Flannery O’Connor in Flannery (2020), dir. Elizabeth Coffman & Mark Bosco (photo by Joe McTyre, Stuart A Rose Library, Emory University; all images courtesy of the film)

The new documentary Flannery is the cinematic equivalent of a full-court press on Flannery O’Connor‘s behalf, to protect her place in the pantheon of great American writers from the charge that she was a racist. Unfortunately, evidence gleaned from other sources, such as Paul Elie’s recent article for The New Yorker, demonstrate that she certainly was. I sensed a leitmotif of anxiety underlying what is otherwise a very measured and carefully crafted look at O’Connor’s life. Directors Elizabeth Coffman and Mark Bosco’s defensive tactic is subtly interwoven with the accounts that several writers, friends, relatives, biographers, and even O’Connor’s publisher give about her short, arduous life.

Tommy Lee Jones, Conan O’Brien, and William Sessions discuss the overweening influence of Catholicism on O’Connor’s art. Writers like Alice McDermott, Mary Gordon, Mary Carr, and Tobias Wolff discuss the humor that undergirded her stories. The film even attempts to make her a martyr, with one unnamed interviewee saying: “In some ways we can say ‘Thank god for her suffering,’ because it allowed her to produce the work that she produced.” The full-court press becomes clearly apparent when the talking heads attempt to deflect and reason away the evidence of racism in O’Connor’s writing, particularly in personal letters to her friend, playwright Maryat Lee.

Flannery O’Connor (photo by AP)

One scene employs the arch and austere editor Sally Fitzgerald (who befriended O’Connor after taking her in as a temporary boarder) to explain away the writer’s address to Lee in one letter as “Dear Nigger Loving New York White Woman.” Fitzgerald claims, “It was the ‘New York White Woman’ that was the hidden insult.” But this doesn’t jibe with her letter to Lee from 1964, which states: “About the Negroes, the kind I don’t like is the philosophizing prophesying pontificating kind, the James Baldwin kind. Very ignorant but never silent.” Baldwin is one of the most incisive, truthful, and brilliant analysts of US culture ever, but she couldn’t see past his skin color to recognize his insight.

Other defenders include Alice Walker, Hilton Als, Richard Rodriguez, and Lan Samantha Chang, the director of the Iowa Writers’ Workshop. On O’Connor’s politics, Walker says, “She just saw the mystery of the craziness without always trying to make the craziness black or white.” Rodriguez makes the case that she was too faithful a scribe of her culture: “She’s too good … her mimicry of the voices around her is too acute, and in that accuracy she doomed herself because a lot of these stories are judged by modern readers as unacceptable.” This is like answering a job interview question about one’s worst trait by saying “I work too hard.” Als offers: “I don’t think that Flannery was racist so much as she had a knee-jerk reaction to race in the way that she had a knee-jerk reaction to her mother.” So now racism (the reduction of another human being to the sign of their skin color) is analogized to the Freudian mechanics of parent-child relations? This justification just can’t be justified.

Flannery O’Connor with her peacocks (photo by Joe McTyre for AP)

I think that all of these claims and observations can be comfortably considered true at once alongside O’Connor’s racism (aside from Als’s defense) to see her as a whole, complex, and flawed human being. More than being a Southern writer, a Catholic (this is given much weight), the daughter of a father who died of Lupus (the same disease that would take her at age 39), she was a brilliant chronicler of her time and place. Reading her in my 20s, I found her one of the keenest observers of how personal ideology enchants the real, political, corporeal world into and out of focus, demonstrating how some of us are always living in a carefully cultivated dream. The directors might have made a more convincing portrait if they had led with what writer Mary Gordon says toward the end: “She looks at the darkness unflinchingly, and she approaches it with clarity and with precision. And that, I think, is her greatness.”

Flannery O’Connor knew the contours of this darkness by heart. She lived them. She became a literary emissary with enough self-awareness to show her readers the mysteries of ideology, the tortuousness of a belief in a god. In her short story “Greenleaf,” these traits are prismed through a white woman farmer who is gored by a bull, and perhaps in her dying moment admits something she could not before. We don’t know exactly what that is, because the author doesn’t let us know. O’Connor was like this in both her life and her writing: a faithful narrator who told some harsh truths, but also whispered the worst parts of herself and her culture under her breath.

Flannery is now available to stream via various virtual cinemas.

The Latest

Required Reading

This week, the Getty Museum is returning ancient terracottas to Italy, parsing an antisemitic mural at Documenta, an ancient gold find in Denmark, a new puritanism, slavery in early Christianity, and much more.

Seph Rodney

Seph Rodney, PhD, is a senior critic for Hyperallergic and has written for the New York Times, CNN, MSNBC, and other publications. He is featured on the podcast The...

11 replies on “A Documentary’s Attempt to Protect Flannery O’Connor at All Costs”

  1. The Heart is a Lonely Hunter is all the defense that she will ever need. And as for being racist how could you fail to mention her depiction of a black character, the female protagonist in Ballad of a Sad Cafe?

    1. O’Connor didn’t write either of those books. You’re thinking of Carson McCullers.

  2. Baldwin was harshly critical of Christianity so it’s probably not unusual that a very religious Christian would have difficulty with him. I’m reasonably sure many African Americans, then, found him difficult. He’s maybe praised so much now because, even among African Americans, irreligiousness is much more popular now.

    I mean I think she probably was kind of racist, but what I gather is she saw racism as part of the dark and sinful aspect of others as well as herself. The New Yorker article was off based in several ways.

  3. Thank you for exploring this topic. It was very painful to realize that Flannery O’Connor, one of my favorite writers precisely because she does not flinch from seeing the darkness in herself and others, is now being examined through the culling process of our times. For every one whose viewpoints are guaranteed to withstand the ultimate test of time, and will be with you now and in eternity, as they are, and those of you whose lifetimes of work have no taint, now and forever, of the place and culture you were born into, no discernible error when viewed from any and all other viewpoints, you are free to judge and take down the more mortal of writers, artists, thinkers, founders, leaders. I was brought up to disdain racism, to respect all people, and to read widely. I’m not sure if it’s the tolerance I was taught or innate love for one’s fellow human, but at first reading Ms O’Connor’s viewpoints did not appall me, and only intrigued me, and that has not changed. I’m not a Catholic, she was, and that’s fine too. I’m not a southerner, but she was. I did not have to agree with her point of view, but found her way of exploring deeply her own faith and understanding to be very important contributions to our culture.

  4. It would be difficult to determine whether the documentary is willfully trying to hide her racism, or if it is more a matter of the sin of omission, without watching it first. However, beyond using the tired excuse of “she was a product of her times” to defend her. It is possible to know that racism is a bad thing, and even be outspoken about it, but it is also still so deeply ingrained in our society that we often do not recognize it in ourselves.

  5. I read Flannery O’Connor’s books a long time ago – I loved her writing! are they still in print I wonder?

  6. Paul Elie’s article on Flannery O’Connor has terrible misunderstandings of the author’s writing. It also has at least one factual error. O’Connor struggled with the racism of her Southern background. Her fiction, however, has characters who belittle blacks and “white trash.” Each story has payback for the characters exhibiting such views. As for personal letters and notes, I would like to see anyone’s collection of such, especially James Baldwin’s.

Comments are closed.