J. P. Morgan in Ragtime
J. P. Morgan, or John Pierpont Morgan, a wealthy businessman obsessed with Egyptology, met his untimely demise in Egypt after his health rapidly deteriorated upon his inability to find the otherworldly experience he had sought for years. At least, that’s what happened at the end of Ragtime by Doctorow. The real J.P. Morgan died of a stroke while traveling abroad in Rome, Italy, though he was in Egypt for some time before that. He was also an avid member of the Episcopal Church, which feels like quite a stretch from Egyptology.
However, I think the reason Doctorow chose to portray J. P. Morgan in such a way was not because of its apparent truth, but because of Morgan’s significance as a figure in history. His influence was quite extraordinary; one article I saw when I looked up his name titled him as “the man who bought the world”. Learning about him does make one wonder what it must be like to be a man as powerful as Morgan, someone who has the world at his fingertips -- and I think it must have been this question that led Doctorow to write from the perspective of Morgan in Ragtime.
Through Morgan, Doctorow portrays a man who has too much power, someone who has achieved everything there is to achieve. The Morgan that Doctorow depicts is a man who seems to have lost a sense of purpose in life (what purpose can there be when one already has everything?), and therefore desperately channels his energy into finding that purpose, the “why” of his existence and immense financial power. Why is Morgan, out of the millions of people in the universe, born into wealth? Why is he the man at the top of the world? To me, it seemed almost as if Morgan was grappling with a weird case of imposter syndrome, except the answer that Morgan eventually arrives at is that he was reincarnated and therefore superior to the rest of the world. The irony is that the same questions that he struggles with probably also apply to the Egyptian kings he believes himself to be the reincarnation of. What did those kings do to deserve to sit on the throne? After all, kings are born into royalty.
Morgan tries to confirm his theory in Egypt, but he’s unable to do so. He can’t deal with the fact that he is not, in fact, superior -- he’s just a normal human with a f*** ton of money -- and eventually dies. To me, his ending wasn’t that surprising, but it was interesting. It reminded me of an article (or maybe it was a video) I read (or watched?) a long while back about the role of luck in many, if not all, success stories. The article talked about how huge success is often the result of a stroke of luck but tricks the receiver into believing in their own excellence. As a result, many rich people may look down on poorer people, reminding them to “pull yourself up by your own bootstraps” when in fact the only difference between the two of them was that one person got lucky, while the other did not.
I honestly felt a tad bit bad for Morgan. He didn’t ask to be born rich -- that was merely a stroke of luck, though whether it was good luck or bad luck is a different story. And besides, having an existential crisis is never fun, especially when it results in your death.
Great post! I really like your focus on why Doctorow chose to choose Morgan's death in Rome for reasons besides the actual facts. I think it is interesting how he died in Rome which used to be one of the strongest empires of all time. It could also represent that no matter how powerful you are, your power, or empire will always come to an end.
ReplyDeleteI really like your post! We talked about the historical accuracies of some characters, but not Morgan, so it was interesting to learn that he didn't actually appear to have any overt fascination with Egypt - maybe he just visited the once, Doctorow learned about it, and decided to role with it the way he did with Evelyn Nesbit donating to Emma Goldman's magazine. I hadn't really thought about the meaning Morgan has in the story, and I like your interpretation of how he's struggling to understand his own wealth and power. In general, I feel like his story just serves as a sobering, mocking view of people like Morgan. He was so sure, so dead set on who he was (a reincarnated Pharaoh), that it almost shocks the reader when he becomes disillusioned and passes away.
ReplyDeleteI like that you chose to focus on Morgan as a character and consider his motivations and interests- I feel like he's often overlooked when there's such a vibrant cast of characters that we know much more about. I think your analysis is largely correct, he is lost and confused on his quest for meaning- but I guess he wouldn't quite see it that way. I also agree that his death was the only predictable and appropriate ending for him in Ragtime, nothing else would have made sense knowing both the character and the author, and Doctorow's clear opinion on the real Morgan. Great post!
ReplyDeleteI feel like in a story with a weird cast of characters, JP morgan stands out as one of the weirdest characters with one of the weirdest stories. He seems to find purpose in life in one of the strangest ways that even I don't fully understand in his obsession with Egyptian mythology and his perception that he is a reincarnation of a dead Pharaoh. Also he randomly predicted WWI before he died?? Such a weird character.
ReplyDeleteI totally agree that he is someone who has gained so much that he has nothing to live for, but I think that we are definitely intended to be highly critical of his narcissism and disregard for others. In my opinion, the way he frames Morgan's rants about how he is on too high of a level of functioning for mere mortals is pretty blatantly negative, and multiple times throughout the book Doctorow takes time to note how poorly he treats the people around him. For example, right before, his death, we have this quote "Without a word the old man [Morgan] kicked at the sides of his camel and, knocking over his Arab guide, fled to his boat" He treats the man who had done him a considerable service like expendible garbage
ReplyDeleteTo be completely honest I almost forgot this character existed.. (shhhhhh) but in my defense, it's such an odd addition to the story. With any of the characters and fictional tidbits he adds, Doctorow definitely added Morgan to teach us a lesson or some kind of moral philosophy. Either way, the entire sequence seems a bit out of place as Morgan doesn't weave into the rest of the plotline as much as the other characters.
ReplyDeleteIn keeping with his theme of ending an era, Doctorow did something interesting with Morgan's death. Not only was this the end of a great financial powerhouse (and apparent art enthusiast), you point out that his death is also symbolic, the end of an empire. As skeptical postmodernism is about history, and the repetition of history, I think it proves true that empires are built to fall. Doctorow does something similar with dismantling power systems at the end of the book by mentioning the death of the Archduke, another powerful figure influential in his death.
ReplyDelete