"In his speech, he warns of two possible threats to the republic. The first is found in the lawless actions of the mob, the second in the inevitable rise someday of an aspiring dictator. The gravest peril will come if the mob and the dictator unite."
The “his” being referenced here is Abraham Lincoln. He is not yet President; he is not yet even thirty years old. The speech being referenced here is one the young Lincoln delivers to the Young Men’s Lyceum of Springfield. It will later come to be regarded as Lincoln’s first truly significant act of oratory. The warnings contained in that speech must be understood within the context of the composition of this historical novel as nothing less than foundational. In her Author’s Note elsewhere in the book, Karen Joy Fowler honestly admits to hesitancy in taking up the subject of the assassin of President Lincoln as one worthy of her time and talent. The most infamous member of this renowned family has already taken up too much of the spotlight deservedly earned by his betters. So, then, why does this book exist? To a large extent, it exists because of warnings of Lincoln. This novel was published in the immediate wake of the most heinous lawless mob to ever form in American history. And it was on January 6, 2021, that this mob formed with the full intention of overthrowing the rule of law so that an aspiring dictator could finally cut himself loose from the “aspiring” part. The book may take as its subject a family that produced an assassin of a President, but it is also to some great extent a book about a President desperately seeking to become the assassin of America.
“The Thane of Fife had a wife. Where is she now? What, will these hands ne’er be clean? Here’s the smell of the blood still. All the perfumes of Arabia will not sweeten this little hand. Don’t I make a lovely Lady Macbeth?”
Just as the above passage references a much young Lincoln, so does this passage which primarily consists of quotes from Shakespeare’s Macbeth present a portrait of a much young John Wilkes Booth. When reciting Lady Macbeth’s lines, the boyish Johnny has added a petticoat and shawl to his other perfectly typical male attire. It is a comedic performance conducted in partial drag for the amusement of his sister, Asia. Despite being purposely absurd on Johnny’s part, however, this scene is also instrumental in how the author approaches the difficult task of writing about the single most destructive American in the nation’s history. Putting a special focus on the future assassin of hope at a time of life far removed from that fateful night inside Ford’s Theater removes some of the onus. Situating John Wilkes Booth in a circumstance that is at least partially humiliating also helps. At the same time, however, there is context and subtext taking place here that makes little scene profoundly serious. Consider that the most infamous assassin America has yet produced is taking on a role in a play about a king killer. Curiously, however, it is not the role of the man who kills a king in order to become king, but his wife and accomplice who spends every moment she appears on stage after committing the dead vainly trying to rinse the blood from her hands. The specific choice of Lady Macbeth’s query about whatever happened to the wife of the Thane of Fife is particularly resonant as it foreshadows the stain of guilt that John will ultimately bring to his entire family. (The Lady is referencing herself; she was the wife of the Thane of Fife before the Thane of Fife became King.) The parallels being drawn here are remarkably powerful for a scene that is otherwise a comical exercise in humiliating a villain.
What is it like to love the most hated man in the country? Loving John is something the world simply will not have.
On the other hand, this question speaks to an aspect of the question of why write about John Wilkes Booth that is less successful. In addition to the historical context of the MAGA insurrection and Trump’s attempted coup, the composition of this historical fiction is also informed by the continuing epidemic of gun violence in America in the 21st century. The author termed Booth the “most famous man with a gun in all of American history.” That assertion is questionable, to begin with considering how America has always been a machine specializing in the production of men who become famous for using guns, but there is another more troubling assertion being made implicitly in the quote above. In just one month in 2022 alone, the most hated man in America is a title that passed from Texas Senator Rafael “Ted” Cruz to Robb Elementary School shooter Salvador Ramos to Uvalde Consolidated Independent School District Police Department Chief Pete Arredondo and then back against to Cruz. The connection between Booth and his tiny Derringer pistol and the collective machinery supporting the right of Americans to slaughter schoolchildren is the most tenuous one made between the novel and the present-day state of the nation.
