The title of this book may seem to be abrupt or misplaced or something—because it invokes the gods. If Dunbar is using an allusion to the Greek conception of the gods, then perhaps the title is a reference to tragedy, the Greek art of showing how someone's flaws and character faults are responsible for their greatest downfalls. But is that version of justice demonstrated in the book? No, actually, the title points to the fact that in Berry's case, it wasn't hubris at the root of his tragedy, but the fact that he was black.
This is an example of how tragedy afflicts the Black community, and the fact that it was written over 100 years ago doesn't mean that it isn't still applicable. From a literary design standpoint, it seems to be a story with two halves, where one half is about Berry and his innocence, and the other half is about the experience and trauma that his family endures because of his wrongful condemnation. The second half happens in New York, so it's also a symbol of urban vices, because Joe gets caught up in a vicious alcohol abuse problem by finding work in a club, and his untreated anger (about the injustice of his father, perhaps) overflows when his girlfriend tries to leave.
The fact that Joe is guilty of murder, but Berry is innocent, that fact brings up an important question. What was Berry guilty for? What was Joe guilty for? Berry's only guilt is his skin color, which is the novel's way of reminding the reader that Black people are commonly mistreated, even since slavery. Joe's guilt is more complex, because he is responsible for his choices, but then again, he was certainly the victim of extreme circumstances, and when he was mentally desperate, no one could help him the way alcohol could. He is guilty, but still disenfranchised and victimized by circumstance.
