Skip to main content

Why do the greasers and Socs fight in a vacant lot in The Outsiders by S.E. Hinton?

The fight between the greasers and the Socs in the vacant lot is payback for Bob and Johnny. 


The greasers and Socs are always fighting each other. They are in different social classes, and their different gangs are based on using class differences and territories to target one another. Usually, this involves gang members fighting one or two at a time, but sometimes there are “rumbles” where larger numbers become involved. 


The big rumble at the end of the book comes about as a result of Bob and Randy's attack on Johnny, and Johnny killing Bob. Therefore, both gangs consider it an opportunity for payback. They both want revenge. The greasers blame Bob and Randy for attacking Johnny and Pony, which ultimately leads to Johnny's injuries from the church fire. The Socs blame Johnny for killing Bob. 



[The] big rumble was coming up and we would settle this Soc-greaser thing once and for all (Chapter 7).  



Both gangs meet at the vacant lot to fight. The greasers are assisted by Shepard's gang.  



They lined up silently, facing us, and we lined up facing them. I looked for Randy but didn't see him. I hoped he wasn't there. A guy with a madras shirt stepped up. "Let's get the rules straight—nothing but our fists, and the first to run lose. Right?" (Chapter 9)



Pony’s brothers do not want him to fight because he was hurt in the church fire. He is not a big fighter, but he wants to support his gang. Therefore, it is very important to him that he is there. He goes and survives. The greasers win, and Pony feels proud. Unfortunately, Johnny later dies of his injuries from the fire.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Is 'efficate' a word in English?

I routinely hear the word "efficate" being used. For example, "The most powerful way to efficate a change in the system is to participate." I do not find entries for this word in common English dictionaries, but I do not have an unabridged dictionary. I have checked the OED (I'm not sure if it is considered unabridged), and it has no entry for "efficate". It does have an entry for "efficiate", which is used in the same way. Wordnik has an entry for "efficate" with over 1800 hits, thus providing some evidence for the frequency of use. I personally like the word and find the meaning very clear and obvious when others use it. If it's not currently an "officially documented" word, perhaps its continued use will result in it being better documented.
Post a Comment
Read more