distance himself from organized religion, yet at the same time, he is beginning to preach for his own religion (O’Connor 63).
Hazel also seems to have rooted his identity in his hat and fashion. In a startling turn in the novel, Hazel murders a man who copied his clothes and preaching style. Hazel is shocked by seeing the other man who dresses like him, and upon hunting him down, one of the first things Hazel says to him is, “Take off that hat” (O’Connor 114). Hazel’s demeanor while he murders the man is very cold and emotionless, but he clearly cares a lot about his clothing being imitated; he cares enough to kill.
Hazel’s connection to the black and white hats raises a lot of questions. Does the ambiguity of the black hat represent Hazel’s uncertainty about religion? Can the change from a black hat to a white hat illustrate a kind of enlightenment? Could Hazel murdering his “twin” represent a repressed self-hatred? The text of Wise Blood does not answer this question, and it is not meant to. It simply raises a variety of questions for the reader to answer for themselves. And this trend of fashion (and hats specifically) raising open-ended questions carries on in The Violent Bear It Away with Young Tarwater.
The Violent Bear It Away was published in 1960, eight years after the publication of Wise Blood. It similarly explores the notion of symbolic hats. The Violent Bear It Away describes the clothing of its main character, Young Tarwater, as “a faded pair of overalls and a grey hat pulled down over his ears like a cap” (O’Connor 337). Interestingly, the text goes on to give more details about Young Tarwater’s gray hat saying, “He followed his uncle’s custom of never taking off his hat except in bed” (O’Connor 337). While Hazel’s hats were either black or white, Young Tarwater’s is gray, and the description of it being “pulled down like a cap” seems to indicate that it is not actually a cap and is being bent out of shape (O’Connor 337). Furthermore, Young Tarwater following the example of his great-uncle and never taking off his hat except to sleep creates a connection between Young Tarwater’s hat and his uncle. The hat that he wears represents his great-uncle. However, Young Tarwater’s hat is given an opposing relation later on. Young Tarwater’s uncle, Rayber, also gives a description of the gray hat. “Rayber saw only the hat, intransigently ground upon his head, fierce-looking even in the dim light. It had the boy’s own defiant quality as if its shape had been formed over the years by his personality” (O'Connor 405). Here Young Tarwater’s hat is described as being aligned with the young boy’s own personality, and his stubbornness and uncompromising nature. Much like Hazel’s hat, Young Tarwater’s hat is now shown to represent conflicting ideas.
This conflict of identities tied to the gray hat is also a much larger conflict in the story as a whole. Young Tarwater is faced with a crossroad where he must choose if he will follow his great-uncle’s path of radical evangelism or if he will follow his own path. But much like the conflicting hat, Young Tarwater’s actions are never clear in what path he chooses. Young Tarwater believes he burns down his great-uncle’s house with the Old Tarwater’s body still inside, cremating his great-uncle in a pagan way that his great-uncle would have hated. But it is later revealed that Young Tarwater’s uncle was buried in a Christian manner by a neighbor. Additionally, Young Tarwater is shown to be fighting to urge to baptize Bishop, his cousin. In the end, Young Tarwater does baptize Bishop, while also simultaneously drowning him, thus fulfilling, and failing his quest. Young Tarwater’s actions show his conflicting moral convictions, symbolized in his hat.
But Young Tarwater doesn’t keep his hat forever. Towards the end of the novel, right before Young Tarwater decides he will preach in the city about “the terrible mercy of God”, Young Tarwater is hitchhiking in a stranger’s car when he is drugged and sexually assaulted (O’Connor 478). This is when Young Tarwater’s hat is taken. “In about an hour, the stranger emerged alone and looked furtively about him. He was carrying the boy’s hat for a souvenir” (O’Connor 472). Young Tarwater’s hat, representing the conflicting forces in his life, is now gone, just as he is setting out to preach to the children of God. So, does the loss of his hat represent that he has chosen the path his great-uncle set out for him since he was wearing the item representing his conflict? The great-uncle’s association with the hat was based on the fact that Young Tarwater never took it off, so now that it is gone, does this represent Young Tarwater following a path of his own? Just as in Wise Blood, the importance of the symbolism of the hat is not in the answer, as no answer is provided, what is important is the asking of the question itself. O’Connor is inviting the reader to come to their own conclusions about the stories she is telling.
The final piece of evidence to support this thesis comes from O’Connor’s 1965 work titled, Everything That Rises Must Converge. In this story, we are introduced to Julian and Julian’s mother, where Julian is accompanying his mother on the bus since she no longer feels safe traveling alone post desegregation. In Everything That Rises Must Converge, O’Connor continues to provide extensive commentary on hats. The mother’s hat is described as “hideous,” and the text goes on to describe its unique characteristics (O’Connor 485). “It was a hideous hat. A purple velvet flap came down on one side of it and stood upon the other; the rest of it was green and looked like a cushion with the stuffing out” (O’Connor 485). What is interesting about this hat is that it sets up two key points. First, the hat is expensive, and secondly Julian hates it. The narrator says, “everything that gave her pleasure was small and depressed him,” showing Julian’s hatred for the item (O’Connor 485).
Furthermore, Julian’s motivations throughout the entire story revolve around making his mother upset, Julian rose, crossed the aisle, and sat down in the place of the woman with the canvas sandals. From this position, he looked serenely at his mother. Her face had turned an angry red. He stared at her, making his eyes the eyes of a stranger. He felt his tension suddenly lift as if he had openly declared war on her (O’Connor 492).
This scene, along with the earlier quotation that what gives his mother pleasure depresses him indicates that Julian openly enjoys making his mother upset and is depressed when she is happy, represented by her purple hat.Towards the end of the story, Julian’s mother dies from falling over. When Julian’s mother is knocked over, her purple hat falls off and the text reads, “Her legs were stretched out in front of her, and her hat was on her lap” (O’Connor 498). Julian angrily yells at his mother, and he picks up her hat. Julian is furious at his mother, and this seems to come from a deeply rooted hatred, yet when he realizes she’s not okay, his language and treatment of her completely shifts. He calls her things like “darling” and “sweetheart” and “Mamma” and goes crying out for help. The story is no longer keeping track of where his mother’s hat is, but presumably Julian is still holding it. When she was wearing the hat, the hat represented Julian’s anger and hatred towards his mother. Yet when she is dead and Julian is now holding the hat, it has shifted into an object that represents his love and affection towards his mother. Julian’s conflicting feelings and his impression of his mother are represented in the purple hat, yet what his true feelings are, are not necessarily clear in the end.
The depictions of hats in O’Connor’s work, namely, Wise Blood, The Violent Bear it Away and Everything That Rises Must Converge ask a variety of questions. O’Connor herself said, “I think a serious fiction writer describes an action only in order to reveal a mystery” (Magee 9). And in her writing in these works, O’Connor is not meaning to solve a mystery or answer a question. The symbolic use of hats within O’Connor’s work are meant to highlight the questions being asked, rather than any specific answer.
Andreas, James. “‘If it’s a Symbol, the Hell with It’: The Medieval Gothic Style of Flannery O’Connor in ‘Everything that Rises Must Converge.’” Christianity and Literature, vol. 38, no. 2, Sage Publications, Ltd., 1989, pp. 23–41, http://www.jstor.org/stable/44311748.
Brinkmeyer, Robert. The Art & Vision of Flannery O’Connor. Louisiana State University Press, 1989.
Magee, Rosemary M. (Ed.) Conversations with Flannery O’Connor. University Press Of Mississippi, 2000.
Evans, Robert. The Critical Reception of Flannery O’Connor, 1952-2017. Camden House, 2018.
O’Connor, Flannery. Collected Works. The Library of America: 1988.
Smith, Leanne E. “Head to Toe: Deliberate Dressing and Accentuated Accessories in Flannery O’Connor’s ‘Revelation,’ ‘A Late Encounter with the Enemy,’ and ‘Everything That Rises Must Converge.’” Short Story Criticism, edited by Catherine C. DiMercurio, vol. 262, Gale, 2019. Gale Literature Resource Center, link.gale.com/apps/doc/H1420125476/LitRC?u=anch19713&sid=summon&xid=158ba6b2. Accessed 11 Oct. 2021. Originally published in Flannery O’Connor Review, vol. 6, 2008, pp. 40-55.
Spivey, Ted. Flannery O’Connor: the Woman, the Thinker, the Visionary. Mercer University Press, 1995.
Stephens, Martha. The Question of Flannery O’Connor. Louisiana State University Press, 1973.
Moriah Parker is a senior pursuing a dual major with English and Japanese with a minor in Creative Writing. She has a love of poetry inspired by poets such as Li-Young Lee and Mary Oliver and hopes to one day be able to work as a poetry translator while working in Japan.