Monday, March 19, 2012
Individual Religion
Thursday, February 23, 2012
Not Invisible After All
Ralph Ellison’s novel Invisible Man begins with the simple statement “I am an invisible man,” (1). Throughout the novel the main character continuously repeats this phrase as a question of doubt or as a statement describing himself. As his position flips-flops and demonstrates his self-doubt and the doubts of society, the uncertainty of this statement prods the main character, like many, to becoming a statement of action or restraint. In a circular fashion, Ellison continues to present the past and present as one, and for the main character (who remains nameless throughout the novel) to question the meaning of his grandfather’s statements as he drives one of the college’s founders on a questionable journey to a shady part of town. The statements and the drive are two pivotal moments in the main character’s life and they launch him into an uncertain future full of questions, rebukes, and efforts to defy society throughout the novel.
To question Ellison, why does the main character not have a name? He remains nameless throughout the entire novel. Perhaps this is intentional so as to fully create an “invisible man” to demonstrate his lack of power as an African American man. Though the main character’s college dean also has the same skin color as the main character, Dr. Bledsoe explains the power of the Negro man, “Power doesn’t have to show off. Power is confident, self –assuring, self-starting and self-stopping, self-warming and self –justifying. When you have it, you know it…The only ones I even pretend to please are big white folk, and even those I control more than they control me…When you buck against me, you’re bucking against power, rich white folk’s power, the nation’s power- which means the government power!” (142) Thus, even with the same skin color, someone must be above and someone must be bellow, it is a fact in the world as Dr. Bledsoe so poignantly points out. Just like the slaves before him, the main character has no power over himself, others do; he has no name, for this is not mentioned; and his existence is dependent on the will of others, as he must do as they please. Dr. Bledsoe even goes as far to say, “You’re nobody, son. You don’t exist – can’t you see that? ...I didn’t make it, and I know that I can’t change it. But I’ve made my place in it and I’ll have every Negro in the country hanging on tree limbs by morning if it means staying where I am, “ (143) and certainly such statements do not help the main character as he attempts to resolve the uncertainty raised by his own question of whether or not he is invisible.
The main character’s defining event leads him to New York, where despite Dr. Bledsoe’s own beliefs, he learns he is somebody as he speaks and attempts to convince others to join a group similar to the Black Panthers group. Other events result in the main character’s “hibernation” underground far from the eyes of society, and during this period of time, the main character finally finds the truth and he is able to answer his own question concerning his invisibility. The main character, like many, found a period of time when he was invisible. However, he did not go unseen, his voice did not go unheard, and he was not invisible. Truth, though slow in coming, brings the words of the main character to life, “When one is invisible he finds such problems as good and evil, honesty and dishonesty, of such shifting shapes that he confuses one with the other, depending upon who happens to be looking through him at the time,” (572) and thus, he was just unable to see the line between two choices, his past and his present became one, rather than one being a place to move from as he moved to the other.
Sunday, January 22, 2012
"Take a flying leap"
Who is a stranger? Someone you do not know. Someone who lives by a different social norm. If someone is different can they be trusted? After all, he or she is a stranger. While reading Camus’ The Stranger I was introduced to a character who was not what you would call by normal standards. Most people know the age of their mother, become upset during funerals, show their emotions, and have opinions. Meursault, however, cannot claim any of these previously mentioned attributes. The lack of emotion or sympathy for others lives’ is exemplified by Meursault’s own view that life can be described as redundancy with no changes ever occurring, and thus, he exemplifies the definition of an existentialist. Through a world wind of events, Camus depicts man’s inability to have compassion for one another through descriptions of unusual behavior and actions.
After shooting an Arab man four times, Meursault finds himself in the middle of a trial, from which he becomes more and more withdrawn. Though his murder trial, those participating in the trial ignore Meursault, telling him to “Just keep quiet” and use evidence against him from behavior and actions at and after his mother’s funeral instead of evidence concerning Meursault’s actions when he shot and killed the Arab. During the trial and the jury deliberations leading to the guilty verdict, I questioned whether the happiness that comes from being different is worth it. Meursault is judged by being different and no one understands him; yet in his final days, Meursault comes to the conclusion: “I felt that I had been happy and that I was happy again,” (Camus, 123). Meursault did not need a “nod” from society telling him what he felt and did was correct, and he simply did as he pleased without any desire to adhere to other’s beliefs or opinions. After much thought, I came to the conclusion that those who are truly different can have a have a large impact on the world even though their ending might not be happy. Meursault feels what he likes and does as he pleases without regard for acting “normal.” However, his fate becomes that of meeting the guillotine. Similar to many modern day criminals who commit white-collar crimes like embezzlement or securities fraud, or are repeat offenders f violent crimes, Meursault feels no remorse for his actions. Or Meursault simply does not understand that his actions are wrong.
You could say after reading this book, though we all want to say we are different, most of us do in fact adhere to the written and unwritten social rules that dictate our every move. Only people like Meursault find a different sense of happiness even though he finds he alone enjoys being “differnt.” We are responsible for our actions and our actions create the person we become, those actions however, are primarily in our own hands and we must, “…[be the] first to grab hold and take a flying leap,” (26) into our futures.