The Round House is written by a woman, filtered through the perspective of a young boy, and layered with themes of gendered violence. What are the possibilities and limits of having Joe as a narrator? What unique angle does he have to offer and how would the narrative differ as told by another character? (Be specific.)
Allowing Joe to be the narrator gives an unforeseen perspective that most individuals would not think of when a crime, such as a rape, occurs. This new perspective gives the story a unique angle. The book portrays how his innocence quickly disappears and the corruption that occurs to his mother leads him to commit murder, which adds to the psychological pressure that he is already encountering. Although he explains the actions and moods of his mother after the rape, the audience really does not know what is going through her mind, which is a limit of having Joe as the narrator. If the narrative would have been told by the mother’s point of view, the tone would be saddened and less revengeful. Because the mother was sleeping and in her room so much, I believe her perspective would actually give less detail of the story behind the crime. Joe does a great job investigating what led up to the crime and takes matters into his own hands, in order to protect his mother. The display of Joe’s innocence at the start of the book to his mature and hardened self at the end of the book portray how devastations can affect an entire family and ruin the innocence for children. Joe was the only character who fully took matters into his own hands and directly spoke to everyone to get a full list of perspectives. Because all of his findings are shared throughout the book, Erdrich was extremely intelligent in picking Joe to be the narrator.
I completely agree, I think that allowing Joe to narrate added so much more to the story and the events within it. Seeing Joe’s shift from innocence to outrage shows the impact that a traumatic event such as this one can have on children. Joe, at only thirteen, has not yet learned how to deal with or fully understand his emotions, and suddenly he is forced to take on heavy anger and despair. He is desperate to feel some sense of normalcy again, and so he becomes focused on bringing the rapist to justice. He seems to take this responsibility onto himself at only thirteen. When all hope is lost for justice, the only path Joe sees to bring his family back to life again is to murder the rapist. A decision that easily could have ruined Joe’s life. By using Joe’s perspective throughout this novel, the author is able to make the readers see so much more about how a child and family handle trauma.
Joe’s perspective brings a unique view on the events of the novel. Joe has a strong devotion to his mother saying, “her absence stopped time” when she was missing at the beginning of the novel (3). Then later he strategically plans to kill his mother’s attacker, and he succeeds. After killing Lark, he tells his parents that “he deserved it. Mom is free now. You’re free. The guy who killed him should get a medal” (292). Having Joe narrate the story shows a personal, male point of view. It allows readers to see the perspectives on sexual violence of all genders in the novel. Men are told by society to not express emotion so to see a teenage boy be concerned with his mother’s well-being shows that sexual violence matters despite gender. However, because Joe narrates the story, the victim’s perspective is lost. Joe can see the effects of the attack and hear the story, but the true first-person view changes with Joe’s filter. Erdrich, however, writes the details exquisitely so no matter who tells the story the reader still feels emotions for the characters. During the attack description, I personally felt horrified when Lark uttered “if you move an inch I will kill this baby and if you move an inch I will kill Mayla” (162). Without Joe’s perspective and Erdrich’s passion, the words would not have as a strong of an impact as they currently do.
Katie, I totally agree. The use of Joe as the narrator, combined with the focus on his father’s struggle as well his mother’s, emphasizes the point that while the sexual assault epidemic plaguing reservations takes women as its primary victims, there are a host of secondary victims whose lives are similarly affected, even if they didn’t go through the trauma firsthand. The close connections and often familial relations between the various characters create ripple effects, illustrating what I believe to be Erdrich’s primary point: when a native woman is raped, not only is her life shattered, but the entire community is shaken.
Having Joe as the narrator brought forth many different unique views and perspectives otherwise unachievable with a different main character. The first of those being the fact that Joe himself wasn’t the one who was attacked. Through Joe, we received special insight to the toll sexual violence can have not only on the victim, but also on the victim’s loved ones. For instance, if Geraldine was the narrator rather than Joe, we would perhaps never fully understand how much of a role the attack had in the lives of Joe and his father that summer. Joe also offered a very unique perspective because of his age. He was only 13, so his understanding of sexual violence and its effects went from very little to a lot in an extremely short amount of time. It was very interesting to see Joe develop into basically a new person in the span of a few months because of a terrible thing that happened to his mother. He transitioned from an average middle school boy in the beginning of the book to a man seeking vengeance on his mother’s attacker by the end of the book, and we got to witness this transformation firsthand.
I agree with all of your points, Tysen. Another unique perspective that Joe has is that he is a man rather than a woman. He notices how the day is simply off the day of the attack and how his mother changes after the attack. For example, both Joe and his father noticed that she was not home to make dinner as she ALWAYS is at a particular time. The expectation that she would be there doing the maternal things that she always does actually is a good thing as they absolutely know something is wrong because she is not where she should be. Also, after her attack she secludes herself in her room and the men are left to fend for themselves, which is something that is commented on by Joe many times throughout the novel such as how his father does not cook very well. Neither of the men do pick up the maternal roles that are left open.
While I do agree that having Joe as the narrator provided a unique perspective, I also think that it created a significant lack of death regarding actually recognizing the implications of sexual assault. For example, in the beginning of the novel, Joe recalls, “My mother was sunk in such a heavy sleep that when I tried to throw myself down next to her, she struck me in the face.” The reader from then on is told about Joe’s innocence on recognizing signs of trauma from his mother and his inability to help her cope. Joe acting as the narrator make sit so we, the audience, don’t get the whole story and are blocked from knowing what is going through Geraldine’s mind as she heals both physically and mentally. I think that this novel would have been even more incredible had it switched narrators every few chapters. It would have been even more powerful if the story had been told by Geraldine, so not only could the audience see the effects that her assault had on her through the perspective of Joe, but also actually know exactly how she was coping and processing through everything that had happened.
Gracia, I definitely agree with this point. While having Joe as the narrator allowed Erdrich to show his personal thoughts and changes through the course of the novel, the result was that it left out much of the impact that the rape had on Geraldine herself. From Joe’s point of view, the reader predominantly sees the physical effect of the rape as evidenced by Geraldine staying in her room and not eating or talking to anyone. This is very limited because the reader never gets insight into the mental side of how Geraldine is processing the events. Furthermore, I would argue that Joe is never fully able to grasp the extent of what has happened to his mother, as best illustrated by his constant sexualization of Sonja throughout the novel. Ultimately, because Joe’s main focus becomes seeking revenge for what has happened to his mother, this ends up taking away from Geraldine’s recovery and response to the event. While I definitely think that Linden has does something absolutely horrific in his rape of Geraldine and murder of Mayla and the court systems are too flawed to respond correctly, Joe’s decision to use violence in response definitely raises questions about revenge and using violence to respond to violence. This is a unique question raised by having Joe as the narrator, but it ultimately discounts much of Geraldine’s response and her personal struggle in the wake of the rape.
Joe’s perspective, being so young, throughout the book offered an interesting glimpse into how trauma reverberates throughout a family, however, I feel that his perspective is being over celebrated. Joe offers a very detailed account of his mother’s recovery, much more so than she may offer, but Joe is a child. It is difficult to see any family member in agony, especially a parent, but because he is so close to his mother, it is a more traumatic experience for him. While it is traumatic, Joe also does not have the ability to change any of the situation such as what happened, healing his mother, making time go faster, and other factors. This is a lot of stress on a child at such a young age, and while it does offer an interesting 3rd person view of the situation, Joe’s depiction of it feels very heighten rather than what actually is. I feel that including more of his mother’s perspective in healing would add a lot to the novel, especially with tradition and gender roles within the Native American culture possibly playing in.
I agree with you in the fact that Joe is too young to make the impact the Erdrich made it out to be. As a 13-year-old, there is no way I would have been able to handle that situation in stride the way Joe was able to.
Joe and his father’s relationship is very similar to that of Scout and Atticus in “To Kill a Mockingbird”. Their relationship is the only reason I could see Joe knowing and being as involved as he was. Knowing about the situation is different than acting on it. The scene in the grocery store is possible, however the murder and car crash seem over the top. It seemed as though Erdrich didn’t know how to end the story.
The similarity of the two pairs is interesting. The connection between a child and a parent is unique. When you think about a son/daughter’s view of their parent it is their whole world. Stories like these two show that kids understand their parents even in ways they may not understand at the time. Although I feel the age isn’t perfect it fits the story very well. As a 13-year-old preteen who is just starting to see things that he never consider or even knew of. I feel this is shown in the very start of the book when Joe never states what he thought happened to his mother. Either from mind numbness from the shock or from simply not knowing of what could have happened specifically. Joe as the main character means he is dynamic. The story covers the mental maturing of Joe through a high stress period of time. Personally I agree that I would not have been able to do what Joe did, but I would never doubt that there is someone who could.
Isabelle– you bring up a good point that I didn’t even realize when reading the book. While Joe’s perspective on the rape was not a first hand account, he likely gave the reader way more detail than the mother would have given, had she been telling the story. Especially because the mother was the one who experienced the trauma and was obviously not in a state to be openly sharing her thoughts, having Joe narrate the story was actually helpful. At first, I did not see it this way, as it was hard to allow myself to come to terms with the fact that a teenage boy was telling the story of a woman’s rape. I mean, how could he understand, right? But actually, now that you mention it, I’m glad that it was Joe who told the story. The Round House would have very well been a completely different story had his mother given the accounts of her own rape. It allowed us to not only receive more detail, but see how the effects of rape have a much wider reach than just to the survivor.
To begin with, the narrative is limited by having Joe as the narrator because the narrative cannot go into nearly enough detail about the crime that was committed on Joe’s mother, Geraldine. We — the readers — are instead the bystanders, stuck watching the pain, grief, and anger that Geraldine goes through without ever having exactly enough information to completely relate to her. When she shuts herself in her room, and gets angry when Joe proposes finding her attacker and making him pay for harming her, we, like Joe, are unable to quite understand her method of reasoning. Also, because Joe is a thirteen year old kid, everything is filtered into a child’s perspective on it all. However, having Joe as the narrator also gives a life to the story that it otherwise would not have. Because Joe is a child, the Round House is also a growing up, coming of age story. Yet given the nature of the book, the book then becomes about a kid who is forced to grow up too fast because of the events that befall the adults in his life. His mother is raped and assaulted; his father endures a heart attack; Sonja is hit by Whitey. Joe proclaims himself to be his mother’s savior, and eventually shoots Linden, because he believes that no one else is willing or able to save his mother, which is an impossible burden for a thirteen year old kid to take on. Also, by having Joe be the narrator, we get to see a sort of gender conflict, in which sexism and objectification of women is a strong trait of the antagonist, yet Joe also possesses some of the same trait. This quality is shown with his lust for Sonja, who sees him as more of an adopted son. Thus, we encounter a complicated scenario in which Joe condemns such acts and feels guilty for how he treats Sonja. Without having Joe be the narrator, we would not receive this nuanced perspective on the violence and sexism present in the book.
I agree with Kylie in the sense that Joe’s narration creates distance between the reader and Geraldine. Joe, being a child, cannot fully understand the grief and pain that his mother is enduring. He is distanced from her emotions and biased by his longing for his “before-mother” (89). This longing causes him to dread coming home and seeing his mother in the state that she was in. He even depicts her as a “pale smudge” with a “spidery look” that was “repellant” (87). This criticizing diction displays Joe’s confusion about his mother’s behaviors. In many ways, he is unable to understand her and instead wants his “before-mother back” (193). Thus, the reader cannot have any better understanding of Geraldine than Joe can, which therefore limits our empathy towards Joe’s mom.
Moreover, having a male narrator complicates the author’s message. While Louise Erdrich is standing up for the protection and rights of Native American women, it is evident that the women themselves do not have much of a voice in the story. Even though, Linda does narrate part of the story, the majority of it is narrated by Joe. Furthermore, Linda is depicted as “magnetically ugly,” like a “pop-eyed porcupine” (110). Thus, Joe’s narration of her is harsh and devaluing. Additionally, Joe’s behavior around his Aunt Sonja only worsens the issue. He objectifies her by only being interested in her appearance. Once Sonja reprimands him, Joe realizes he is a “gimme-gimme asshole,” but accepts it rather than changing himself (223). This proves the point that Joe, too, devalued women. As a result, Joe’s bias dilutes Erdrich’s call for female empowerment. Effectually, one must consider the effects of a different narrator.
If Geraldine was the narrator, the story would be told through a more mature and accurate lens. The reader would have a closer understanding of her experience and the severe impact it had on her. However, Joe’s narration adds a coming-of-age aspect to the story that is intriguing and relatable. Joe acts as the glue by connecting the stories of his friends and family all while eliciting the reader’s sympathy. Also, he is the one that avenges his mom and obtains justice for his family. Even though the reader lacks understanding of his mother’s pain, Joe invites us to understand his pain along with his father’s. Another possible narrator for the story could have been Linda. Linda’s narration would have given a unique insight into Lark’s motives, but would have further distanced us from Geraldine and the gravity of the situation. In short, Joe’s narration does not empower Geraldine, however it does highlight the motifs of familial ties and vengeance through a coming-of-age story.
If the purpose of the novel is to expose and make the audience think critically of the toll of sexual violence and the cultural suppression of Indian communities, than Joe is the best narrator. An adult narrator would not have the same reactions or observations as Joe because they are aware of the world’s evils. His age makes him an unaware observant to simplify what he sees, and lets the audience react and analyze. This allows us to see him process his mother’s rape while also sexualizing Sonja and seeing his friend objectify other girls. An adult narrator would compare the two and lay in front of the reader, not challenging them. We also learn of the reservation life because it is the only home Joe has ever known. The way he describes the novelty of the grocery store, the horrible condition of Angus’ building, the limited tribal jurisdiction his father rules on, it is obvious that this is normal for Joe. However this casual innocent view of his community’s oppression allows the reader to discover and understand.
I also disagree that to advocate for Indian victims of sexual violence that the novel must empower women. As we learn from Joe’s perspective, sexual violence deeply affects the victim and everyone they know. I burdens a community. Seeing rape from only a woman’s point of view enforces the idea that sexism is a woman’s issue, and thus not much would be gained from Geraldine’s narration. Observing Joe and his father suffer from the evil makes it a men’s issue too, and thus the novel has far more impact. In addition, because his mother is so depressed and unresponsive initially, Joe’s perspective probably better illustrates the suffering his mother goes through. Joe is also the best character to observe his father strive for justice and be rejected by federal government. With Joe as narrator, the audience can better understand the way Native victims do not get justice, and this advocates for change. To say though that the novel does not empower women would be incorrect. Almost every female character is independant and strong, like Akii refusing to be killed by her husband, Sonja leaving Whitey, Linda refusing to let her self be victimized, and Geraldine urinating on the matches to save herself and Mayla. Joe as the narrator does not disempower women, but informs the big picture of sexual violence against an oppressed community.
Joe has a unique perspective as the narrator; he is a young child who has never experienced any kind of trauma before his mother’s attack. While his three best friends have everyday hardships, Joe’s family and home life seem normal. This only increases the intensity of the effects of the attack. Additionally, Joe is an innocent child who struggles to understand the events of the sexual assault. Joe and the reader learn together about the details and the dangers of sexual violence, and this helps to inform readers and spread awareness of this growing problem.
However, Joe is also a very limited narrator for similar reasons. The fact that he has not experienced anything like this before might have hindered his views and exaggerated what he saw. The novel described how Geraldine locked herself away from her family, and this had a large impact on Joe, as well as the reader, who is able to see the impact of the attack on the victim. Despite this, Joe is unable to know what his mother is thinking and feeling exactly, and he can only guess. Erdrich could have included a section narrated by Geraldine, where her inner thoughts are explored. This would help to explain her shifts in behavior, from refusing to move from her bed to trying to be overly excited to cook and resume usual chores. The reader would have gained valuable insight to the effects of Geraldine’s attack, though Joe’s narration helps the reader to feel the confusion and frustration of the sexual assault.
I absolutely agree. I was initially irritated when I realized that the narrator of this book was male because by default, it takes away the voice of the woman who actually experienced it. By reassigning the narration to a man, it feels as though it implies that a woman needs a man to speak for her in order to have her trauma recognized. However, upon further reading, I realized that Erdrich was making a comment on how our society often does ignore women’s issues unless a man recognizes them as important, and used a male lens to exemplify that. We also see the reality of the “male gaze” through Joe, especially because he is an adolescent boy with raging hormones. For example, whenever Joe is with Sonja, all he looks at are her breasts. Joe thinks Sonja does not notice, but she later reveals that she would be an idiot not to notice his obvious gawking. This further exemplifies the oppression and lack of understanding that often happens between men and women; a problem with our society that often leads to crimes like sexual assault.
By using Joe as a narrator instead of Geraldine, Erdrich also highlights the reality than a bystander can never fully understand the implications of being a survivor of sexual assault, which can be analyzed through a psychological lens. Again, because the narrator is not the one who was assaulted, we cannot truly know what Geraldine was feeling or going through, which makes the reader a bystander as well. Erdrich uses this to show the reader the destruction that one attack can cause; not only the halt of the life of the survivor, but the unraveling of the lives and mental states of all who surround them, especially in a close knit community like that of the reservation.
Often in cases such as rape, I think people tend to focus more on the victim and the perpetrator while disregarding other individuals who have been affected as well. The uni
Often in cases such as rape, I think people tend to focus more on the victim and the perpetrator while disregarding other individuals who have been affected as well. By telling the story through the lens of Joe, Edrich is able to give an alternative view of the situation from an individual who is indirectly affected by it and portray the distraught that rape can have on others aside form the victim. In addition, it seems that if the story was narrated through Clemence, there would be a lack of detail seeing the state at which she was in.
Because Joe is only 13, there is a naivety that comes with his perspective which allows for the development of his maturity throughout the book. Joe’s age and immaturity highlights how profound the effects sexual assault can be as he eventually murders Linden. All Joe can think about is vengeance, while his father is more concerned with the well being of Clemence. This displays how Joe’s lack of maturity takes a different approach to the situation and overall a different objective to handle it. Joe’s ambition for vengeance also puts a spot light on the United States Criminal Justice System and their lack of duty and responsibility which fueled Joe to kill Linden. Having such a dramatic narrator as Joe also emphasizes how horrific sexual assault is. If the narration of the story was from the more calm and rational father of Joe, the whole situation could possibly be downplayed in an unintentional way.
I agree. At first it was difficult hearing such a sensitive topic being narrated by a young boy like Joe. Soon however, raw emotions and Joe’s predicament made story captivating, especially considering many of us reading this here are also adolescents with families. Joe’s unique perspective made the story feel strikingly real. As he journeyed for his mother’s vengeance, he grew tremendously from an immature 13 year old child; while it was an unsettling process, the event and it’s aftermath undoubtedly served as a coming to age for Joe.
Joe’s is perspective is unique in that it isn’t a thirteen year old telling us a story, it’s an adult looking back on his past. There is innocence in that Joe didn’t understand some of what happened at the time, but because the lens was that of an adult, a lot of the youthful, brash interpretations of what had happened weren’t there. I think that having this perspective gave us an outside view of the occurrence, even though Joe was involved in the story. We read Joe’s analyzed retelling of his own actions and thoughts. If we had heard the story from Joe as a thirteen year old we wouldn’t have had as much understanding of the emotions going on within Joe.
Often, we hear stories of sexual violence from the victims themselves. However, The Round House offers an outsider’s perspective, giving readers more of a 360º view of the ramifications of this crime. Through Joe’s eyes, we see the stark difference in his mother before and after the attack. He constantly reminisces on what he misses about his mother, such as her traditional cooking. These longings for the previous aspects of his mother build an image of who she used to be before the attack, creating a vivid “before” picture of her for the readers to compare with the present. Through these comparisons, readers see just how deeply a crime like this can wound a victim and kill them in a spiritual sense.
Joe also offers a unique perspective considering his age and stage in life. As a young boy, he is not accustomed to deciphering his emotions. His emotions are pure and genuine, which makes his whole journey that much more candid and primitive. What he feels and how he acts is unfiltered and offers an authentic tale of the toll rape can take on not only the victim, but anyone close to them as well.
I think Erdrich’s decision to make Joe the narrator was an interesting decision. Throughout The Round House Joe goes through a huge transformation as his innocence is stolen from him after his mother is raped. He begins with a simplistic, idealistic, childish view on life, but because of a broken system he feels forced to enact revenge. If the mother had been the narrator, I firmly believe that the story would’ve taken a much more somber and sad turn. Erdrich compares the female vs male minds and stereotypes in the Round House. Men often turn to violence and anger when tragic events occur, while women often wither and hold everything in. Erdrich’s decision to make Joe the narrator allows for an interesting comparison that would’ve been lost if the mother had been the narrator.
The unique possibility that having Joe as a narrator gives us, is the ability to contrast his reaction to the sexual assault with the primitive nature of his mind at times. Throughout the story, Joe often shows a less than mature view of women, when referencing their appearance. These feeling are prevalent right off the bat when he is talking about the Star Trek characters that he and his friends admire. He references his admiration for Worf saying “Worf didn’t enjoy sex with human females because they were to fragile and he had to show restraint.”(20) It is an interesting and confusing juxtaposition to contrast his statement here with the anger he shows in the act that was performed against his mother. Another example of this behavior is the way he describes Sonja. When describing her, he says “I felt differently about her breasts-on them I had a hopeless crush.”(24) In my opinion these two examples illustrate that Joe does not in fact have a complete grasp on the true devastation the crime committed against his mom causes the victim. Rather, he sees the pain that his mom is undergoing and is seeking revenge based upon his love for his mother, and her specific pain, rather than the specific crime. He also allows us to see the ways in which a crime like this can impact most importantly the victim, but also those around them. The limit to having Joe as the narrator is the same as the possibility. If the story was told from the point of view of the mother than we would have been able to gain much more insight into the actual pain that the mother was feeling. With Joe as a narrator there was much more of a vengeful tone to the story with less time spent being really connected to the emotion of the crime that took place and the mother’s thought process following the act. I feel it may have been interesting to have a section of the story that referred to what was going through the mother’s head during the time she was in her room alone.
With Joe as the narrator, we clearly see the results sexual assault can have on a victim’s family and loved ones, especially from a minority group who is not receiving adequate help. In this novel, Joe’s family is not given much aid from the government and Joe is the one who found most of the evidence, not the police officers. Narrating the story through someone so young vividly displayed the fight people go through to seek justice from sexual assaults because Joe himself struggled to comprehend the events just as his family struggled to get them legally processed. Having the narrator be in the dark about the next events he would find out left the reader on cliff hangers that made the book more exciting. If the narrator had been an adult the novel would not have had the same affect of mystery and confusion, which would have downplayed the message that minority groups are often, also, left in the dark.
With Joe as the narrator of the novel, the readers are able to experience the perspective of a young boy on an incredibly mature and devastating situation. Joe is thrown into this without any warning and forced to mature, however it not always in the positive direction. We see him lose his innocence as he grows a dependency for alcohol and develops revenge for Lark which ultimately leads to Lark’s murder. It is difficult, however, because Joe is not only male but also incredibly young making it hard for him to comprehend such a crime not only against women but against his people. Geraldine’s thoughts and perspective are never fully expressed in the novel which makes it difficult to fully understand what she went through. Her recovery is witnessed as painful and forced leaving her to ultimately settle for the outcome of her rape. It is unique that we get to see the full effects of this crime through the eyes of a young person and how they can be so deeply affected by the actions of others. Joe reminisces about the times before the incident and wishes to reverse what Lark had done by eliminating him from the world completely.
Joe is able to not only see the crime through his own eyes; his curiosity drives him to discover the reactions of many adults around him. Joe’s narration is realistic; it tends to change topic often, for example whenever he brings up Sonja’s attractive qualities in the midst of narrating a serious topic. Although Joe is narrating The Round House from a later point in his life, it is clear he still possesses some child-like curiosity and tendency for distraction.
The level at which Joe cares about his mother makes an important point about ignorance – although some men (and women, for that matter) may show ignorance or even hate towards victims of sexual violence, those bad qualities are learned, not set upon birth. Joe has seen strong women such as his “before” mother throughout his entire childhood; this has allowed him to develop a sense of respect and caring towards women.
Joe provides a unique dynamic and perspective to the delivery of Erdrich’s message that the ends does not always justify the means, no matter how severe the circumstances may be. Erdrich uses Joe to demonstrate how extreme and immoral actions root from lack of experience, knowledge, and leadership. When Joe’s mother was raped, Joe lost one of his main sources of wisdom and knowledge. As a result, Joe was left to fend for himself and mature at an extremely fast pace. The seemingly naive and innocent young adolescent was suddenly forced to grow and mature into an adult. Joe provides a unique perspective because he does not have enough “real world experience” to cope with the adverse situations quickly filling his life. He resorted to naively attempting to solve the crime on his own and ended up murdering his mother’s rapist. Erdrich uses Joe as a lens of naivety to show the detrimental effects that rape has not only on the victim, but also the surrounding family members. Joe’s unique sense of justice derives itself from his love and unique relationship with his mother. If this narrative were told by another character, the reader would not gain any sense of the love and unique dynamic of Joe’s relationship with his mother, which ultimately resulted in Joe’s harsh and extreme actions.
Having Joe narrate this novel allows for the development of the central theme of revenge. The novel touches on the fact that Joe had to be the one to commit the crime because his punishment for murder would be much less severe then it would be if his father had committed the crime for example. The narration of this story had to be from the person that committed the murder, because the climax of this novel was that drastic act. It is Joe’s development from an innocent young boy pulling small trees from the floor of his house, to a revenge driven young man killing his mothers attacker that truly allows us to see the development of an individual after a horrific event in their life, and the cost that comes with revenge. Joe seemingly had little to lose compared to the rest of his family when it came to committing this crime, but in the end he lost his best friend. This makes a very interesting point about the idea of revenge, and whether the benefit is greater than the repercussions.
I agree with the statements previously made about Joe’s narration adding a perspective not commonly thought of in a rape case: the family’s. Although this is an important aspect, I think another possible purpose for this perspective is to create a more relatable situation for the reader. It can be harder to relate to a victim of sexual assault, but it is easier to relate to a character like Joe who is close to someone who has. This connection allows us to better understand the suffering, anger and general thoughts of the characters. This is important because Joe is constantly changing how he feels about his mom, his dad and the assault. We have to be able to relate to him to understand why he feels a certain way at a particular time. For example, we see Joe’s rising anger towards his mother because she is almost non-existent after the assault. This is a terrible thing to feel towards a victim of sexual assault, but if you put yourself in his shoes he is a young man who has had his whole life flipped upside down. Does it justify his actions especially later in the book? No, but it allows the reader to further empathize with the character.
Erdich’s choice to use Joe, a still naive thirteen year old, adds possibilities to expand the context of the narration, but also changes the tone and personal perspective that writing from Geraldine’s eyes would have provided. I agree with earlier comments that Joe’s view may give readers more details than his mother’s, and more than that I think that he provides clarity. Geraldine is traumatized and withdrawn, even agreeing that she can’t “come back to life” (88). Instead of hearing the story from the victim, whose emotions are clouded and who knows the truth but can’t bring herself to tell anyone, the story becomes more of a mystery to be solved as Joe and his father find clues and try to dole out punishment. Joe’s is limited in that he cannot fully understand his Mother’s emotions and experiences, but it is interesting to see that as his understanding expands we get to see his first, pure, and innocent reactions to the violence he is learning about. Joe is unbiased, a clean slate that Erdich could use to offer readers a wider view of the effects of violence. Instead of focusing solely on Geraldine’s recovery and emotions, we learn how Joe’s life has changed and how the reservation and his friends have been impacted.
Joe’s narration of the novel allows for focus on childhood dependence and male privilege. As a young boy, Joe cannot comprehend the effects of the trauma his mother endures. He sees a change in her, and only recognizes how this change affects him. She is no longer the mother he once knew, but a shadow of the woman who was once his provider, his caretaker, and his protector. Joe’s lack of sympathy stems from his childhood immaturity; he is unable to see the situation from his mother’s point of view, until much later in life when he “writes” this novel. Even as a child, Joe possesses an implicit freedom throughout the novel. He is a boy. Joe roams free around his reservation, not questioned by anyone, leaving no more than an occasional note for his father. And he is safe. Even after a vicious attack on his mother, he feels secure enough to leave home on his own and do as he pleases; safe enough to confront and attempt to kill his mother’s attacker. For any girl, or even a grown woman such as Geraldine, safety in her town, in her work place, in her sacred worship space, and in her own homeland is no guarantee.
Joe’s narration of the The Round House provides insight to the negative ripple effects that the perpetrator’s actions have on both the immediate family and the community surrounding the victim. Prior to reading The Round House, I had been exposed to the already appalling statistics regarding sexual assault in the United States, however reading about the Mother’s rape from an outside perspective implicitly highlighted how many people are impacted from a single case. Both Joe’s personal emotions and perception of other’s raw emotions made me consider the extent of people in our own community at UO & in our hometowns that have not only been directly impacted by sexual assault, but indirectly changed because of knowing or living with a victim just as Joe experienced with his Mother. Additionally, hearing this emotional story from a male’s perspective breaks the masculine stereotype of being non-emotive (especially with vulnerable, or difficult topics) because Joe consistently voices his feelings. Even something as simple as Joe being deeply bothered by this crime against his mother is something that Joe’s narration allows us to see. Even though there are obvious restrictions with a second-hand story, Joe’s narration provides a glimpse into different aspects of the novel.
By using Joe as the narrator, Louise Erdrich is able to present a touchy subject, from a more innocent point of view. This adds to the effect the story has on the reader, because after his mother is raped, Joe is forced to almost immediately grow up, and he loses that childish ignorance towards the rest of the world. It is heartbreaking to see a thirteen year old undergo a circumstance like his, and if the book would have been narrated from an older person’s point of view such as the father’s, the situation still would have been horrific, but possibly less intense, in a sense that it wouldn’t mold an older character’s way of life quite as much. The reader is able to see Joe change and develop a huge source of anger, and he is faced with the pressure to act as an adult, and basically lose his parents for sometime, which is incredibly difficult for a kid his age. As people grow older, they tend to become more and more numb to the terrible things that occur in the world, especially today where there are killings and accidents on the news quite frequently. Sometimes it is easy to forget how traumatizing things can be, especially for kids. Therefore because the story is told through the eyes of Joe, the reader has an easier time understanding what effect rape and violence has on everyone, especially youth.