Silas receives credit for the most important moment

I genuinely believe that the single most important moment in the novel Crooked Letter, Crooked Letter written by Tom Franklin can be found within the first 150 pages of the book. The moment which I value as the most significant transpires as Silas Jones’s implication of what truly happened on the widely-debated night that Larry Ott allegedly took Cindy Walker on a date. To begin, the novel commences introducing the two protagonists: Larry and Silas. The two, despite their racial differences, became great friends. However, gradually, they both became synechdoches for people feeling that they do not belong in their surroundings. In their case, their surroundings were the conservative and often racist townspeople of Chabot, Mississippi in the 1970’s. As Silas’s race prevented him from completely segregating into society, Larry’s personality and weak respiratory system became his obstacle to fitting in. The most important moment takes place following the disappearance of Tina Rutherford present day, which evokes questions regarding Larry’s innocence regarding both this case as well as another one when he was just a junior in high school. Silas, now the town’s sheriff, finds himself searching for answers about the shooting of Larry. It is believed by the town that the shooting came as a result of his guiltiness for the two crimes. However, Silas remains unbiased and professional, as well as helpful to Larry’s case, saying, “I just don’t think he’s got it in him” (141). This one, mere, statement sums up an entire novel. The reflective tone used by Silas helps him to acknowledge the fact that Larry in fact had no part in either mysterious vanishing. Franklin portrays Larry as a gentle and sensitive man, who only wanted one thing in life: approval. That is, approval from his peers as well as from his father. Franklin consistently depicted Larry as “alone” and at odds with his father’s expectations of him (1). For example, he illustrates Larry’s longing for any type of affection from his father with his pleasant goodbyes and terms of endearment like “daddy”(43). Then, he juxtaposes Larry’s jubilance with his father’s reaction, in which Larry received “barely a glance” (43). By indirectly characterizing his father as cold and mean, Franklin evokes sympathy from readers for Larry with pathos. A person who already has a sensitive personality cannot possibly live happily with a father such as Carl Ott. Thus, by portraying him as a feeble person who could do no harm to anyone, he is indirectly characterized as someone who “doesn’t got it in him” to kill (141). This claim exposes the townspeople’s ignorance in believing that Larry could have actually had part in the disappearances. In addition to characterization, Franklin’s use of dramatic irony highlights the fault in those who judge. As readers, we know what happened that night between Larry and Cindy, and how she “[went] someplace else [that] night” instead of a date with Larry (128). Thus, this particular moment provides insight to readers which will allow them to infer that Larry did no harm to Cindy nor Tina, and further highlights the ignorance of the townspeople who judge Larry. Silas’s quote sums up the fact that Larry, contrary to what the townspeople of Chabot thought, was not capable of harming anyone which exposes Franklin’s purpose for writing. Franklin encourages those with judgmental tendencies to value the old cliché “one is innocent until proven guilty”.

Silas at Larry's defense

     Throughout the novel Crooked Letter, Crooked Letter, the author Tom Franklin illustrates a person who became the product of incessant ostracism. This character, Larry Ott, endured judgment and exclusion from the community of Chabot, Mississippi. Marla, an infamous employee at the town’s diner, The Hub, explains that the “whole county thinks he’s a kidnaper or rapist or murderer or all three” (94). Franklin uses this hyperbole to explicate the negative reputation associated with Larry, and more importantly, to show how few people genuinely tolerate him without judgment. However, despite the lack of sympathy for Larry, Silas Jones, the town’s sheriff and old friend of Larry’s, constantly defends him and rewards him with benefit of the doubt. Besides Silas’s reservations when it comes to communicating with Larry, he remains unbiased when Larry’s innocence becomes questioned. Silas’s understanding attitude towards the town’s outcast leads me to respect him more as a person. I appreciate his will to believe the best in someone until they can be proven guilty. For example, when Larry’s innocence becomes doubted following the disappearance of a local girl when he was a young boy and when history repeated itself after about 30 years, Silas remains consistent in Larry’s defense saying, “I just don’t think he’s got it in him” (141). Personally, I judge Silas as “right” morally, putting discernment aside and instead valuing what he knows as the truth. Those who judge Larry and even those who support him do not know entirely what happened between him and the girl who disappeared in his past, Cindy Walker. But unlike the townspeople, Silas does not jump to conclusions about Larry. Franklin writes with dramatic irony, which allows his readers to hold knowledge that the townspeople do not have. With this writing style, the readers gain a perspective in which they also will want to stand up for Larry’s innocence, paralleling Silas’s attitude. Although it would become expected for Silas to shun Larry similar to the rest of the town due to their shared past, he remains professional. Growing up, Silas and Larry became fast friends despite their demographic differences, until their friendship came to an abrupt end as a result of Larry’s drunk and malicious father, Carl Ott. After the physical fight they were forced into by Carl, emotional evidence lingered with Silas for years to come. However, he did not allow these memories and past assumptions to control his beliefs of Larry. Moreover, I, like Franklin, admire Silas’s open-mindedness regarding the criticisms of Larry.

The "timeless" conflict of racial tension

      The clash between different races has served as a catalyst for social tension ever since emancipation of slaves in 1863. This timeless conflict remains prominent in the 1970’s as well, providing a main plot point for author Tom Franklin in his novel Crooked Letter, Crooked Letter. In the '70's, schools and public places began to desegregate, forcing differing races to coexist despite their contradicting attitudes and beliefs. In the novel, the conflict becomes relevant with the introduction of the protagonists: Larry Ott and Silas Jones. Larry, the son of white, middle-income parents befriends Silas, the son of a single, black mother amidst unavoidable social tension that comes along with racial differences. The general precedent of the conflict suggests that the two boys could never be friends. However, the fact that they do get along so well highlights Larry’s similar feeling of loneliness. Larry feels ostracized for reasons differing from Silas’s. Silas faced racial prejudice daily, even from Larry originally. The first time Larry saw Silas, he wondered what had brought them “this far out,” implying that they had strayed from where most black families subsided (33). Instead of becoming a product of the racial tension of the time, he became a product of judgmental peers and a weak respiratory system. Franklin portrays Larry as a social outcast, explaining that “the white boys laughed at him” (45). Situational irony surfaces with this statement, with emphasis on the word “white”. The blunt tone ultimately evokes pathos for Larry. I believe that Franklin does this on purpose, creating sympathy for a character who later will need any benefit of the doubt he can receive. Already, throughout the novel, Franklin has hinted of Larry’s controversial actions frequently, indirectly characterizing Larry as unstable. He introduces the fact that “the local police…watched him closely” (5). This claim suggests that Larry has gotten into trouble with the law before, further indirectly characterizing him as dangerous and unpredictable. However, even with such foreboding warnings of Larry’s past actions, Franklin arouses sympathy from readers. He not only portrays Larry as an outlier to his peers…but also to his own father. Carl, Larry’s father, completely contrasted his son… and because of their many differences, he “liked most everyone except [Larry]” (38). So, by paralleling the way in which Larry received intolerance from everyone around him to a boy plagued by adversity because of his skin color, Franklin succeeds in creating pathos for Larry, lessening the judgment for his inevitable harmful actions. Moreover, the inclusion of this particular “timeless” conflict allows Franklin to foreshadow events to come, and to prepare those who hold preconceived notions in regards to others' past actions, for these events with an understanding for the person Larry became as a result of being ostracized.