Dionysian Joe Christmas:
The Tragic Essence of William Faulkner’s Light in August
Hitoshi Yokomizo
Some people have been tempted to read Light in August (1932) as a tragic story
about Joe Christmas, or to be exact, as a story about his confrontation with racial
uncertainty and the eventual catastrophe. Cleanth Brooks, a representative of the earlydays’ critical discourses on Faulknerian literature, alleges that Joe Christmas is finally
executed as a “black” pariah owing to his deviation from the community’s norm
(69–70).1 In addition, recent critics such as Diane Roberts detect a certain subversive
quality in Joe Christmas, whereas they tend to conclude that Joe Christmas’s racial
uncertainty or his subversive character is ultimately obliterated in the community’s
desire for order.2 If so, Joe Christmas could be regarded as a very tragic hero, for
Christmas seems to reflect a form of tragedy, which Friedrich Nietzsche discussed in
The Birth of Tragedy. According to Nietzsche, Greek tragedy is an incredible union
between the Dionysian as the sensual, the spontaneous, or the chaotic, and theApollonian as the rational, the ordered, or the self-disciplined: the “Apolline[Apollonian] consciousness alone, like a veil, hid that Dionysiac [Dionysian] world”(21). Just as the Dionysian is veiled by the Apollonian, Christmas’s racial uncertainty
or his subversive element is covered by the community’s normative power.
Nevertheless, I doubt whether Joe Christmas is really executed as a “black” criminal inaccordance with the community’s expectation. Is it appropriate to assert that his
subversive nature is eradicated in the end?3
This study attempts to reread the racialized career of Joe Christmas from theviewpoint of the interrelation between Joe Christmas as the Dionysian and thetownspeople as the Apollonian. The first section deals with Joe Christmas’s radicaltransformation into the Dionysian in Chapter 14 of Light in August. The second section
evaluates Joe Christmas’s subversion of the townspeople, recounted in Chapter 15. The
third section sheds light on Joe Christmas’s death in Chapter 19. Finally, this study
aims to relativize the tragic essence of Light in August by exploring who and what Joe
Christmas is.
I
The latter half of Chapter 14 of Light in August narrates Joe Christmas’s flightafter his killing of Joanna Burden and describes his radical transformation. During the1

flight, Christmas is awakened to the normative world and its binding power; thus, hebecomes free from the racial discipline, which he has adhered to indeliberately. Ever
since his childhood at a “white” orphanage, Christmas has been torn between two
racial identities, and therefore, has displayed some antinomic behaviors about race. His
racial oscillation and his racial antinomy result from “blackness” engraved on
Christmas by the words of other people; however, the essential cause resides in that hehas clung to the normative identity, whether he has done so consciously or not.4 As
Christmas has ideologically internalized racial taxonomy, which never permits anyone
who is like “a walking oxymoron and its negation: both white and black, and neither”(Bleikasten 83), he has never been able to accept his racial uncertainty and has
struggled against it all the time.5 Through the seven-day flight, however, encountering
the natural world and its chaotic power, Christmas is reborn as a subversive being thattranscends the normative world:
For a week now he [Christmas] has lurked and crept among its [the country’s]
secret places. . . . For some time as he walks steadily on, he thinks that this iswhat it is—the looking and seeing—which gives him peace and unhaste andquiet, until suddenly the true answer comes to him. He feels dry and light. ‘Idont have to bother about having to eat anymore,’ he thinks. ‘That’s what itis.’ . . . he is entering it again, the street which ran for thirty years. It had been apaved street, where going should be fast. It had made a circle and he is stillinside of it. Though during the last seven days he has had no paved street, yet hehas travelled further than in all the thirty years before. And yet he is still inside
the circle. ‘And yet I have been further in these seven days than in all the thirty
years,’ he thinks. (338-39)
The above quotations hint at Joe Christmas’s radical transformation. During theseven-day flight, Christmas swerves from a “paved street,” sneaks into an unpaved
area as “secret places,” and finally arrives at “the true answer.” Considered in the lightof Mary Joanne Dondlinger’s observation that the “paved street” is “a man-madeconstruction” (111), it is reasonable to assume that Christmas has roved over thenormative world, constructed by man, for thirty years, but now he enters the natural
world that is not paved—not constructed. In other words, Christmas steps into thenatural world, a certain chaotic/secret sphere, in which “[t]ime, the spaces of light anddark, had long since lost orderliness” (333).6 By touching the chaotic power lurking in
the normative world, he discovers “the true answer” and undergoes a complete2transformation. To put it another way, relatively becoming aware of the normative
world and its binding power, Christmas realizes the background of his hardship and his
destiny. For this reason, not only the seven-day flight is much more decisive for
Christmas than all the thirty years of his life, but also Christmas muses “I don’t have tobother about having to eat anymore”: this mediation is not a negative imagination
about his death, but a positive one that results from his epiphanic experience. It issafely assumed that Joe Christmas is reborn at this stage. Leaving the horizon oforderliness or rather the norm, Christmas recognizes that he is no longer troubled over
his racial identity. Joe Christmas epistemologically transcends the normative world.7
Olga W. Vickery investigates the above issue from the viewpoint of Joe
Christmas’s “humanization.” According to Vickery, the seven-day flight, “where evenfood becomes unnecessary, gives to Christmas the human dignity” and Christmas “seeshis life not in terms of “black” and “white” but simply of the human race” (73).
However, Vickery looks upon Christmas’s racial transcendence as an individual matterand hence states that, in the face of the townspeople’s desire for order, Christmas isultimately forced to conform to the community’s racial norm (73–75). Vickery detects
deracialization in Christmas, but she ends in emphasizing Christmas’s eventual
passivity. Nevertheless, we should not fail to note that Christmas cannot be easily
incorporated into the community’s plot. Through the epistemological metamorphosis,
Joe Christmas becomes a subversive being who embodies racial invisibility. At thesame time, Christmas becomes a spontaneous/strategic character, who chooses his own
death of his own accord in order to leave his being behind.
Here, let us examine Joe Christmas as a subversive character from a standpointof Nietzschean tragedy. Referring to Nietzsche’s The Birth of Tragedy, Donald M.
Kartiganer argues Joe Christmas in terms of the Dionysian and the Apollonian:Christmas is comprised of what Nietzsche called the Dionysian and theApollonian, the will to destruction and the will to order. Nietzsche’s
understanding of those concepts and his insistence on the dynamic relationshipbetween them captures the dynamic of Christmas’s character and the tragic
conflict he epitomizes. Christmas is both the Dionysian force and its
verbalization by the Apollonian force, that difficult fusion that Nietzsche said
was the focus of every Greek tragedy. . . . (15)As Kartiganer suggests above, Joe Christmas surely seems to be a “difficult fusion”
between the Dionysian and the Apollonian, for Christmas, in the former period, cannot
3

accept his racial uncertainty and therefore cannot but verbalize his racial identity
antinomically; in other words, he sometimes behaves as a “black” and sometimes as a“white.” To take his metamorphosis into consideration, however, Joe Christmas
emerges not as the incredible fusion between the Dionysian and the Apollonian but as
the very Dionysian itself. Christmas, in the seven-day flight, shifts his epistemologicalposition from the Apollonian level symbolized by a paved street to the Dionysian level
represented by the natural world and its chaotic power. As a consequence, Christmas
gives up normalizing/verbalizing his racial uncertainty as the Dionysian element, andbecomes “Dionysian Joe Christmas” as a subversive and spontaneous being who
personifies racial invisibility and performs his own death.
II
In Chapter 15 of Light in August, Joe Christmas, reborn as the Dionysian,subverts the townspeople and their racialized identity. Through the epistemologicalmetamorphosis, Christmas makes an inflexible resolution to leave his life behind him
and dares to return to the town where the hysteric townspeople are spurred to capture
Joe Christmas as a “black” criminal who murdered a “white” woman, Joanna Burden.
After all, Christmas is caught by Halliday, one of the townspeople, in Mottstown,
where Christmas, at this time, unsettles the psychological stability of the townspeople:. . . Halliday saw him [Christmas] and ran up and grabbed him and said, ‘Aint
your name Christmas?’ and the nigger said that it was. He never denied it. He
never did anything. He never acted like either a nigger or a white man. That wasit. That was what made the folks so mad. . . . It was like he never even knew he
was a murderer, let alone a nigger too. (350)As the passage above gives suggestions, Christmas’s racial invisibility makes thetownspeople’s blood boil with indignation. What renders the townspeople “so mad” is“the visible invisibility of his [Christmas’s] blackness” (Bleikasten 98). Joe Christmas
never fulfills the townspeople’s desire to identify him as a “black” man. Rather, as wehave noted, Joe Christmas is somebody that the townspeople can never identify as
either “white” or “black.” Considered in the light of the townspeople’s reaction to his
capture: “It looked like he had set out to get himself caught like a man might set out toget married” (349), it is obvious that Christmas’s “deliberate capture is disruptive tothe citizens” (Dondlinger 111). Joe Christmas as the Dionysian shakes thetownspeople’s judgment and their racial dualism, and therefore, causes trouble between
4them over racial ideology and racial awareness. Christmas’s racial uncertainty at thecore of his tribulation is due to other people’s verbal violence, which is deeply rooted
in racialism; his racial invisibility, in this phase, subverts the townspeople’s racial
ideology as if it made a counterattack against them.
However, Christmas’s racial invisibility is ironically enough to drive thetownspeople into lynching him. The Dionysian of Joe Christmas stirs the Apollonian of
the townspeople to veil his chaotic nature. Thus, Joe Christmas’s racial invisibility
once subverts the townspeople and their racialized identity; nevertheless, is theinvisibility, the Dionysian force, ultimately covered by the townspeople, verbalized by
the Apollonian force? It seems that Joe Christmas could never be absorbed into thetownspeople’s plot of racial identification. Turning our attention to how Joe Christmas
spontaneously performs his own death, we know that he is the very Dionysian thatthwarts the townspeople’s Apollonian impulse to “blacken” him.
III
Chapter 19 of Light in August, recounted from the townspeople’s viewpoint, tells
us how Joe Christmas carries out his own death and how he leaves behind his being,
the Dionysian, that can never be subsumed into racial normalization by thetownspeople. By performing his mysterious death, Christmas attains his own self andleaves it behind. Joe Christmas, after his rebirth, dares to depart for the town so as toact out his own death; subsequently, he is captured in Mottstown and taken to Jefferson.
At this point, Christmas displays an inscrutable behavior. With the special grand jury
close at hand, he escapes from captivity at the very center of the square where thetownspeople move around here and there. Christmas goes around the town without
intending to actually evade and, in the end, he is shot and castrated by Percy Grimm in
Gail Hightower’s house. Readers wonder about his actions and probe into them, just as
the townspeople do:
About the suppertables on that Monday night, what the town wondered at was
not so much how Christmas had escaped but why when free, he had taken refugein the place which he did, where he must have known he would be certainly run
to earth, and why when that occurred he neither surrendered nor resisted. It wasas though he had set out and made his plans to passively commit suicide. (443)This is the opening passage of Chapter 19, which narrates the townspeople’s reaction
toward Joe Christmas’s death and reveals that the townspeople are suspicious about5Christmas’s escape and his eventual death. They evidently sense something intended in
his escape and death. This suggests that Christmas leaves his being, his mysterious
being, in the townspeople’s mind. In this light, it is possible to consider that Christmas
has succeeded in his difficult attempt to leave his life behind by performing themysterious death. Gavin Stevens as a town commentator is typically fascinated by the
mystery about Christmas and endeavors to grasp its essence; however, his observationthat Christmas’s conflict between “blackness” and “whiteness” drives him into such an
enigmatic behavior is unfortunately nothing but an arbitrary interpretation based on thewrong impression (Hiraishi 96). At that moment, is it impossible that the mystery,which Joe Christmas leaves behind, remains an unsolved mystery? Is it impossible for
Christmas to leave his mystic being behind? Closely analyzing the scene of Joe
Christmas’s death, we should notice that Joe Christmas is a very mystic/Dionysiancharacter, who is never subsumed into interpretation.
The scene of Joe Christmas’s death appears to be the most significant part in thenovel for readers to understand that Joe Christmas is the very Dionysian, a subversive
character, who always already takes on some attributes that can never be subsumed
into normalization/verbalization. Before putting forth the argument, let us now refer toone or two preceding studies, which have different views on Christmas’s death. First,
James A. Snead contends: “As [Theodor] Adorno suggests, ‘all reification is aforgetting’: Jefferson cannot remember the truth without losing its flattering and fixed
self-image. For the town, Joe Christmas will always be ‘the nigger’ who slit the ‘white
woman’s [Joanna Burden’s]’ throat and ‘got what he deserved’” (133). Diane Roberts
also argues: “Joe incorporates both white and black, both male and female, both theability to menstruate and to ejaculate, and is present yet erased; the myriad play of self
and desire is obliterated in the face of the community need for conformity and unity,
for the hierarchies of white/black, male/female to remain undisturbed” (184). I
recognize the importance of their assertions; however, it seems to me that they fail tograsp the essence of the pronoun “black” used in the locale of Christmas’s death. To
take the inexplicability of “black” into consideration, Joe Christmas’s death comes out
more thrillingly than we imagine.
Then his face, body, all, seemed to collapse, to fall in upon itself, and from out
the slashed garments about his hips and loins the pent black blood seemed torush like a released breath. It seemed to rush out of his pale body like the rush of
sparks from a rising rocket; upon that black blast the man seemed to rise soaring
into their memories forever and ever. They are not to lose it, in whatever6

peaceful valleys, beside whatever placid and reassuring streams of old age, in the
mirroring faces of whatever children they will contemplate old disasters andnewer hopes. It will be there, musing, quiet, steadfast, not fading and notparticularly threatful, but of itself alone serene, of itself alone triumphant. (465)With regard to the above scene, Snead indicates syntactic ambiguity, or to put it
concretely, the ambiguity of the referents of the pronouns such as “they” and “it” andthe ambiguity of the meanings of the adjective “black” (131). According to Snead, if“they” refers to the townspeople, it is an unavoidable question whether “they” includes
the “black” townspeople or not; moreover, the referent of “it” depends on if the
pronoun “they” includes “black” people. In the light of the thread of meaning in thepassage, however, “they” seems to refer to Percy Grimm and his company, whoparticipate in the symbolic lynching. When the passage says “They are not to lose it,”“they” seems to refer to the “white” townspeople symbolically. At this moment, there
emerges a crucial question: what does “the pent black blood” or “black blast,” which
the “white” townspeople witness at the scene of Joe Christmas’s death, signify? The
meaning of “black” is essentially inexplicable.
As far as we treat the adjective “black” as what it is without any bias, it is
impossible to determine whether “black” refers to racial matter symbolically or bloodcolor literally. Taking into consideration the townspeople’s desire to veil Christmas’s
racial invisibility or their impulse to see “negro blood” in him, Christmas should beincontrovertibly designated as a “negro” or a “nigger” at the dying scene narrated fromthe point of view of the townspeople. At the same time, any ambiguous expression ofblood should be avoided here. Nevertheless, why are the ambiguous expressions
selected? The reason would be that Joe Christmas’s racial invisibility never yields tothe townspeople’s normalization. The narrator, or rather the implied author, whom I am
tempted to identify as Faulkner, suggests here that the townspeople can nevernormalize or “blacken” Christmas. As Snead succinctly describes him as “an elusive
shadow” (124), Christmas could be considered as an intangible character who slips
through normalization/verbalization. Even if the townspeople persistently strive to
confine Christmas within the semiotic code of race, their attempt invariably ends infailure. Joe Christmas is a radically subversive character who always already possesses
some quality which can never be subsumed into normalization/verbalization. As
Thadious Davis points out that “[w]hat the men [the townspeople] will experiencealong with the image of Joe’s face is guilt” (174); the townspeople are never free fromJoe Christmas and are doomed to be disturbed by the Dionysian power. That is why the7word “triumphant” is used at the end of the death scene. The phrase implies that
Christmas’s venture ends in success. The townspeople’s racialism and their verbal
violence bring about unendurable suffering to Joe Christmas, whereas Christmas, in theend, leaves Joe Christmas, the Dionysian, behind him to keep on disturbing thecommunity and its inhabitants. Moreover, Joe Christmas, in this light, appears to besomebody who epitomizes the alternative way of being, for Joe Christmas emerges as“a paradoxical joy”; he accomplishes be(com)ing through the negative way of being,i.e., his death.8
Light in August has been read as a tragedy in which the uncertain/subversive
character of Joe Christmas is finally obliterated by the townspeople. However, as wehave discussed so far, Christmas’s subversive nature, the Dionysian, can never beveiled or verbalized by the community’s prescriptive power, i.e., the Apollonian. Joe
Christmas is “Xmas” (LIA 58, emphasis mine) in the text, “an elusive shadow” drifting
about the normative world, and the inexplicable “black”; namely, he is the very
Dionysian that always resists verbalization/signification. If “[t]ragedy acts out thechaos at the core of a socio-discursive order, but also recuperates for knowledge the‘inexpressible’ which eludes that order” (Eagleton 20), Light in August cannot be a
tragic story. Joe Christmas, in the novel, remains forever as “the inexplicable.” If wereaders thoughtlessly give it a structure, the essence of the novel is to be crucially
vitiated. Thus, Light in August could be interpreted as a story about Joe Christmas’s
triumph over the townspeople; in other words, it is a story of the Dionysian’s triumphover the Apollonian. Consequently, Light in August is not a tragedy that comprises anincredible union between the Dionysian and the Apollonian, but an unconventional
tragedy that depicts the Dionysian overwhelming the Apollonian; as it were, Light inAugust is a “novel,” which shakes the generic stability of tragedy and also relativizes
our way of being.
Works Cited
Bleikasten, André. “Light in August: The Closed Society and Its Subject.” New Essays
on Faulkner’s Light in August. Ed. Michael Millgate. New York: Cambridge UP,
1988. 81-102.
Brooks, Cleanth. William Faulkner: The Yoknapatawpha Country. New Haven: Yale UP,
1963.
Davis, Thadias M. Faulkner’s “Negro.” Baton Rouge: Louisiana State UP, 1983.
Dondlinger, Mary Joanne. “Getting Around the Body: The Matter of Race and Gender8

in Faulkner’s Light in August.” Faulkner and the Natural World. Ed. Donald M.
Kartiganer and Ann J. Abadie. Jackson: UP of Mississippi, 1999. 98-125.
Eagleton, Terry. Sweet Violence: the Idea of the Tragic. Oxford: Blackwell, 2003.
Faulkner, William. Light in August. New York: Vintage International, 1990.
Hiraishi, Takaki. Shosetsu ni okeru Sakusha no Furumai: Fokuna teki Hoho no Kenkyu[The Author’s Behavior in the Novel: A Study of Faulkner’s Method]. Tokyo:
Shohakusha, 2003.
Kartiganer, Donald M. “The Meaning of Form in Light in August.” Modern Critical
Interpretations: William Faulkner’s Light in August. Ed. Harold Bloom. New
York: Chelsea House Educational Communications, 1988. 9-41.
Kazin, Alfred. “The Stillness of Light in August.” William Faulkner: Critical
Assessments Volume Ш. Ed. Henry Claridge. East Sussex: Helm Information,
1999. 119-34.
Nietzsche, Friedrich. The Birth of Tragedy. Trans. Shaun Whiteside. London: Penguin
Books, 1993.
-----. Twilight of the Idols and the Anti-Christ. Trans. R.J. Hollingdale. London: Penguin
Books, 2003.
Nussbaum, Marth C. Love’s Knowledge: Essays on Philosophy and Literature. New
York: Oxford UP, 1990.
Ohashi, Kenzaburo. Fokuna: Amerika Bungaku, Gendai no Shinwa [Faulkner:
American Literature and the Modern Myth]. Tokyo: Chuokoron-sha, 1993.
Roberts, Diane. Faulkner and Southern Womanhood. Athens: U of Georgia P, 1994.
Snead, James A. “Figures of Division: Light in August.” Modern Critical
Interpretations: William Faulkner’s Light in August. Ed. Harold Bloom. New
York: Chelsea House Educational Communications, 1988. 117-34.
Vickery, Olga W. The Novels of William Faulkner: A Critical Interpretation. Baton
Rouge: Louisiana State UP, 1959.

Notes
Cleanth Brooks is so conservative that he looks upon the prescriptive power of thecommunity’s norm as positive one; André Bleikasten argues it against Brooks’s view on
the norm that the cause of Christmas’s deviation lies in the defect of the community’snorm.
2
See also Theresa M. Towner’s “Unsurprised Flesh：Color, Race, and Identity in
Faulkner’s Fiction” in Faulkner and the Natural World (Jackson: UP of Mississippi,
1999), ed. Donald M. Kartiganer and Ann J. Abadie: 45–65.
3
Alfred Kazin positively reads into Joe Christmas an “existential” attitude to try to1

9

“become someone, a human being” (123).
4
In his childhood, Joe Christmas, brought up at a “white” orphanage, interiorizes thepossibility of “blackness” by the word “nigger” arbitrarily uttered to him by otherpeople such as the dietician or other orphans. The origin of the word “nigger” lies in a
racist mad speculation made by Doc Hines, Joe Christmas’s grandfather, whereas therepeated word “nigger” performatively inscribes “blackness” on Joe Christmas.
5
Bleikasten asserts that Joe Christmas adheres to the “white” myths or the “white”
standards that the townspeople follow (84).
6Regarding the “paved street” as a symbol of American civilization, which is acounterforce to Nature represented by Lena Grove, Kenzaburo Ohashi suggests that Joe
Christmas, in the seven-day flight, undergoes the natural power, the power of “earth,”
for a brief space of time (118–19). As is shown in the following parts, nature or thenatural world, in this paper, is assumed to be what latently possesses a certain chaotic
power —the Dionysian power.
7
It is not appropriate that he transcends the normative world itself. Joe Christmas
epistemologically transcends the normative world. In the light of the passage, “‘But I[Christmas] have never got outside that circle. I have never broken out of the ring ofwhat I have already done and cannot ever undo,’ he thinks quietly. . . .” (LIA 339), suchmetaphorical words as “circle” and “ring” imply that Christmas is never released fromthe normative world itself or its binding power. After the epistemologicalmetamorphosis, Joe Christmas lurks around and in the normative world subversively,
just as the chaotic power does so.
8
In Twilight of the Idols, Nietzsche, who radically revises his own observation on the
Dionysian discussed in The Birth of Tragedy, bestows his highest praise on theoverflowing of the Dionysian and mentions a particular form of joy: “Not so as to get
rid of pity and terror, not so as to purify oneself of a dangerous emotion through its
vehement discharge —it was thus Aristotle understood it— : but, beyond pity and terror,
to realize in oneself the eternal joy of becoming —that joy which also encompasses joy
in destruction…” (121). Here, Nietzsche presents a form of the paradoxical joy or rather
an alternative way of being that can be achieved with and expressed only by a certain
negativity. Nietzsche is often misunderstood as a very nihilist who is full of negation or
despair, whereas, in reality, “Nietzsche did hold out for a human life beyond nihilism”
and “believed his task as a writer to be the creation of that hope as vivid possibility”(Nussbaum 307). In addition, Takaki Hiraishi reads in Joe Christmas’s death a
psychoanalytical idea “thanatos” as positive acceptance of death (88). In my
understanding, “thanatos” is connected with be(com)ing.

10