critisim on revelation
...story. “It is the first of the three stories that O‘Connor produced during the last months of her life. It is singularly fitting that she wrote “Revelation,” which Caroline Gordon declared her “profoundest so far” as she herself moved toward death-ultimate revelation. Excerpts from her letters show O‘Connor, in an act of personal revelation, telling the story of her story; and her narrative of its genesis, completion, and acceptance provides insight not only into O’Connor’s personality-especially her demonstration of ‘grace under pressure,’- but also into the process and techniques of her writing. (Cash 61)” After reacting to the comments from several of her readers, who had been infected to the Sanchez 2. Sewanee Review, O’Connor was concerned about the imperfection of her work: “I haven‘t read it for errors in the type or for itself. I usually find plenty I‘d like to change when it is too late. (Cash 65)” It is significant to O’Connor’s defense of Ruby Turpin because it seems to be a follow up to her reaction to readers misunderstanding of the character. O’Connor encourages that Ruby Turpin is a redeemable human being, and not just a stock figure of Southern duplicity. The vision that Mrs. Turpin experiences under the momentum of Mary Graces’ attack insures her salvation. She begins as a woman who defies God, but is soon able to accept her imperfectability and capable to achieve cleansing. O’Connor refers to the “Revelation” after she just learned that the story achieved the O. Henry prize: “We can worry ab...