The Proud Peasant
- Jon Nelson
- Apr 16
- 5 min read
Updated: Apr 17

SF has never been very forward-looking. It is likely the least innovative of literatures. It has certainly never been daring, though several of its practitioners wear the ‘I am Daring’ badge hypocritically. It is a field compounded largely of patsies who can be led by nose-rings anywhere at all. — "The Case of the Moss Eaten Magician"
I want to think a little about Lafferty's support for Joseph McCarthy and his refusal ever to believe that McCarthy had been wrong about communism. I should say at the outset that I take a measured view on the deeply flawed and often destructive McCarthy, but I am sympathetic to Laffery's view of anti-communism. After all, Soviet infiltration was a Cold War reality. McCarthy is not, in my eyes, the straightforward historical villain he is often portrayed as in popular accounts. The whole thing is just sad to me, on all sides. To put it mildly, being remotely measured about McCarthy is not popular.
So, where to start with Senator McCarthy and Lafferty? Perhaps we begin with the fact that they were both proud Irish Catholics. There is a good online essay from the Jesuit magazine America by Larry Tye that gets McCarthy and Catholicism right. Tye is a McCarthy expert who argues that McCarthy’s Catholicism was central to his identity, but not in the deterministic way later popular accounts suggest. The cartoon McCarthy is a Catholic ideologue. Yes, McCarthy was raised in a devout Irish Catholic farming family in Wisconsin. He was further shaped by his Catholic education at Marquette. It is a weird coincidence, if it is one, that, within Green Tree, the Green Tree community converges at an Irish burial in Ireland, in the county from which the McCarthys had immigrated to the U.S. At that point in the novel, America has become in many ways politically intolerable within the novel's imaginary of Flatland.
McCarthy himself was not intellectual, but even his knowledgeable detractors seem to agree that his Catholicism was sincere, habitual, and deeply, if naively, personal. McCarthy did not use Catholicism for public display. He did not want to be thought of as a Catholic ideologue. His Catholicism was old-fashioned: regular Mass, confession, prayer, and support for Catholic causes all mattered to him.
Tye takes aim at one of the big McCarthy myths, the claim that Catholic leaders effectively launched McCarthy’s anti-Communist crusade.. Catholic anti-Communism and Catholic voters certainly helped promote his rise, and he was often a hero of Catholics, but Catholic opinion itself was hotly divided on McCarthy, with important clergy and lay voices denouncing him from the beginning. By the end, after the Army-McCarthy hearings and his Senate censure, both his public standing and Catholic support took a nosedive. There are few political implosions in American public life quite like it. One interesting detail is that of one of the two Catholic senators who did not censure McCarthy was JFK, who was reluctant to alienate his base. In Green Tree, Kennedy is the Cardboard Man, the cardboard Catholic. McCarthy was a man whose faith was real, yet whose demagoguery overshadowed it, and who will probably always be a villain in the popular imagination. Again, he isn't getting a measured treatment anytime soon. The last serious academic attempt at partial rehabilitation was in the year 2000.
Now, a complicating factor in all this is the way Lafferty’s view of communism intersects with questions of American Jewish identity, since one part of the McCarthy story involves the different responses Senator McCarthy drew from Catholics and Jews. As Tye writes, “The truth is that at his peak, McCarthy had the support of an impressive 49 percent of Protestants, which was just one point below his national rating. Jewish Americans were the one religious group who consistently and overwhelmingly rejected him, with 15 percent viewing him favorably and 71 percent unfavorably.” It is therefore not surprising that McCarthy becomes a figure in In a Green Tree about whom Julius Brass has something to say.
McCarthy’s identity in the book is called the "Proud Peasant." He is first introduced by Pat O'Trassy, who foresees a "type-man" who will lead an unorganized revolt to reverse the world's surrender to evil and slavery.
"This type-man that I see," Pat O’Trassy was speaking with his hands as well as with his mouth as he tried to show the shape of the type-man, "will head an unorganized revolt. I even have a name for the phenomenon that he’ll head: ‘Remembrance of Proud Peasants.’ That’s sort of a title for something It keeps coming to me. I almost see the face of the man who will first typify it, Black Irish and Black German mixed, dark of brow and jowl, solid, honest, good. I’ll begin to see that face more clearly soon."
This is where Julius Brass comes in. Because the "brotherhood" of his enemies has antennae that warn them of threats early, Julius predicts that the Proud Peasant will be thwarted:
"But this ‘Proud Peasant’ will be thwarted at every stretch and turn, Pat. He will be just about the biggest bust ever. He’ll be totally destroyed. And you yourself will be taught to loathe him. The peasant-as-hero will be ruined and shot down." "Why will he be ruined, Julius un-Caesar, you un-tactician of these battles?" "OH, I’m a superb tactician in these battles, Pat. But the members of the brotherhood have antennae that you don’t know about. They can give themselves warning of a threat even before it begins . . . They’ll not allow him to be seen undistorted. He’ll be smothered in slander and booing. He’ll be savaged to death. And his fellow Proud Peasants will be gulled into dishonoring him in death and after."
This is Lafferty’s allegorical take on what happened in 1954 following the televised Army-McCarthy hearings. What Americans learned led to the U.S. Senate’s 67-22 vote to censure McCarthy for conduct unbecoming of a senator.
That will all happen in the novel's future. Back in Tulsa, Pat's wife Beatrice Belle has a ten-inch baked-clay statuette (from James Tyrone's archeological digs) that Julius says is the "Archetypal Proud Peasant." The connection gets cemented:
In November of 1946, Beatrice Belle saw in the newspaper the picture of a youngish man who had won an election in a midnorthern state." That’s the man," BeeBee said. "He is the splitting image of his image on the buffet there."

Over time, Pat O'Trassy observes that he has two effigies connected to this man, and they begin to reflect a disturbing, explosive ambivalence. The primary statuette remains true to the man's original appearance: a clear, crisp, good-looking, and honest man, clouded only slightly by concern and frustration. The secondary effigy, though, morphs:
But the secondary effigy, ah, it was turning into a loathsome fellow. He was really having a foul job done in him. "Some people say that a person can see anything he wants to see in these little reacting-clay effigies," Pat O’Trassy grumbled. "But I’m seeing things in this one that I very much don’t want to see. Gah, it’s hard even to look at the loathsome thing!"
As Julius predicts, the real-life Proud Peasant is targeted by what the novel calls "Loathsomizing Machines." The media and his enemies subject him to an onslaught of character assassination until his true self can no longer be seen or heard; only distortions reach the American public:
But what was the man himself up to, the man that the effigies effigied? That was hard to say. The shrilling and booing and yelling and spitting against him did not really allow him to be seen or heard at all. Only distortions of him could come through. The "Loathsomizing Machines" were working on him. When last had there been such stark and violent slander and hatred!
The Proud Peasant died on May 2, 1957, pretty well hated by almost everyone. Never had the death of one honest man brought so much sheer delight to so grubby a commonalty. He was still a young man when he died. It was a Murder by Slander.




