In both Invisible Man and Native Son,
the entire plot relies on craziness to keep the narrator and Bigger running. What exactly happened in the paint factory
that caused a “stinking[,] goo[y]”
explosion (230)? Why does a factory
have a hospital? How does the narrator
“just happen” to run into Clifton in Midtown Manhattan? How did Bigger accidentally strangle Mary? How does literally everyone involved in
Bigger’s life all come into his cell at the same time? The number of lunacies
thrown within each novel is endless. The
purpose of these insanities is to not only functions for the story’s plot, but
also to juxtapose the even more crazy way the narrator and Bigger are treated
by society. The Battle Royal scene is
rooted in historical fact, yet it appears not any less crazy than the rest of
the insanities thrown in throughout the novel. The juxtaposition of these
scenes shows how the history of American race relations is possibly more crazy than the complete insanity of
the other fictional scenes, like the Golden Day.
In Hurston’s Their Eyes Were Watching God we see a very different picture of her
main character’s agency. Janie, although
always still constrained in many ways by society, is able to have some amount of choice in her life that
is not evident in NS or IM. She
chooses to leave Logan and the later to run off with Teacake. In the case of Logan, she does not have many
alternatives, but with Teacake she is
the one that runs off with him. Hurston’s Their
Eyes Were Watching God is the only book we have read where the protagonist
seems to have emotional attachment to other people. In both NS
and IM Bigger and the narrator
both seem very alone in the world from the beginning to the end of the
novel. They each have acquaintances and
family, but Wright and Ellison focus on the society’s impact on their lives as
a more “historical” picture rather than on a personal level. I think that Wright’s criticism of Hurston does
a good job pointing out some of the problems in Hurston’s portrayal of the Muck
and Eatonville’s citizens, but looks over the fluidity and joy of Janie’s
character despite repression.
There are definitely many differences between the books we have read so far. In Native Son, Bigger doesn't have much choice in what he does. Wright uses this to make a point about black people being influenced so heavily by white society. As Hurston's novel is not a protest novel and more of a love story, she was able to give Janie's character more freedom.
ReplyDeleteInterestingly enough, Janie is placed in a unique position of choice in spite of her gender because of the wealth that was left to her. In all three books, a lack of stability is what drives the craziness that you mentioned. Bigger is thrown into contact with radical ideas he is unprepared to handle and Ellison's narrator is often at odds with his grandfather's morals (that eventually prevail) and the ideals of the white-run system. As a result, the avenues of criticism between the novels aren't always representative of the quality of the authors. While the competitors make good points in their critiques, they all too often want someone else's book to follow their own writing methods.
ReplyDelete"If it's bad, I'll hate it because I hate bad writing, and if it's good, I'll be envious and hate all the more. You don't want the opinion of another writer." - Ernest Hemingway in Midnight in Paris
I think your quote definitely holds true with Wright's critique of Hurston's novel. Wright bashes her for failing to make a political statement on racial issues, yet does not see that she had created a book that gave more agency to a female protagonist than Wright did with Bigger.
Delete