Chapter 10: The Skrup Shoe – Summary and Analysis

⚠️ Spoiler Warning: This guide contains detailed spoilers for the entire novel. Proceed only if you've finished reading or are comfortable knowing the plot.

Chapter Summary

Earl “Doc” Roberts learns about the hidden deaf Negro boy from his cousin Carl Boydkins, a state welfare worker. The chapter traces Doc’s family history—a fabricated Mayflower lineage that actually begins with a sailor named Ed Bole. Doc’s childhood was marked by a polio‑crippled foot that earned him the nickname “Hoof.” The only shoe that ever fit was made by the Jewish shoemaker Norman Skrupskelis, but Doc resented the old man’s silence. In high school, Doc developed a crush on Chona, who also wore a Skrup shoe; when she rejected his invitation to join the debate team, his humiliation turned to rage. Years later, after medical school, Doc joined the White Knights of the Ku Klux Klan. When Carl tells him Chona is illegally hiding a twelve‑year‑old deaf boy, Doc agrees to examine the boy and sign a report that would send him to the notorious Pennhurst institution.

Key Events

Carl Boydkins relays rumors that Chona is hiding a deaf Negro child at the grocery store.
Doc’s family history is recounted: the Blessington myth, the true story of Ed Bole, and the loss of the Boydkins farm to industrial pollution.
Doc’s childhood polio left his left foot deformed, causing him lifelong pain and shame.
Norman Skrupskelis crafts a magical, nearly pain‑free shoe for Doc, yet Doc feels humiliated by the shoemaker’s gruff manner.
In high school, Doc develops a secret crush on Chona and asks her to join the debate team; she nervously refuses, and Doc’s infatuation curdles into resentment.
After medical school, Doc returns to a Pottstown transformed by immigrants and reluctantly joins the White Knights.
Carl proposes that Doc examine the hidden boy to have him committed to Pennhurst. Despite his misgivings, Doc agrees.

Character Development

Earl “Doc” Roberts is revealed as a man shaped by physical pain and racial entitlement. His disability isolates him, but instead of building empathy, he clings to a fantasy of white supremacy and old‑fashioned American values. His childhood humiliation at the hands of Norman Skrupskelis and his rejection by Chona fester into a generalized hatred of Jews and outsiders. By chapter’s end, his willingness to use his medical authority to remove Dodo from the community reveals how personal grievance and institutional racism combine.

Chona appears only in flashback, but her refusal of Doc’s overture and her later letter to the newspaper about the Klan parade show her as someone unwilling to accommodate prejudice. Her presence in Doc’s memory underscores the connection—via the Skrup shoe—that he can neither embrace nor escape.

Carl Boydkins serves as the plot‑moving functionary: a lazy, cynical welfare worker who sees the boy as a bureaucratic problem. His casual racism and willingness to lie set the state’s machinery in motion.

Themes, Symbols, or Motifs

The Skrup Shoe symbolizes both the possibility of genuine care and the resentment that can arise from receiving help. For Doc, the shoe is a daily reminder of his difference and of the Jewish artisan’s silent superiority. For Chona, it represents the same outsider status, but she wears it without shame.

The Mayflower myth is explicitly deconstructed: the Roberts‑Boydkins family history is a fabrication, built on a drunk sailor’s lies. The motif of invented purity contrasts with the actual mixed heritage of America and exposes the fragility of the “old stock” identity Doc clings to.

Industrial transformation mirrors the “pollution” of the white Protestant town. The factories that destroyed the Boydkins farm are equated with the arrival of immigrants and African‑Americans, linking environmental decay to racial anxiety.

The gaze recurs: the way Norman examines Doc’s foot without speaking, the way Doc scrutinizes Chona in the hallway, the way the Klan “decides who are the good ones.” Each objectifying look reinforces hierarchy.

Why This Chapter Matters

Chapter 10 provides the psychological and historical root of the conflict that drives the novel’s plot. It explains why the state, personified by Doc, feels entitled to take Dodo from the Hill. Without this backstory, Doc’s actions might seem merely evil; instead, McBride shows how a man who believes himself to be a healer can become an instrument of harm. The chapter also deepens Chona’s character by showing her through the eyes of a man who both desires and resents her, revealing her quiet integrity. The Skrup shoe becomes a tangible link between two characters from different worlds, a token of craft that cannot bridge the chasm of race and belonging.

Study Questions and Answers

How does Doc’s family history—the Blessington myth and the true story of Ed Bole—shape his identity?
The myth gives Doc a sense of lineage and entitlement he feels is threatened by immigration. The true story, an absurd tale of a drunk sailor who reinvented himself, undermines the very purity Doc claims to defend, though he never examines it. The contrast shows that American identity is often invented, yet Doc clings to the fiction to justify his prejudices.
What role does Doc’s disability play in his worldview?
His deformed foot and the nickname “Hoof” made him an object of ridicule. He receives help from Norman Skrupskelis but interprets the shoemaker’s professional demeanor as arrogance. Instead of building solidarity with others who are marginalised, Doc channels his shame into a desire for control and a belief in a natural hierarchy where he finally belongs at the top as a white male doctor.
Why does Doc agree to help Carl send Dodo to Pennhurst, despite knowing the institution is “a horrible, overcrowded nightmare”?
Doc’s decision is driven by a mix of professional obligation, leftover resentment toward Chona, and a desire to please the powerful men in the Klan. He suppresses his medical conscience because the boy is Black and deaf—a “problem” to be removed from the community Doc sees as his own. The chapter emphasises that indifference and pride can be as harmful as outright cruelty.