Kristen Hall, Spring 2010
According to NAACP activist Kenneth B. Clark, “Racial segregation, like all other forms of cruelty and tyranny, debases all human beings-those who are its victims, those who victimize, and in quite subtle ways those who are mere accessories” (Massey, xi). This quote epitomizes the conflict in James Alan McPherson’s short story, “A Loaf of Bread.” Set in the heated racial climate of 1940s Chicago, the narrative involves a white grocery store owner, Harold Green, who sells his goods at a higher price to the black community. Due to this stark incident of racism, the African American population began an uprising, banding together to fight against the ingrained prejudices of American culture. At the close of the story, Green finally recognized the injustice he was perpetuating, and sought to rectify the problem by giving away free products. Through this tale, it is evident that racism is not based upon any biological differences between blacks and whites -as there are none- but that oppression is enabled through the selfish motives of the dominant class.
As a black writer, McPherson sought to display the persecution faced by so many individuals of his culture through his writing. He chose to write “A Loaf of Bread” in response to the “black people who had moved to Chicago in the 20s, 30s and 40s and couldn’t get mortgages to buy houses because FHA redlined certain areas” (Spalding, 5). This forced many blacks to buy from slumlords, as “discrimination in employment…and in choice of neighborhood often ensured that the only houses African Americans could afford would be older properties in already declining areas” (Meyer, 8). Blacks were then obligated to pay even larger sums in order to renovate the dilapidated homes, thus remaining in a vicious cycle of poverty and exploitation. As blacks fought to assert themselves in predominately white neighborhoods, to escape the “ghetto [filled with] crime [and] licentiousness,” violence abounded (Meyer 8). Many domineering white individuals believed in the “permanent division of our country into two societies…Negro and poor…, the other, predominantly white and affluent,” and took to acts of brutality to assert this power (Massey, 4). “White supremacists held rallies or burned crosses and used violence to intimidate blacks” as an attempt to assert their authority, based purely on skin color (Meyer, 100). White activists refused to allow equality in the housing market, even after the color line was deemed unenforceable in this industry at the end of the 1940s. These white supremacists wished to preserve the status quo, as they fought for their own rights to be superior. This insatiable attitude for superiority maintained the harsh segregation of blacks, even in their own neighborhoods, and was the rationale for McPherson to display the oppression of blacks in a grocery store setting within his story.
At the start of the story, the reader learns that “Harold Green was caught red-handed selling to one group of people the very same goods he sold at lower prices” to the opposing race (McPherson, 280). Green, as a white male and evident member of the dominant class, had been exploiting the black population because he could; everyone needed the essentials-bread and water-and he had cornered the market in order to make the greatest profit. This had been going on “for many years” as Green “acted only from habit” (280). The concept of racism had become ingrained in Green’s head, as his “father came to this country with nothing but a shirt. He was exploited…He put himself in a position to play by the rules he had learned” (281). Green felt no issue with this segregation, as his own father had faced the same problems, and apparently overcome them. Green upheld his racist tendencies as those he had persecuted banded together to picket his store and cause his financial ruin. He questioned where “they [got] so much power,” as if those under him had no authority to fight against the wrongdoings of a white man (285). Green continued to denounce the African American individuals of his neighborhood; his wife told him to demonstrate that he had morals, and Green replied back “prove it to them?” (293). The italics of the word “them” is used to signify the exaggeration of the word, and Green’s lower opinion of the subjects that he was addressing. As the narrative wore on, Green had an epiphany, with the strong coaxing of his wife, and chose to give away all the items in his shop for free. As he did so, he “felt lighthearted and wild, like a man drugged” and “was grinning with the grace of a madman” (297). He acted “hysterically,” as if he was undertaking the most eccentric task (299). Green had stepped completely out of his element, as racism had been so ingrained within his culture. However, as Green lost his need for money and he recognized his overly selfish tendencies, he was able to overcome his repulsive values.
In opposition to Green stood Nelson Reed, a Baptist minister and an assembly line worker who put his faith in God. Nelson believed in equality, and that selfish motives for profit and economic gain did not justify exploiting anyone, especially due to race. Nelson “believed in Justice with a capital J….When men start to capitalize, they gets greedy. They put a little j in joy and an even littler one in justice. They raise up a big G in Greed and a big E in Evil” (284). He recognized that the greed of the white man to increase revenue would overcome his positive nature, and lead to eventual destruction. Despite his issue with Green’s practices, Reed sat down with the store owner. He refused to look at Green’s books of sales, and fought on moral grounds, ignoring the monetary factors of the situation. Reed found his happiness in his family, rather than finances. He “lived on principle…ain’t got no dime in the bank” (294). When asked to step into Green’s proverbial shoes, Reed admitted he “can’t even afford the kind of shoes he wears” (294). Reed was stuck in a vicious cycle, as he was facing a plight similar to that of the many blacks who were attempting to buy homes in the 1940s. He was poor, but could not advance because he was being taken advantage of purely due to his race. However, despite his lack of prominence, Reed ended up winning the battle. After their conversation, Green chose to make amends for his exploitation of those in the neighborhood, beginning with Mrs. Reed’s purchase of a loaf of bread. Despite the fact that the bread was free of charge, Nelson insisted on paying for it. He did not want Green’s pity or charity, but rather to be looked at as an equal. Only when the selfish motives had disappeared could equality exist.
Mr. Green’s racism was deeply rooted in his past, and continued into the present due to his financial gains from misusing the black community. “The onliest thing that matters in this world is money” to Green, not adhering to a proper moral code (283). Green saw only the color of the people –black- and this did not matter to him; the name of his children is Green and that “is the only color [he] is interested in” (285). Green cared not who he hurt, only the benefits that he could reap as a salesman. He saw racism as one of the “realities of life” that maintained the status quo; he never thought to challenge these ideals, just go along with them so that he could remain in a position of distinction (288). Everything was based upon the “factor of circumstance,” and this was Green’s excuse for raising prices for the black community (289). Green only changed his ways when required by his wife. However, his refusal to proliferate the greed of American capitalistic society -at least in his tiny corner of the world-allowed him to depart from his extremely racist tendencies and rupture the balance. Green only facilitated racism in order to benefit himself, but, when his operation was undermined and this was no longer possible, he sought to make amends and be at equal pegging with those he had once deemed his inferiors. He was “Free! Free! Free!” from the hatred and segregation that had plagued his black peers and almost caused his own ruin (296).
Despite the prevalence of racism in the 1940s, McPherson examined the ways in which it can be defeated. Green exemplified deep-seated racism, as he refused to lower prices for blacks to promote equality in his grocery store. Blacks had been facing similar problems in their neighborhoods during this era-the housing market separated blacks and whites, allowing no economic mobility and thrusting African Americans into the dredges of poverty. This was only done to further the power of the white male, and keep the other individuals in inferior ranks. However, when the greed of prospering off of hatred is overcome, equality can arise. Only when Green was able to give away his products for free, ignoring all financial consequence, could he mend the rifts that he had created. Therefore, he exemplified the way in which altruistic motives can lead to breakthroughs in rooted intolerant relations.
Works Cited
Massey, Douglas S., and Nancy A. Denton. American Apartheid: Segregation and the Making of the Underclass. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard UP, 1993. Print.
May, Charles E., Frank N. Magill, and Cheryl Herr. “James Alan McPherson.” Critical Survey of Short Fiction. 2nd ed. Pasadena, Calif.: Salem, 2001. 1-5. Print.
McPherson, James A. “A Loaf of Bread.” The Seagull Reader. :. Ed. Joseph Kelly. 2nd ed. New York: W.W. Norton, 2008. 280-99. Print.
Meyer, Stephen Grant. As Long as They Don’t Move next Door: Segregation and Racial Conflict in American Neighborhoods. Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield, 2000. Print.
Spalding, J. M. “Interview with James Alan McPherson.” Inertia 2002: 1-5. Web. 5 May 2010. <hthttp://www.inertiamagazine.com/issues/001/interview-james-alan-mcpherson.php>
Tyson, Lois. Critical Theory Today: A User-Friendly Guide. 2nd ed. New York: Routledge, 2006. Print.