'Thank You Ma'am'- a Short Story by Langston Hughes

Hello Friends... 

Hopefully, we all are doing well... Be careful, we must stay fit and shouldn't fall ill getting our studies affected. We shall eat and drink healthy, exercise regularly, and won't avoid our domestic and social responsibilities. And whatever time we get for ourselves at the end of the day, we must study hard for most of the time, so that we learn to think... and thereby,- learn. We simply cannot afford to stop thinking, for we are the learners,- we are the lucky ones who got the scope to learn... 

Let's learn to think first...

Who May Participate in the Discussion

This is a discussion on the short story Thank You Ma'am by Langston Hughes. Students of Class XII, WBCHSE have to study this text for their final examination. So, it is very likely that they may find this discussion helpful for them. 

However, this discussion may help any learner to develop a strategy suitable for him/herself to study a text of fiction. Even those who prefer reading stories for leisure only may also find this platform helpful to share and discuss their own views of what they read with other readers.

Shall we start reading the story, then?-

Thank You Ma'am

Langston Hughes

The Title

What do you expect the story to be all about, now when you have already gone through the title? Is this going to be an old story of faithfulness and gratitude? Maybe it's a story of the age-old student-teacher relationship... Or perhaps, it is about something else other than these. Who knows?

Well, whatever be your assumption, you must have been quite sure by this time that the story ought to have at least two characters: a lady, and somebody else expressing his or her gratitude towards the lady. Do you have anything else to assume from the title of the text?

I think now it's time to read the story to find out how far our assumptions from the title is correct. Don't you agree?

The First Paragraph

First Reading

She was a large woman with a large purse that had everything in it but hammer and nails. It had a long strap, and she carried it slung across her shoulder. It was about eleven o'clock at night, and she was walking alone, when a boy ran up behind her and tried to snatch her purse. The strap broke with the single tug the boy gave it from behind. But the boy's weight and the weight of the purse combined caused him to lose his balance so, instead of taking off full blast as he had hoped, the boy fell on his back on the sidewalk and his legs flew up. The large woman simply turned around and kicked him right square in his blue-jeaned sitter. Then she reached down, picked the boy up by his shirt front, and shook him until his teeth rattled.

A Second Thought

Did it all happen too fast? Of course, it was fast. But we may always slow down our pace of reading, or may choose to read a segment once again to look for meanings that are not directly told. That's the fundamental joy of intensive reading, looking for meanings hinted at, but not told directly...

Shall we read the paragraph once again, now at a slower pace?---

The First Sentence

She was a large woman with a large purse that had everything in it but (except) hammer and nails. 

Don't you find the introduction of the character fascinating in its own way?- She was a woman- well that's obvious. Probably she's the woman referred to in the title. 

She was a large woman- Do you get to visualise the character in your minds' eye? Yes, you only get to see a silhouette/shadowy figure, for we don't have the details...

She was a large woman with a large purse- Now we get some more information to build up our visual perception of the character. 

A large woman with a large purse- A purse that had everything in it- Wow, it must had been a gigantic purse, containing everything under the sky... 

Everything? Not exactly- everything, except hammer and nails... 

An exaggeration?- No, you don't try to get the meaning literally here. It means that the purse contained a lot of usual, as well as unusual stuff. I am pretty sure that you get this sense conveyed anyway. But there is something very remarkable about the expression. It points out that the bag didn't contain any hammer or nail. 

Do you think this to be significant at all? Does it indicate that the lady didn't belong to certain professions? Or does it seem to be just a casual comment to you? Would you like to check if this is metaphorically significant or not?

By the way, what gains more importance in the first sentence?- The lady, or her bag? Do you feel that the lady is described less prominently than her bag in the first sentence?

Have you noted how the sentence stands out strikingly with its parallel and contrastive phrases? Make a note of the parallel phrases 'a large woman' and 'a large purse', and the contrastive phrases 'everything' and 'but (except) hammer and nails'. Don't you feel that the parallel phrases support the existence of two different entities of similar importance whereas contrastive phrases highlight the prominence of one over the other?

Shall we move on to the next sentence?

The Second Sentence

It had a long strap, and she carried it slung (hung) across her shoulder. 

The description of the purse still continues from the previous sentence- a large purse with long strap. 

The lady carried it slung across her shoulder. The strap embraced the lady across her shoulder- Does this evoke any image in your minds? Is the purse going to be more dominant a character than the lady herself?

Isn't it interesting to note that the length of the clause that actually describes the length of the strap is much short, but the clause that describes how the long strap slung across the lady's shoulder is much longer? Do you feel this to be indicative of something that is not directly told? 

The Third Sentence

It was about eleven o'clock at night, [1]

What's your opinion about the time? Is the time usual for people to stay outdoor? Or do you apprehend some danger or emergency out there? 

and she was walking alone, [2]

Do you feel this information that the lady was walking alone might help you gauze/determine the gravity of the situation? 

when a boy ran up (came to quickly) behind her [3] and tried to snatch (take away) her purse. [4]

Did the possibility of a similar situation cross your mind earlier? 

What's your reading about the thief? 

Remember, he is just a boy. What situation do you think may lead a boy to stay outdoor late at night attempting to snatch other's purses? 

We have a total of four clauses in the third sentence. It is structurally a complex-compound sentence. Don't miss how the first two [1 and 2] and the last two clauses [3 and 4] are joined together with the conjunct 'and'. But whereas we have commas to pause at the end of the first two clauses, we have no punctuation thereafter until we reach the end of the sentence. So, we rush through the last two clauses, falling short of breath, and thus enact the suspense of the sudden attempt of theft. Tricky, isn't it?

The Fourth Sentence

The strap broke (tore apart/snapped) with the single tug (pull) the boy gave it from behind.

What's your reading now?

Do you find the strap of the heavily loaded bag unusually weak? Was it too cheap, or too worn a bag? 

What kind of people uses too cheap or too worn a bag? 

Or, do you think that the strap broke for loading the bag excessively? 

Why and when do people need to load their bags excessively? 

Or, was it just an accident that the strap gave in? Or did the boy pull the bag with excessive force? 

The Fifth Sentence

But the boy's weight and the weight of the purse combined (together) caused him to lose his balance so, instead of taking off full blast (full speed) as he had hoped, the boy fell on his back on the sidewalk (footpath/pavement) and his legs flew up. 

Were you expecting this?

Was the boy too novice? Or was it just an accident, a moment of ill-luck for the boy?

Have you missed the lengths of the clauses in the sentence? Note carefully, how they get deduced in length as we move on from the beginning to the end of the sentence. Don't you feel that the shortest length of the final clause of the sentence actually helps us to get the effect of the anti-climactic fall of the boy? The legs that were supposed to take him off full blast, were there, thrown up towards the sky...

Have you noticed the argumentative structure of the sentence? It refers to the original plan of the boy, the unforeseen factors, and final compromised situation. We all experience similar situations in our own lives. This particular structure of the sentence may come very handy in sharing those embarrassing situations to close friends:

But the boy's weight and the weight of the purse combined caused him to lose his balance (the factors unforeseen) so, instead of taking off full blast (his original plan) as he had hoped, the boy fell on his back on the sidewalk and his legs flew up (the compromised situation).

It's not as hard as it seems. We just need to make a careful study of the linkers that organise the argument-

But, ______________________________________ (the unforeseen factors), so instead of ______________________________________ (the original plan) as I/you/(s)he had hoped, ______________________________________ (the compromised situation).

Would you appreciate an instance?-

But the price of the notebook was too high, so instead of buying the notebook as I had hoped, I bought just a card.

Why don't you try to check whether this structural analysis helps you or not to find your own expression?

The Sixth Sentence

The large woman simply turned around and kicked him right square (in the centre) in his blue-jeaned sitter (the area of the jeans he used to sit upon, buttock). 

Was she too harsh to deal with a juvenile? Was it an instinctive act on the part of the lady? 

Are you able to visualise the boy in his blue-jeaned sitter lying on his back on the sidewalk, being kicked by the large woman? Did the reference to the size of the lady help you to guess the weight of the kick?

The Seventh Sentence

Then she reached down (bent/stooped down), picked the boy up by (gripping) his shirt front, and shook him until his teeth rattled (shook against each other noisily). 

Wasn't she quite a strong lady? 

Do you find anything mention-worthy about the length of the clauses in the sentence? Remember, sometimes sentences that do not seem to be lengthy at all are actually lengthy to read just because of the presence of more syllables.

The Narrative

Who tells us the story, by the way? A third person narrator, observing the whole incident closely, right? Do you think s/he is involved into the action in any way? Or, do you feel that the narrator sounds much objective, and aloof from the course of the incident?

Reading Again on Your Own

Wasn't the second reading more revealing than the first? Why don't you go for another reading on your own, if you feel it necessary, before you start reading the second paragraph? Please don't get bothered about time. Intensive reading is a process that demands time. It's different from scanning or skimming.

The Second Paragraph

First Reading

After that the woman said, "Pick up my pocketbook, boy, and give it here." She still held him. But she went down enough to permit him to stoop and pick up her purse. Then she said, "Now ain't you ashamed of yourself?" 

Second Reading

Why don't we go for a second reading again? 

After that the woman said, "Pick up my pocketbook (purse), boy, and give it here." 

What would you like to add to your list of attributes for the lady now? I am sure you remember that she was a large woman, and quite strong a woman. Didn't we find her quite prompt as well?

I would now say that she seemed to be quite authoritative, capable of bringing an adverse situation quickly under control. Why don't you make a note of the authoritative tone of the imperative speech uttered by the lady? 

But, did she sound malicious? 

Don't you think that if we list up all the attributes of the characters we are studying one after the other, it might help us to appreciate the art of characterisation?

Where do you think the pocketbook was lying, by the way? 

She still held him. But she went down enough to permit (allow) him to stoop and pick up her purse. 

Did the lady hit the boy any more? How do people around you behave when they catch some purse-snatcher red-handed? How would you have behaved if you had been at her place?

Then she said, "Now ain't you ashamed of yourself?" 

I was expecting this obvious question, since he was just a boy. Weren't you? Well, my mom always started with this question whenever she caught me doing anything I was not supposed to do in my childhood.

The Narrative

Have you noted that since the very beginning of the second paragraph, we have direct speeches. That is to say, the narrator shares with us the exact words as uttered by the characters in the story. Don't you feel that this helps you to listen to the characters on your own, instead of listening to the interpretation of the characters made by the narrator? Don't you feel that the narrator is much liberal-minded allowing you to form your own opinions of the characters, and is much different from a 'teacher'?

But, here's the catch... You can't afford to miss the any utterance now, for it is you who have to form your own opinion, organising the rationale behind.

Can you tell the speaker from her/his words? Listen carefully for specific traits...

Resuming Our Reading of the Story

First Reading

Firmly gripped by his shirt front, the boy said, " Yes'm".

The woman said, "What did you want to do it for?"

The boy said, "I didn't aim to."

She said, "You a lie!"

By that time two or three people passed, stopped, turned to look, and some stood watching.

"If I turn you loose, will you run?" asked the woman.

"Yes'm," said the boy.

"Then I won't turn you loose," said the woman. She didn't release him. 

"I'm very sorry, lady, I'm sorry," whispered the boy.

"Um-hum! And your face is dirty. I got a great mind to wash your face for you.

Ain't you got nobody home to tell you to wash your face?"

"No'm," said the boy.

Second Reading

Have you already engaged yourself into the drama? Well, a second reading may intensify the extent:

Firmly gripped (strongly held) by his shirt front, the boy said, " Yes'm". 

Was it possible for him to say otherwise when he was still held strongly by the lady?

Do you find the clipped/shortened form of 'madam' interesting?

The woman said, "What did you want to do it for?" 

How would you have asked the question if you were there to ask the question? 

I myself would have asked a 'why' question.

The boy said, "I didn't aim to." 

Do you feel that to be quite lame as an excuse?

She said, "You a lie!" 

I don't believe the boy either. Do you believe him?

By that time two or three people passed, stopped, turned to look, and some stood watching. 

Have you noticed that we again have a shift in the mode of the narration? This is the narrator telling us the story again, and we are listening to the narrator, instead of any character. 

Don't you think that it was really some odd hour at night, else at least twenty to thirty people would have stopped to look or watch? Why do you think some people didn't stand whereas others stood and watched? Why did they stand and watch at all? What would you have done as a passerby? Why?

"If I turn you loose, will you run?" asked the woman. Back to interrogation once again...

"Yes'm," said the boy. 

I, myself would have run, as the boy confessed. 

Does this confession mark him as a novice than a seasoned purse-snatcher? 

What would have your answer been had you been there in his position? Would you explain why?

"Then I won't turn you loose," said the woman. What the hell did she mean?!!! She didn't release him. Poor boy...

"I'm very sorry, lady, I'm sorry," whispered the boy. 

Did he get choked with fear, or maybe, tears? 

Was he trying to avoid drawing other's attention further to the mess he was already in? 

Was the lady shouting at the boy? 

Don't people shout themselves hoarse in such situations? Was the lady behaving unusually?

"Um-hum! And your face is dirty. I got a great mind to wash your face for you. 

Quite unusual, I dare say. If she meant what she said, she must be more than just being 'great'... What's your opinion?

Ain't you got nobody home to tell you to wash your face?" 

Don't you get the meaning clear? Yes, you do, for sure. At least, I believe you do. But, if you don't, don't hesitate to ask me down there in the comment box.

How would you've asked the same question? Why is your way of asking so different from the lady's way?

You ask the question quite formally, using the standard variety of English used by most of the speakers around you. But the lady here used a variety of English (also called a dialect; however, often this term is used to indicate a variety of lesser significance) used by a smaller community (like the communities of the 'black Americans' during the time of the author) to ask the question. Hence your way of asking is different from the lady's way. If your way is not different, you must be knowing the variety of English the lady used, and must be a native speaker of English. ESL/EFL learners round the world rarely get the chance to learn the different varieties of English.

You'll note even your native language (mother-tongue) has multiple prominent varieties if it is used by a considerable number of people. Whenever there is a multitude of speakers, the language is bound to develop different varieties influenced by different socio-cultural-political reasons.

"No'm," said the boy. 

Did this at all occur to you earlier?

Would you try to report/narrate the section above and note how you deal with the narration-change? You may visit the link below to refresh your knowledge about narration-change:

https://anirbaneng.blogspot.com/2020/05/change-in-mode-of-narration-or.html

Resuming Our Reading of the Story

First Reading

Let's continue our reading...

"Then it will get washed this evening," said the large woman starting up the street, dragging the frightened boy behind her. He looked as if he were fourteen or fifteen, frail and willow-wild, in tennis shoes and blue jeans.

The woman said, "You ought to be my son. I would teach you right from wrong. Least I can do right now is to wash your face. Are you hungry?"

"No'm," said the being dragged boy. "I just want you to turn me loose."

"Was I bothering you when I turned that corner?" asked the women.

"No'm."

"But you put yourself in contact with me," said the woman. "If you think that that contact is not going to last awhile, you got another thought coming. When I get through with you, sir, you are going to remember Mrs. Luella Bates Washington Jones."

Second Reading

Are you ready for our second reading together? 

But now I would rather suggest that you read the section for the second time on your own, and then get back here to see what you've missed, and to let me know what I've missed... 

That would enrich both of us, don't you agree?

"Then it will get washed this evening," said the large woman starting (starting to walk) up the street, dragging (pulling forcibly) the frightened (afraid) boy behind her. 

You have already noted that she was a large woman, and quite strong to drag the frightened boy behind her. 

The boy was frightened, but do you find the lady frightening? 

He looked as if he were fourteen or fifteen, frail and willow-wild, in tennis shoes and blue jeans. 

Would you like to sketch the boy down on your notebook? 

The boy is frail, or weak. 

Does the phrase 'willow-wild' mean anything to you? 

It is possibly a phrase coined by the author himself. Willow is a tree with slender/thin stems and branches. The frail-looking boy resembled a willow tree in his thinness. However, in his careless appearance with his 'dirty' face, he seemed 'wild'.

The woman said, "You ought to be (are very much like) my son. I would teach you right from wrong. Least (minimally) I can do right now is to wash your face. Are you hungry?" 

Did she go beyond your expectation?

"No'm," said the being dragged boy. "I just want you to turn me loose." 

If you had been there in his position, would you have desired anything else?

"Was I bothering (disturbing) you when I turned that corner?" asked the women.

"No'm."

"But you put yourself in contact with me (But you choose to confront/challenge me)," said the woman. "If you think that that contact (impact) is not going to last awhile (for sometime), you got another thought coming (you are thinking wrong again. What was his first mistake, by the way?). When I get through with you (when I finish dealing with you), sir, you are going to remember Mrs. Luella Bates Washington Jones." 

Quite an impressive self-introduction! Don't you think so? Any script-writer would have felt proud to have written such a dramatic dialogue for the audience. Don't you feel the way dramatic? 

Do you think she was not being deliberately dramatic? Or, was it just her self-reliance that sounded so to our ears? 

What might be in her mind right now? Was she going to screw the boy up hard?

Have you noted the name of the lady?

Resuming Our Reading of the Story

First Reading

Shall we continue?---

Sweat popped out on the boy's face and he began to struggle. Mrs Jones stopped, jerked him around in front of her, sport half-nelson about his neck, and continued to drag him up the street. When she got to her door, she dragged the boy inside, down a hall, and into a large kitchenette-furnished room at the rear of the house. She switched on the light and left the door open. The boy could hear other roomers laughing and talking in the large house. Some of the doors were open, too, so he knew he and the women were not alone. The women still had him by the neck in the middle of her room.

She said, "What is your name?"

"Roger," answered the boy.

"Then, Roger, you go to that sink and wash your face," said the women, whereupon she turned him loose- at last. Roger looked at the door- looked at the woman- looked at the door- and went to the sink.

"Let the water run until it gets warm," she said. "Here's a clean towel."

"You gonna take me to jail?" asked the boy, bending over the sink.

"Not with that face, I would not take you nowhere," said the woman. "Here I am trying to get home to cook me a bite to eat and you snatch my pocket book! Maybe, You ain't been to your supper either, late as it be. Have you?" 

"There's nobody home at my house," said the boy. 

"Then we'll eat," said the women, "I believe you're hungry- or been hungry- to try to snatch my pocketbook." 

"I wanted a pair of blue suede shoes," said the boy.

"Well, you didn't have to snatch my pocketbook to get some suede shoes," said Mrs. Luella Bates Washington Jones. "You could have asked me." 

"Ma'am?"

Second Reading

Sweat popped out on the boy's face and he began to struggle. 

The boy was sweating out. Was he afraid? 

He began to struggle, possibly to get free. Did he act awkwardly?

Mrs Jones stopped, jerked (shook) him around in front of her, sported half-nelson (gripped) about his neck, and continued to drag him up the street. 

What was going on in her mind, actually? What did she intend to do with the boy?

She must had been a really strong lady, for it requires strength to handle a boy like that, no matter how weak he is... Would you like to make a guess about the lady's profession by this time?

Have you checked the internet for the meaning of 'half-nelson'? It is a particular hold used to demobilise opponents in wrestling sports:

When she got to (reached) her door, she dragged the boy inside, down (went through) a hall, and into a large kitchenette-furnished (furnished with a small kitchen-area) room at the rear (back) of the house. She switched on the light and left the door open. The boy could hear other roomers (residents; don't you find the way the affix '-er' is added to the root word 'room' to mean the people who reside in those room interesting? It's the same way we coin the word 'teacher' from the root 'teach'...) laughing and talking in the large house (The people residing there seemed to be happy, right?). Some of the doors were open, too, so he knew he and the women were not alone (Why do you feel this bit of information is important for us? Was it frightful for the boy to have more people around than the lady herself, or was it more frightful to be alone there with just the lady and none else?). The women still had him by the neck in the middle of her room. 

Were you able to get a glimpse of the building where the lady lived? What's your opinion about the building, it's residents, and the locality? Why don't you try to visualise the house, its entrance, the room of the lady, and its position in that large house?

She said, "What is your name?" 

Was she showing some interest to know each other better?

"Roger," answered the boy.

Now, you have the name of the boy as well.

"Then, Roger, you go to that sink (basin) and wash your face," said the women, whereupon (after that) she turned him loose (made him free)- at last. 

So, the lady really meant that she would have the boy clean his face first. Did the boy feel relieved now? Do you think that he really had a very dirty face? Would you like to share your reasoning?

Roger looked at the door- looked at the woman- looked at the door- and went to the sink.

Don't you find the dilemma of the boy wonderfully expressed through the description of his action?

Was it very difficult for Roger to decide what he would do: whether he would run, or if he would go to the sink and clean his face? Would you like to imagine yourself in his position, and think? Do you think that if Roger had decided to run away, he could have escaped successfully now?

"Let the water run until it gets warm," she said. "Here's a clean towel." 

Well, the lady had the provision of warm water. 

Don't you feel the lady herself turning warm towards the boy every moment? What may be the possible reasons? Do you think the boy had reminded the lady of her son? How old was the lady? What is your guess? 

"You gonna (Are you going to) take me to jail?" asked the boy, bending over the sink. 

Do you now feel that it was a tremendous struggle for the little boy to choose not to run away, but to clean his face as asked by the lady? Why do you think Roger chose to abide by the lady instead of escaping?

"Not with that face, I would not take you nowhere," said the woman. 

Was she being sarcastic, or true to her feelings? What's your feeling? 

Have you noted the usage of double negatives [underlined above] to mean that she wouldn't take the boy anywhere with that dirty face of his? It is a typical feature of the variety of English the lady is speaking.

"Here I am trying to get home (return home) to cook me a bite (something, very minimal) to eat and you snatch my pocket book! Was she angry with the boy? Was she thoroughly exhausted at her day's end? Maybe, you ain't been to your supper (you didn't have your supper) either, late as it be (it is already quite late). Have you?" Did this occur to you even for once earlier?

"There's nobody home at my house," said the boy. 

Hope you get a lot of your questions answered...

"Then we'll eat," said the women, "I believe you're hungry- or been hungry- to try to snatch my pocketbook." 

A nice instance of what we call logical deduction, right? In fact, we ourselves are trying to do a lot of logical deduction as we are reading the text intensively, right?

"I wanted a pair of blue suede (leather with a velvetty-touch) shoes," said the boy. 

Well, the boy sounds honest now... Whom would you like to give the credit, the boy, the lady, or both of them?

"Well, you didn't have to snatch my pocketbook to get some suede shoes," said Mrs. Luella Bates Washington Jones. "You could have asked me." 

Really? We don't come across such generous people on our ways often... Aren't you surprised?

"Ma'am?" 

Have you noted the amazement? And the politeness? And, do you feel that it indicates the boy's eagerness to believe the lady as well? 

This is what we refer to as pragmatics. Meanings are conveyed through much more ways than we imagine...

Resuming Our Reading of the Story

First Reading

Are we feeling too eager to learn how does the story end? Let's go for a quick reading then...

The water dripping from his face, the boy looked at her. There was a long pause. A very long pause. After he had dried his face and not knowing what else to do dried it again, the boy turned around, wondering what next. The door was open. He could make a dash for it down the hall. He could run, run, run, run, run!

The woman was sitting on the day-bed. After a while she said, "I were young once and I wanted things I could not get."

There was another long pause. The boy's mouth opened. Then he frowned, but not knowing he frowned. 

The woman said, "Um-hum! You thought I was going to say but, didn't you? You thought I was going to say, but I didn't snatch people's pocketbooks. Well, I wasn't going to say that." Pause. Silence. "I have done things, too, which I would not tell you, son- neither tell God, if he didn't already know. So you set down why I fix us something to eat. You might run that comb through your hair so you will look presentable."

In another corner of the room behind a screen was a gas plate and an ice box. Mrs Jones got up and went behind the screen. The woman did not watch the boy to see if he was going to run now, nor did she watch her purse which she left behind her on the day-bed. But the boy took care to sit on the far side of the room where he thought she could easily see him out of the corner of the other eye, if she wanted to. He did not trust the woman not to trust him. And he did not want to be mistrusted now.

"Do you need somebody to go to the store," asked the boy, "maybe to get some milk or something?"

"Don't believe I do," said the woman, "unless you just want sweet milk yourself. I was going to make cocoa out of this canned milk I got here."

"That will be fine," said the boy.

She heated some lima beans and ham she had in the ice box, made the cocoa, and set the table. The woman did not ask the boy anything about where he lived, or his folks, or anything else that would embarrass him. Instead, as they ate, she told him about her job in a hotel beauty-shop that stayed open late, what the work was like, and how all kinds of women came in and out, blondes, red-heads, and Spanish. Then she cut him a half of her ten-cent cake. 

"Eat some more, son," she said.

When they were finished eating she got up and said, "Now, here, take this ten dollars and buy yourself some blue suede shoes. Next time, do not make the mistake of latching onto my pocketbook nor nobody else's- because shoes come by devilish like that will burn your feet. I got to get my rest now. But I wish you would behave yourself, son, from here on in."

She led him down the hall to the front door and opened it. "Goodnight! Behave yourself, boy!" she said, looking out into the street. 

The boy wanted to say something else other than "Thank you ma'am" to Mrs. Luella Bates Washington Jones, but he couldn't do so as it turned at the barren stoop and looked back at the large woman in the door. He barely managed to say "Thank you" before she shut the door. And he never saw her again.

Second Reading

The water dripping (rolling down) from his face, the boy looked at her. There was a long pause (silence). A very long pause. After he had dried his face (What did he use to dry his face?) and not knowing what else to do dried it again, the boy turned around, wondering (thinking) what next. The door was open. He could make a dash (run) for it down the hall. He could run, run, run, run, run! 

Have you noted the shift/twist in the narrative? 

Till so far, the narrator was describing events which were either visually or auditorily perceptible to any ordinary, common observer; or, s/he was sharing the conversation between the characters directly with us. 

But now, for the first time, the narrator had adopted the stance of the omniscient one, and is providing us with some insight into the boy's psyche/mind. 

But at the same time, if you closely observe, everything the narrator says can also be logically deduced by us. Don't you agree? Don't you feel that the narrator interpreted the boy's mind quite appropriately?

Have you noted how silence (absence of audible speech) here have turned out to be so much meaningful? And the way how silence gets intensified alongwith the passage of time is quite interesting as well: There was a long pause. A very long pause.

Perhaps it is so because of the scope it provides to us to introspect our own minds. Maybe, we all looked at the little boy and disseminated/derived meaning from his actions as if they were our own.

Why do you think the narrator repeats the head verb 'run' for five times? Yes, for emphasis, to be sure. But don't you feel five times is too much for emphasising a point? 

Was the objective narrator himself was getting a bit psychologically involved with the character?

The woman was sitting on the day-bed (an utility furniture which may be used for sitting and or sleeping on it, and for storing things inside). After a while she said, "I were young once and I wanted things I could not get." 

Have you noted the subjunctive mood: I were young once - Do you sense a note of pain here?- that the lady now wished for a youth that was never there the way she wished that to be?

We are often reminded of long-forgotten episodes through the association of other similar episodes. Are you revisiting your long-forgotten past as well?

There was another long pause. The boy's mouth opened. Then he frowned, but not knowing he frowned. 

Do you find the silence meaningful again? 

Are you frowning as well? Do you know the reason of your disapproval? Do you feel Roger frowned because of his disapproval? Or, do you feel it to be true that Roger was not aware that he had frowned?

The woman said, "Um-hum! You thought I was going to say 'but', didn't you? You thought I was going to say, 'but I didn't snatch people's pocketbooks'. Well, I wasn't going to say that." Pause. Silence. 

Did the lady guess the reason behind Roger's frown properly?

Do you find the pause at the end meaningful, or awkward?

Can you imagine the lady doing things she wasn't supposed to do when she was just a girl? Don't you think that the lady has changed a lot from the way she was as she grew up?

"I have done things, too, which I would not tell you, son- neither tell God, if he didn't already know. So you set down why I fix (cook) us something to eat. You might run that comb through your hair so you will look presentable." 

Is it relieving that the session of introspection and confession is over? 

It is often quite exhaustive to judge one's own self honestly for long, particularly when we, as grown ups, look back into our 'not-so-ideal' past.

Do you feel that the lady had a special inclination towards the aesthetic appeal of a person's look? First, she was keen to get Roger's face washed and cleaned thoroughly, and now she asked him to comb his hair to look presentable. Isn't it interesting?

In another corner of the room behind a screen (a partition, perhaps done by a curtain) was a gas plate (an oven) and an ice box (a refrigerator). Mrs Jones got up and went behind the screen. 

Does the setting reveal anything more to your reading of the lady? Would you like to treat the screen metaphorically,- a curtain that not only separated the kitchen area from the rest of the room, but also hid the bleeding past of the lady?

The woman did not watch the boy to see if he was going to run now, nor did she watch her purse which she left behind her on the day-bed. Was she too occupied with her past? Or, was she quite sure by the time that the boy would not reach her any further injury? But the boy took care to sit on the far side of the room where he thought she could easily see him out of the corner of the other eye, if she wanted to.  Was the boy confident enough about himself as the lady seemed to be about him? Why did he choose to sit where he would be visible to the lady working in her kitchenette? He did not trust the woman not to trust him. And he did not want to be mistrusted now. Quite natural for the boy, right? He wanted the lady to find him trustworthy... Wonderfully expressed, isn't it?

Do you feel the characters are in their truest selves right now? Would you like to explain how both of them reached this point of mutual trust and honour?

Do you have a different interpretation from the interpretation of the omniscient narrator? I am hopeful that you have not missed the fact that the narrator turned omniscient again, having deep insight into the minds of the lady and the boy.

"Do you need somebody to go to the store," asked the boy, "maybe to get some milk or something?" 

Is it a ploy to escape now, or an honest offer to help and cooperate with dignity?

"Don't believe I do," said the woman, "unless you just want sweet milk yourself. Wasn't she generous enough? I was going to make cocoa out of this canned milk I got here."

"That will be fine," said the boy. Wasn't the purse-snatcher quite civil and social by this time?

She heated some lima beans and ham she had in the ice box, made the cocoa, and set (readied) the table. The woman did not ask the boy anything about where he lived, or his folks, or anything else that would embarrass him. 

Wish I had such sympathetic sensitive minds whenever I got tried for some slip of mine.

 

By the way, please don't miss to note how the mode of narration keeps on swinging between the narrator's voice, and the direct speech of the characters involved.

Instead, as they ate, she told him about her job in a hotel beauty-shop that stayed open late, what the work was like, and how all kinds of women came in and out, blondes, red-heads, and Spanish. Then she cut him a half of her ten-cent cake. 

Would you like tell me now about the economic class of the lady, as you have learnt a lot about her usual diet, and her job profile?

And, why do you think the narrator is now narrating the events mostly?

-Just to save on time. It would have taken quite a few pages to share their original conversation with us. But now, you know what they talked about just in a single sentence.

Do you now understand why the lady had a specific taste about one's looks/appearance?

"Eat some more, son," she said. Could you hear mother Luella pouring her heart out?

When they were finished eating (when they finished their supper) she got up (left her seat at the table) and said, "Now, here, take this ten dollars and buy yourself some blue suede shoes. Next time, do not make the mistake of latching onto (grabbing/snatching) my pocketbook nor nobody else's- because shoes come by devilish (wrong/inappropriate a way) like that will burn your feet (not suit you). Was it learned the hard way by her? I got to get my rest now. Yes, I think it was too much for her for a day. What do you say? But I wish you would behave yourself, son, from here on in (now onwards)."

She led him down the hall to the front door and opened it. "Goodnight! Behave yourself, boy!" she said, looking out into the street. 

Do you think she deliberately avoided a direct look at the boy's eyes? What may be the possible reasons? What would you have done have you been at her position? Why don't you explain the reason/s?

The boy wanted to say something else other than "Thank you ma'am" to Mrs. Luella Bates Washington Jones, but he couldn't do so as he turned at the barren stoop (stoop here possibly meaning the staircase which was barren, without any railing) and looked back at the large woman in the door. Why? He barely (hardly) managed to say "Thank you" before she shut the door. And he never saw her again. 

Can you think of some possible reasons?

The Characters

Now, I think you're ready to evaluate the characters as per your own reading of the story. You have already listed up whatever you've observed about the characters. 

Now, it's time to think about the art of characterisation in the story. Have you been told everything directly that you now have there on your list? Or was the narrative subtle enough to guide you through various clues to reach your conclusion as desired by the author? 

By the way, how close you think you know these characters, now? Enough? Sure, you now have learned a lot, but only whatever is relevant in evaluating the characters against a particular reference, nothing more. You don't even know if Roger was an abandoned boy, or if his parents had died. But you know for sure, that he had nobody back at his place at that time referred to in the story to take good care of him. And you need no more information to guess his hardships of life. 

Don't you find the characters real and living? We know their names, but aren't the names too common? Do you have any typical information which helps you to define the characters specifically? Don't you feel that anyone known, or unknown to you, may live the struggles of Roger, or Luella, as described in the story? They are two separate individuals, but yet, they share so much in common with most of us in different aspects.

A deep insight into human minds, and a neat characterisation, won't you say?

The Title

What's your say about the title? It certainly refers to the post-climactic revelation that concludes the story. Is that all?

Doesn't it evoke a similar emotion unto you? Don't you too feel to thank the lady as you finish reading the story? If you feel a similar urge, then won't you say that the title of the story successfully guides your mind even after the reading of the story is completed?

The Theme, or the Social And the Individual Issues

What is the theme of the story? 

Well, it depends upon how you read the story. 

It might seem to be a tale of 'lost youth' if you focus upon the untold life of Mrs. Luella Bates Washington Jones. It might be the tale of 'a successful revival of a lost youth' if your sole concern is the way Roger was treated. If you think of a larger reference frame, you may read the story as 'a tale of the marginalised getting exploited' as usual, particularly as at present we have reasons to raise our voices against colour-discrimination. Or, if you are not affected by this, you might choose to read the story as an inspirational tale telling us 'how one can surpass all the odds of life if s/he sticks to the path of virtue'.

And there are many more probable perspectives of reading this story. Why don't you let me know about yours? Try to trace the hurdles that the characters had to face in the story? Do you think their basic living was compromised? Why? What could be the possible reasons?

Roger wanted a pair of blue suede shoes. It's apparent he didn't have them. Now it can't be treated as a compromise of basic amenities of life, particularly when he had a pair of tennis shoes on, right?

But, if you consider a young teenager living without any true mentor back at his place, won't you say his basic living was compromised? What possible reasons do you think could lead to such a situation? The more you think, more and more possibilities will show up. You just need to continue digging...

Reader's Responsibility

As a responsible reader, you may not choose to overlook the author's intention. Surely, he had written the story to communicate with us. We may have our own contexts and perspectives to look at the story, but it is also our responsibility to check the context of the author to understand what was the meaning he intended to convey. Advanced learners may click the link below to get the message intended by the author himself:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Langston_Hughes

Feel free to ask me questions, if you have any, in the space meant for publishing comments. And you are certainly welcome to share your views which are different from mine. An academic argument is always the best way to learn...