:
My theory is that black fathers and sons were separated in Africa in the seventeenth century and have not come back together since. They can eat across the table, but that is not the same thing as coming back together (Steinberg 77).
Gaines portrays Martin not as an evil man, but as a man who is trying, both consciously and subconsciously, to redeem himself for his abandonment of his son, but what he has done has not healed his heart, or his son, or their relationship. The sins of his past were the sins of a young man, but clearly this rationale does not excuse him for those sins or exempt him from having to deal directly with those sins and the son against whom he committed them. Again, the essence of the story is the alienation of black father from black son, and only a direct confrontation can alter that alienation, although not necessarily for the better. After all, the son kills himself in the end of the book, so if there is any redemption it will come in the character of Martin. Despite the fact that Reverend Martin's last words to his wife are, "I'm lost, Alma. I'm lost," Alma restores hope for the future with the words, "We just go'n have to start again" (Gaines 214).
Clearly, Gaines conclusion is not meant to be entirely pessimistic, despite the son's suicide, and despite the fact that the encounter between father and son certainly did not yield cheerful results. However, Reverend Martin has indeed experienced an awakening with respect to his past and his neglected responsibilities, and Gaines certainly intends for his readers to draw that awakening into their own lives. Part of this lesson for readers, of course, is that Martin has paid a terrible price for refusing, as both a young man and as an adult up to the reappearance of his son, to live up to the covenant of love and guidance every father has with his son. He has lost a son first to his own neglect, and then to death. He has been effectively o...