In The Invisible Man, I guess I’m not sure what I was expecting, but it is a very depressing story. Of course, it makes sense that the story isn't happy, however I guess I thought there would be some inkling of a hero within the narrator, and he seems to just be in a lull of unhappiness. He himself doesn't really know what to do. I see now why Mrs. Disher had us watch the introductory videos to this book, because it helps put a visual to what is going on. One of the more difficult things to grasp is the narrator’s opinion of his grandpa. In chapter one, the narrator says “I could never be sure of what he meant… And whenever things went well for me I remembered my grandfather and felt guilty and uncomfortable” (16). The narrator seems to respect his grandpa, but there is emotional baggage and almost fear on some level of his grandpa, seen again in chapter two when the narrator is talking about looking at a photo of his grandpa. He says, “It was a face that fascinated me. The eyes seemed to follow everywhere I went… I awoke the the old man’s [his grandfather] laughter ringing in my ears” (33). His dream had been about going to the circus with his grandpa. It will be interesting to see how the narrator characterizes his relationship with his grandfather further, and see if that gets paralleled in any other relationships through the book,The Invisible Man.
"I am invisible, understand, simply because people refuse to see me". Wow. What a great way to start the book. This quote establishes the narrator as socially aware, recognizing where he is. He knows that people don't care about him. Yet if you go deeper, there are multiple meanings to see. If one looks at it superficially, it recognizes a man not noticed. Perhaps a man passed over for promotion, or not having his accomplishments noticed. A deeper reading of this quote, and it appears to be more than simply observing the man's actions. Instead, it means that they refuse to look at who he is. People look the Invisible Man, and already see their own interpretations. This applies to the conflict the Invisible Man has, where the blond man calls the Invisible Man a racial slur, and then they have a physical altercation. In the news after it paints the blond man as the victim, with the Invisible Man as the aggressor, showing how people interpret him in their own ways, yet with disregard to his personhood.
ReplyDeleteIt's interesting that the Invisible Man establishes how perfect he was, in a way. He worked hard and was smart, trying to succeed in school. For all accounts, he was following what white people say that a black person should do to follow society's rules. Yet even as he "succeeds" in these social standards, he still is only observed the same as those who do not put any effort in.
Dr. Bledsoe really got on my nerves in this section. He seemed very two-faced to me, treating the white Mr. Norton with respect to his face while completely disregard the Invisible Man. He seems to lack respect towards anybody, being incredibly self seeking when he bursts out with “We take these white folks where we want them to go”. Bledsoe is manipulative to the extreme, working through not only the students lower than him but also the white donors that keep the university running. He attains personal progress, while he still demeans other African Americans.
ReplyDeleteThen the Invisible Man attends the sermon of Homer Barbee. What an odd last name, I don’t quite understand if there’s any symbolic meaning behind it like there is behind Trueblood’s name, but perhaps we’ll see it later on in the story. The first name seems very explicit classical allusion to Homer the Poet, the blind writer of the Odyssey and the Illiad. The sermon about this mysterious “Founder” seemed kinda similar ideas to me, as if Barbee is himself a second classical Homer, creating a mythology around a man. The Founder is never explicity named, like Invisible Man, which begs the question if the two are meant to be similar figures. Both have these stories and ideas placed upon them by other people. My prediction is that the Founder will be revealed in some sort of fashion, and that there will be stark comparisons to Invisible Man.
My question for you this week is: Have you noticed any other explicit symbolism in the character’s names like Trueblood and Homer?
Yes. It's sometimes difficult to follow the visuals of a stream-of-consciousness work, and Patsy, I'd never thought about The Odyssey here before.
ReplyDeletePatsy-
ReplyDeleteHow do you like this book? In this reading for Invisible Man, I was again struck by the injustice of the treatment toward the narrator. There is an interesting dynamic between Mr. Norton and the narrator. Mr. Norton is almost like a child, and the Narrator a big brother. Dr. Bledsoe acts as a father who favors Mr. Norton, scolding the Narrator to “know better,” when how should he have known what would have happened? Dr. Bledsoe says to him, “Boy, are you a fool? Didn't you know better than to take a trustee out there?” (102). Anyway, I found the story of the founder interesting, that it began a college started by a black man, but still white men have taken over and risen to the top of the “food chain.” Honestly I can’t help but compare everything to my experiences in the south. I now have a friend in South Carolina who will be attending Howard University in DC, an all African American university. When I was driving to school in South Carolina, I passed two all African American universities, but the sad thing is they were in the midst of public housing. Obviously, not everyone is racist, but race has a different meaning in certain places in the south. It’s a cultural thing though, not the result of everyone just being racist. Kind of like the Stanford Prison Experiment, where people fill the roles that they think they are supposed to be. Patsy, what do you think of the University’s racial dynamic?
Not sure if I've picked up on other explicit symbolism, but ill let you know.
I felt so angry for the Invisible Man. I always knew Bledsoe was despicable but I never knew how bad it'd be. After the Invisible Man had worked so hard to get into the college, and then just to be expelled without even knowing. It reminds me of a quote from the TV show Scandal. In the scene a black father is telling his daughter that in order to succeed she has to "Work twice as hard and get half as much". I think this really applies to the Invisible Man. The Veteran he speaks to illustrates this idea. He wanted to escape the south and he is, but only through tranafer to another asylum, instead of true freedom. It symbolizes the narrators journey, as even as he moves to the free north he will still be captive. I think this really plays into your university dynamic, as this fact that even as the Veteran wants to avoid the tropes, he still is stuck in his role. I think the Stanford Prison Experiment is a perfect example to compare to the Invisible Man. He is a man constantly struggling with the roles placed upon him.
DeleteInvisible Man is given the job at the paint factory with a rather heavy handed metaphor in "Our white is so white you can paint a chunka coal and you’d have to crack it open with a sledge hammer to prove it wasn’t white clear through". This represents how African Americans in this era had to try to make themselves as white as possible. It furthers the metaphor when describing the paint process, starting with black and brown and then it being transformed into a pure white. He's placed into a role again, as the unioners view him as a snitch while Brockway simply hates him for his education. Brockway is blocking his way, only giving him the simplest job to complete. The fight and explosion help Invisible Man tremendously, giving him compensation money. Maybe it was ignorant of me, but before reading this I thought Brer Rabbit was always just a Disney character. I looked more into the history of this character, and it really parallels the Invisible Man. Br'er, or brother, rabbit is a character who gets by on his wits, rather than brute strength. He manipulates the fox through cunning, rather than strength. In this same way Invisible Man tries to manipulate circumstances through his intelligence, however the story will tell if his approach will remain successful. I feel as if the Brotherhood will seen to try to exploit that aspect of him, but it will fail just like everything else that places Invisible Man into a role.
In specific regards to the racial dynamic of the university, I think it is a reflection of the era, and how even things deemed to be "black" still belong to white people. As Invisible Man seems to move away from academia, do you think that people will still regard his intelligence or will he start being dehumanized more?
https://youtu.be/zgpq2Rqjg4c (link to the scandal clip if you're interested)
Hi Patsy-
ReplyDeleteOkay so I first wanna talk about the Veteran he met. I thought the conversation they had on the bus was actually really interesting. When I first heard the narrator was going to New York, I have to say I was thinking that he would like it there a lot, but the way the narrator, vet, and Crenshaw talk about New York seemed odd. They talked about freedom, but the way that they talked about it was like they it wasn't quite freedom. It almost seemed satirical, at least to us now. The vet says, “Deep down you’re thinking about the freedom you’ve heard about up North, and you’ll try it once, just to see if what you’ve heard is true” (153). To us now, the freedom he describes sounds like a teenager going on vacation for a weekend without parents, but will one day have to return to reality. I guess this is true for the narrator if he will return in a few months, but the “teenager-type freedom” is emphasized when the vet talks about his symbol of freedom being a woman. Crenshaw kind of rebukes him, saying “There’s other kinds of freedom beside some ole white trash women” (153). I found this interaction interesting. When the vet starts talking about being transferred, and having to look deeper to to see things, it reminded me of the book 10 Days in a Mad House. The woman isn't actually crazy, and when she's there she doesn't act crazy, but is treated as such. She observes the workers act mean to the “crazy ones” when the main character is no different from then in reality. I think the whole book could be paralleled to Invisible Man.
Okay so now we see the narrator come to New York. I relate to him, struggling to get a job. Also, when the waiter tells him he looks like he should order something, then the narrator does NOT order that, I relate to that too. Sometimes, when people tell me NOT to do something, it makes me want to do it more, and sometimes the other way around.
I felt so much anxiety for the narrator when the paint fiasco happened. I would freak out if that happened to me. It hurt to read the Southern saying “If you're white, you're right.” AND THEN we read that he gets injured on his first day on the job. Boy this poor guy. And the doctors were so annoying, treating him as if he were dispensable.
Okay so things seem to start moving really fast here. And after the hospital, its like the narrator is a new man. Its kind of confusing actually, but the strange events and narrow misses reallyyyyy remind me of Catcher in the Rye. I feel like all of this will lead up to one big break down, like it did for Holden in Catcher in the Rye. I didn't very much care for Holden’s character, and I have to say I find myself not liking some of the things the narrator does in Invisible Man.
Patsy- What do you think about the way “freedom” is portrayed by the narrator in this book?
In response to your question, I think his moving away from academia will dehumanize him a bit in the eyes of white people… but I'm not sure about African Americans. In this book (with the exception of Bledsoe) it seems like all African Americans treat each other as if they are all on the same level, all struggling below whites. I think thats why Bledosoe’s behavior is so shocking to the narrator.
I always knew that the Brotherhood would be evil, or at the very least not good. It took the narrator post-lobotomy, who was impressionable and vulnerable, and attempted to shape him into a speaker for them. But after Clifton is killed by the police, the narrator decides to hold a funeral for him. He reveals his own sympathy for human life by doing this, humanizing the figure of Clifton. Even though Clifton sells the racist dolls, and represents a trend of blacks in the novel who work only for themselves and set back the race, I still felt bad for him. The narrative set him up far more sympathetically than Bledsoe or Brockway. This really helps humanize the narrator further, showing how even as the Brotherhood tries to force him into a figurehead, he still is deep down a caring person concerned with others of his race. There is also the obvious metaphor relating the narrator to the doll, with the unseen strings directing it's actions. There is a twofold meaning found here, as most of the metaphors do have many layers. The black strings would be unseen, thereby the narrator does not know who is directing him, but it is also black to imply the Brotherhood, the association attempting to better the rights of the African Americans through intellectual means.
ReplyDeleteMy question is do you think there is any relationship between how the police violence is portrayed here and how it occur in our own society?
To answer your question, I think it's very nuanced to show freedom as a good thing and a bad thing. Freedom comes with more responsibility, and the famous phrase "Ignorance is bliss" really applies to the narrator.
Patsy,
ReplyDeleteSo at the beginning of the reading, I was mad at the narrator. I thought it was so stupid of him to go off to sleep with the married white woman. I was worried that if would turn out worse than it did, but luckily he got out okay. I couldn't help but be reminded of what the veteran said to the narrator on the bus on his way to New York City, about sleeping with a white woman and how it would change is perspective. I think this did affect the narrator, but not in the way the veteran thought. Also, the brotherhood is really getting on my nerves. They just want to control the narrator, just like the university did. This time, at least, I feel like the narrator is starting to come into his own now, figuring out how to stand up for himself. This is seen particularly in chapter 22 when the narrator says with sass, “But while ignoring my personal education for a second I’d like you to remember that the people have little patience with us these days” (465). Also, i think it is interesting that we have seen the narrator evolve from someone easily lost in the world, to someone important and seen by the public. I wonder if this will go further. Patsy, in what ways do you think the narrator will change regarding the Brotherhood, his place in New York, and importance in general?
Also, patsy I don't think the police are as bad in today’s society. I think the police are being watched to carefully right now to act like this. And with recording devices everywhere, it would be hard to get away with something like this.
This is such a powerful way to end the story. First, there is the fact that the narrator becomes totally disillusioned with the Brotherhood. He hears about how they'll be focusing on the national issues, leaving Harlem to Ras the Destroyer. The Brotherhood was taking a popular position of the north: love the race, hate the individual. Instead of viewing the people in Harlem as individuals they need to help instead they view them as a faceless mass to manipulate and use. The narrator decides to fight against the Brotherhood finally, assuming the role of manipulator that so many used against him.
ReplyDeleteHis attempts to manipulate go awry, as there seems to be inaction on the part of the Brotherhood. Then the horrifically violent violent riots begin, as Brotherhood is revealed to be an inciting member of the riots. It continues the motif of large associations manipulating the narrator, keeping him in the dark about the situation until it is revealed. It reflects the era again, and how many so called black support groups were really just for white people to feel better about themselves.
The epilogue brings us back to where the story started, as the narrator reflects on who he is and how he appreciates his invisibility. It allows him to observe without being affected. He decides that he must become a new person before he returns to society, and then the book ends.
I have to say I really struggled with this book, the stream of consciousness style was hard to work through. I don't know if I could write a very successful essay on this book because of how difficult it was. There were so many deeper meaning and layers to each phrase. Overall I am glad I read it, and that I can use it to compare to other novels.
To answer your question, I think he has become much less important. He remains a person to manipulate and use, without a name or a face.
My last question for you: is the ending good, bad or indeterminate?
In this last reading of Invisible man, I was very confused. Everything moved so fast, and I couldn't feel injustice anymore, only anger at the stupidity of people in mobs. I hate when people cannot stand independently and act on their own, and the only part I actually semi liked about the book is the epilogue, because the narrator said something basically to this affect. People are stupid. Black and white, people get stupid when led by the wrong kind of leader. "Ras the Destroyer" was just so dramatic it felt like I was reading one of the narrator's dreams. The Brotherhood really is a cult. Like, they way the try to control him is freaky. AND CAN WE TALK ABOUT THE LAST CHAPTER? If the epilogue wasn't in the book, I would be so pissed. But the reading as a whole left me with more questions. Who was Rhineheart? What was his role? How did the protests end? I'm so mad about the un-resolution. But I did like the epilogue more than anything, particularly when the narrator talked about his realizations about what people want, even though it made me a bit bitter towards the world. People want to be told what they want to hear, and the society pressures everyone to be the same. The parts that stuck out to me most where the parts about conformity: "whence all this passion toward conformity anyway?-- diversity is the word. Let man keep his many parts and you'll have no tyrant states" (577). I do want to talk about this, and look into this quote's deeper meaning.
ReplyDelete