I would describe Langston as a young man who was probably forced to go to church by his aunts and uncles who had encouraged him to submit to Jesus for his own good. I feel this young man in Langston is naive and doesn’t have good judgement since he expected Jesus to come out the shadows or appear in thin air to save him. I think Langston Hughes and his naviety is just a curious young boy who expected Jesus to swoop in and save him like his aunts and uncles said he would. I know Langston is a different person from everyone else who attended the church that day since he was the last one to be saved by Jesus, he just sat there and watched everyone else run off into salvation. Once all the attention in the church was on him he caved into what other people wanted and allowed himself to be saved by Jesus. I think Langston changed when he had not seen Jesus come save him it made him question if Jesus was even real, Langston felt bad because he lied to get out of that tough situation. I think in the end Langston going to church as a “young sinner” looking to be saved by Jesus that day just strained and made him question his ideas and relationship with Jesus since he had not come to save him like everyone said he would.
One thought on “Kemol Mott discussion 3”
Kemol, thanks for the very good analysis. I agree that naivete is one of the protagonist’s most obvious traits. He trusts his aunt and believes what she tells him, as most children would. He takes his aunt’s words about religion literally, which is also something children do. The central irony in this story is that he comes to the church to be saved, but in the end he is not only not saved but ends up an atheist.