Masculinity in “Miguel Street”

The theme of interpersonal masculinity is demonstrated in chapters 1 and 7. In chapter 1, the narrator points out that he seems to be surprised that Bogart was able to make friends. Naipaul wrote, “It is still something of a miracle to me that Bogart managed to make friends; he was at one time quite the most popular man in the street.” (Naipaul 2) Even though this was unexpected, Bogart was able to become a well-known individual among other people where he lived. In chapter 1, Bogart’s presence was missed when he was not involved in the fête which is a celebration or a festival. People would say that Bogart should be there because of how smart he is. Naipaul stated, “‘We must have Bogart. He smart like hell, that man.’ In a way he gave them great solace and comfort, I suppose.” (Naipaul 3) Bogart was the person out of the group that could make others feel comfort and peace in a time of stress and sadness. In chapter 7, Naipaul wrote about the narrator and others going out to the cinema. He wrote, “One day a big crowd of us – Hat, Edward, Eddoes, Boyce, Errol and myself – went to the cinema. We were sitting in a row, laughing and talking all during the film, having a good time.” (Naipaul 48) This is an example of how everyone was able to develop healthy relationship skills and communication with one another.  

There are some positive examples of masculine behavior that are apparent in chapter 7. Naipaul described Bigfoot as big, black and someone who is feared by everybody in Miguel Street, but he only looked dangerous. Hat believed that Bigfoot was scary because of how quiet he was. Naipaul inscribed, “Is only a form of showing off, you know, all this quietness he does give us. He quiet just because he ain’t have anything to say, that’s all.” (Naipaul 47) I believe Hat was saying that Bigfoot isn’t as scary as people thought he was. Not choosing to communicate made Bigfoot seem threatening to others. In chapter 7, Naipaul addressed the effect that bullying can have from childhood to adulthood. Naipaul wrote, “And I wondered then why Bigfoot held himself back from beating Hat and the rest of the people who had bullied him when he was a boy.” (Naipaul 51) I think that Bigfoot chose not to attack Hat and the others for bullying him during his childhood because revenge would not resolve the traumatic experience that he went through. The pain that he would deliver would not free him from the pain that he felt. 

Toxicity is a character trait that is clearly portrayed in chapter 7 because of the violence that took place. Boyce could not compare the beatings that he got to the beatings that Bigfoot got from his father. Naipaul stated, “The blows we get is nothing to what Big Foot uses to get from his father.” (Naipaul 49). The feelings toward Bigfoot are empathetic because the idea of what it’s like to be abused by someone is understood and relatable. Next, in chapter 7, Hat recalled when he found out that Bigfoot was being beaten by his father. Naipaul inscribed, ‘Every day Big Foot father, the policeman, giving Big Foot blows. Like medicine. Three times a day after meals.’ And hear Big Foot talk afterwards. He used to say, ‘ When I get big and have children, I go beat them, beat them.’” (Naipaul 49) Bigfoot’s father beat Bigfoot often when he was a child. The violence that was inflicted on Bigfoot will be cyclical because Bigfoot is not learning from his father’s negative and harmful actions. Bigfoot is bound to repeat history and become like his father instead of realizing what was wrong with what he did to him. Lastly, the narrator addressed that he was reminded of how his mother treats him after finding out about what went on between Bigfoot and his father. Naipaul stated, “I didn’t say it then, because I was ashamed; but I had often felt the same way when my mother beat me.” (Naipaul 49) The narrator was feeling sympathetic toward Bigfoot because of the relationship between him and his father, but he didn’t know how to express himself.

Naipaul, V.S., Miguel Street. (1959), Bogart (pp. 1-7). André Deutsch

Naipaul, V.S., Miguel Street. (1959), The Coward (pp. 47-56). André Deutsch

One thought on “Masculinity in “Miguel Street”

  1. Hey Kavon, I agree with much of what was said here. Great post. The parts in chapter 7 about Bigfoot being so quiet for being such a towering figure and how that relates to toxic masculinity interest me. It feels as if, a lot of the time, people who share similar characteristics to Bigfoot are usually gentle giants. However, when you’re such an intimidating figure as a man, you’re forced to play to the tough guy stereotype. I’ve seen it with my own eyes, guys wanting to start trouble with the tallest guy in the room because they are not actively aggressive and these guys want to prove a point. Bigfoots decision not to talk feels designed to ward off people who want to hurt him in that way. He’s not violent just because of his stature. All of that plays into the ideas of what a man is supposed to be, and therefore perpetuates toxic masculinity.

Comments are closed.