The Beyonce Question

--Driver roll down the partition please--

A couple weeks ago in the Uni High Library, I gave a presentation on Beyonce and (her) Feminism. The library has begun something called “Agora Unleashed,” a program in which anyone can sign up to talk about basically anything during a Uni Period. Many people in this school, you all included, have interests that should be shared, and so this is designed to encourage some non-Uni topics to be discussed.

Anyway, I wanted to write about the topic on this blog, and talk about some of the many cool online sources that I discovered when researching a very famous, eccentric, “feminist” woman. When thinking about Beyonce, I know that many of you may have things that come to mind: boldness, fierceness, jewelry, Blue Ivy, Jay-Z, “Single Ladies,” so on. Beyonce has a very significant presence in our society on the radio, in social media, and even through talking in school (taking pieces of her lines and using them in our speech (i.e. “If you like it then you shoulda put a ring on it, etc.)) I am fairly certain that most of you at least know her name.

So, I will give a bit of an introduction. Beyonce, born as “Beyonce Knowles,” is a singer, dancer, and actress. Her career began when she was fairly young with a group called “Destiny Child.” She wasn’t a solo artist until the early 2000’s when she put out her first album called Dangerously In Love, and by 2008, her album I am… Sasha Fierce was out. That was around the time when our generation came into heavy contact with her because the song “Single Ladies” was released. With it came a very famous video with a choreographed dance featuring Beyonce.

In 2011, she released a fourth album called 4 with the song “Run the World (Girls)” (not as famous). At the end of 2011, Beyonce and Jay-Z announced they were having a baby. And, as the newest extension of her work (besides the Super Bowl performance), her newest self-titled album Beyonce came out in December 2013. It sold more than five million copies worldwide, had five singles on it, and was accompanied by videos for each of the songs, making it more of an experience. She claims that she went more out of her comfort zone for these, “breaking down a fourth wall,” and embracing the music in a unique way. She explains the motives for this new addition in a supplemental video:

The Visual Album

So, what’s the significance of this new album? Not only was this around the time that she was taking more risks with her music, but she also was claiming the term “Feminism” as part of her campaign. I would like to provide a definition of feminism -- one that I found that I particularly identify with:

The advocacy of women's rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men, and someone who is able to look at the world with a critical eye and so as to be able to identify those times and places where that equality is not present.”

These songs, as I said, all have videos to go with, and Beyonce expressed some of her newfound freedom through them. In Pretty Hurts, Beyonce is in a beauty pageant and has to focus intensely on her looks to satisfy the system. The title of the song is the general message she’s addressing, but the video is the visual compliment to her message, showing that she can work outside of our societies standards because she doesn’t want the life of a model or looker.

Another video that has brought even more conversation is Partition .

Much of this video portrays a more-sexualized version of Beyonce. She dances, walks, and moves for her husband, Jay-Z (he is shown sitting smoking a cigar while watching her perform for him).

Beyonce has five supplemental videos for her album, including the one that I added earlier in this post. The other four address some of her songs, and are called Imperfection, Run N’ Gun, Liberation, and Honesty, in that order. In the Liberation Youtube video, Number 4, Beyonce explains her reasons for this video: She had “gotten her body back” from being pregnant and recently giving birth, so she was re-embracing her sensuality, and showing other women that they could too (no matter what age, or circumstance, etc.). Personally, I think it’s powerful that she is confident in the video, song, and also in her defense of it, but I also think she still works within the “male gaze” by doing all the activity for her husband. The problem with this is that she is showing people that even if you are trying to claim your own sexuality or feminism, you still have to work within the guidelines of men. Is this really a new brand of feminism? I have also interpreted her expression to be showing that it is impossible to work outside of the standards of a male-dominated society. But who knows which one it is? Shouldn’t a woman with as much power as Beyonce be able to work outside of the standards?

In my discussion, I gave a list of pros and cons to Beyonce’s campaign, and I would like to share those with you as well. One especially disturbing thing that people noted about her song “Drunk In Love”, was that she allowed her husband to talk about the violence in the marriage of Ike and Tina Turner. He sings “Catch a charge, I might, beat the box up like Mike…/I’m like Ike Turner/Baby know I don’t play, now eat the cake Anna Mae/ Said, eat the cake, Anna Mae.” This was seen as a very anti-feminist move (you can learn more about their marriage/violence by looking them up online). A second complaint is what I kind of already expressed -- that Beyonce is a bottom bitch, a woman who has power within a structure of male dominance. Men created and control the porn and prostitution industries, so women are seeing themselves in the eyes of men who exploit them. Feminists or feminist allies are wrongly growing up with this idea of her. And sort of piggy backing on this is that her type of “feminism” is false hope for black women because it’s layered in capitalism and individualism supporting “rampant pornographic consumerism,” a very white system. Online, I found a quote expressing some of the problems with Beyonce’s role: “just as an activity does not mean accomplishment, reflection does not mean representation.” The quote is referring to Beyonce and Jay-Z’s relationship as trying to represent too much of feminism or equality, etc. Other complaints include Beyonce’s extreme self sexualization (as we can see in Partition and in other videos). Even though this is called “self-expression,” it still sends out a certain message to the world, being not as professional. Why can’t someone like Lauryn Hill or Indie Arie who represent their identities more subtly be the main figure of feminism and womanhood? Additionally, because she is constantly on an international stage, her promiscuity and sensuality just showcases that sex sells. And even if that’s not her point, her sexualness is helping her much more than it’s harming her. Finally, there has been question of why we have to love Beyonce for her feminism -- why can’t she just be appreciated as an artist? As you can see, there are many critiques of Beyonce that are important to think about, but I can’t say that this is all to know. She is also a very famous artist that has captured the eye of millions of people. What is there to like about her?

In the same way she included some pretty controversial material in her song “Drunk In Love,” she has included some very pro-equality lines. In the song “Flawless,” Chimimanda Ngozi Adichie, a Nigerian writer, is sampled from a TED talk she gave about feminism:
We teach girls to shrink themselves, to make themselves smaller. We say to girls, 'You can have ambition, but not too much. You should aim to be successful, but not too successful. Otherwise you will threaten the man.' Because I am female, I am expected to aspire to marriage. I am expected to make my life choices always keeping in mind that marriage is the most important. Now marriage can be a source of joy and love and mutual support. But why do we teach girls to aspire to marriage and we don’t teach boys the same? We raise girls to see each other as competitors – not for jobs or for accomplishments, which I think can be a good thing, but for the attention of men. We teach girls that they cannot be sexual beings in the way that boys are. Feminist: the person who believes in the social, political and economic equality of the sexes.

Beyonce is pro-woman without being anti-man. She wants the world to know that you can be feminist on a personal level without sacrificing emotions, friendships, or fun. “A feminist is not a perfect woman” … or a perfect feminist, so why are our standards so high for her? She is smart to claim the label of “feminist” as hers, because it gets people talking. How else is she going to keep her fans and her following? We are so willing to embrace Queen Latifah or Erykah Badu who reject the term (don’t identify with it).  However, when someone finally embraces it, everyone wants to shame and reject them? I don’t think Beyonce is wrong to claim that term. It’s OK to love Beyonce without giving her, ourselves, or anyone else a pass. She is only human. I would like to end this post with the main reason I felt comfortable putting it on my blog for African-American Lit. -- that one of the biggest reasons Beyonce should be able to stand for feminism is because she represents overall feminism while being black. White feminists have often excluded black feminists and have a more elitist movement in general. On Black Girl Dangerous, a blog by a black, queer, feminist woman, she states “We [black feminists] defend Beyonce because she is a symbol in the ways in which white feminists degrade, dehumanize, and demonize black women all the time. She is an easy example of the ways white feminists ignore and exclude black women from ‘their’ movements, the way they paint our experiences as secondary and inferior to their own, the way they other our sexuality and demean our right to own it.” I could launch into more about black vs. white feminism, but as you see, Beyonce is a victim to a system as well. Sorry for this long, long post (essay?), but if you’d like to talk about it at some point, I’d be enthused to. What do you think? Do you think Beyonce is right to claim that term? I am still struggling on whether I should or shouldn’t support her, but I hope she just becomes more and more representative of many different kinds of feminism.

--Driver roll up the partition please--

Choke Cherry Tree

Beloved has been a breath-taking novel to read, in that it has taken me on a very emotional and involved journey into the present and past of many amazing but also terrifying characters. Morrison knows how to write. There are many themes, scenes, or even literary devices that could be touched on, but I want to talk a bit about the specifics of Sethe’s back -- her “choke cherry tree” (18), as Amy referred to it. I think that although the tree is mostly focused on at the beginning of the novel, it’s important to think about it as a basis for the rest of the novel. It shows the significance of Sethe’s past and therefore the reason that she is the way in the present, as well.

And so, we are first introduced to it first in Chapter 1, as Sethe briefly reflects to Paul D. on her past and that “it cost too much!” (18). Although I can understand what she’s referring to much more clearly now, when I was first reading this part, I didn’t have as much context for what the “tree” (18) was, or what Sethe had really gone through. I was initially introduced to her struggles through the lens of this scar that she carried on her back. To me, that meant/means that a lot of her struggle is based off a physical characteristic she has. The physicality of things in Beloved are given breadth because they are the reminders of everything that has happened. We see this in a couple ways: 124, the neck of the Baby, and later on with Beloved and the way her body is (there are other examples, but these are three significant ones).

Sethe’s scar is identified as a “tree” for a couple different reasons. It represents her family in a way, and the fact that it is complicated and not always appreciated by her or other people. She has had to figure out what her family means to her, and has to sacrifice a lot to maintain it. The complex and ugly mass of scars on her back represents how complicated and incomplete her family is. It also shows Sethe’s burden in life, and how hard slavery was for her. We see this a bit later in the novel, when Sethe recalls an encounter with her mother, a woman who didn’t take good care of her. Sethe’s mother reveals a “cross burnt right in the skin” (72), under her breast, telling her “I am the only one got this mark now. The rest dead. If something happens to me and you can’t tell me by my face, you can know me by this mark.” Not knowing exactly what to say back, Sethe says “But how will you know me?... Mark me, too” (73). Sethe’s mother slaps her because she feels Sethe doesn’t understand. And so when Sethe gets her own mark, she finally does understand what hardship is. Although the reason for Sethe’s mother’s scar is potentially different than Sethe’s in the way it ended up on her skin, I think this scene in Chapter 6 is another key part to understanding Sethe’s plight.

I wonder if you all have other thoughts of what this scar represents? Paul D also reacts to it in a curious way -- by first kissing it and then being disgusted by it. This interaction sheds more light on the relationship between Sethe and Paul D more than solely on her scar, but I think other thoughts can be gained from this scene. If you have anything to add or question, I would love to hear them!

Are you checking your Motives and Thoughts?

Last Friday, I read a (slam?)poem in class called Motives and Thoughts by Lauryn Hill. As I mentioned to the class, it was first heard in 2005 on Def Jam by Lauryn Hill. Def Jam was an American Record Label that was focused mostly on hip hop and urban music. It was founded by Rick Rubin at NYU University in the early 1980’s. The first recordings were put out in 1984, and as the decade continued, various other groups were signed onto the record. In 1998, it was merged into the Universal Music Group. In the 2000s, the company spread to other countries including Japan and Germany. The famous Jay-Z became the president of the company as well, and once the leadership was passed on, the company didn’t last for much longer. In April of 2014, it was decided that the label would no longer be active.

As a side note, and something that many of you have already been exposed to, Erykah Badu (another female rap artist), did a slam poem on Def Jam in 2003 that is really fun to watch and listen to. The link is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mEXu6UmRPZc

I encourage you to watch it.

Anyways, Lauryn Hill’s performance took place sort of in the middle of her phasing out of the rap scene. She had decided that she wasn’t very satisfied with the pressure of fame and the music industry. So, it was significant that she made this appearance on Def Jam. The whole poem is sort of a critique of our society, though, and so I think she may have been comfortable coming out with something that was strong worded. The poem also teeters between rap and poetry because it has a lot of the “couplets” like rap, but isn’t as fast.

Rotating bodies, confusion of sound

Negative imagery, holding us down

Social delusion, clearly constructed

Human condition, morals corrupted

This is the first four lines of the poem, and we can see a type of rhythm already. I enjoyed both listening to it and reading it, but I also want to touch on what Lauryn Hill is actually talking about. She begins by talking about our society and how there is “negative imagery” and “social delusion.” She is shedding light on how the media affects our perception of the things around us. A line in the first stanza,

wicked theology, robbing the poor,

is saying that the less fortunate people in our world are the ones who suffer the most from our corrupt system. I think that although this doesn’t mention anything about race, we can infer that Hill is talking about black communities in our nation because of the generally higher poverty rates there. The poem continues, talking about the fact that we are all “hoes” in this society -- used as tools to do the work that our government wants us to without any good reason. There are some other good lines that serve as good examples to what Hill is trying to get at:

Primitive man with civilized knowledge

System collapse and he still won’t acknowledge

God is the saviour, studies behavior

Trying to fix the mix mind he gave ya

Although I think the poem is important to interpret on its own without knowing Lauryn Hill’s background, I do want to mention that she is pretty religious. I think she includes “God” in her poem to challenge the idea of our society always turning to science even when there is another source. I do think, however, that she also criticizes the institutionalized practice of religion in her poem, and believes that she has a different kind of relationship with God than anyone else. Towards the end of her poem, she has two blocks of:

Motives and thoughts

Check your motives and thoughts

that have another stanza in between them. I actually had the class read those with me on the whim (because we were all pretty tired and so I figured it would wake people up/help people understand the poem more), and I thought that it was nice for everyone to let those words sink in a little more. I think those lines serve as reminders to the reader/listener of this poem, but other people thought they were also messages to God or to Lauryn, herself. The end of the poem

Blind with the wickedness, deep in your heart

Modern day wickedness is all you’ve been taught

Lied to your neighbors, so you get ahead

Modern day trickery is all you’ve been fed

explains that people don’t know any better than to assume the worst of one another or thinking about the real consequences of things. There is more I could say, but I have already gone on for a while. I am wondering if Hill has the right to critique our society so strongly -- it seemed in class that the general vibe is that she doesn’t really. If we think about some of the rap we’ve listened to in class over the past couple of weeks, haven’t there been some strong critiques like this as well? The genre of “protest rap” is strong in this way, and I am only wondering if gender is involved. As in, does this poem come off strongly or stronger than other male rap artists because Lauryn Hill is a woman? If anyone has any opinions or comments, I would love to hear them. Thanks!

The link for Lauryn Hill’s live performance of Motives and Thoughts is:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kntNPyThiH0

White Boy Shuffle

In White Boy Shuffle, I believe Paul Beatty has created a public space for black culture to be explored in the 21st century. Through basketball, poems, and hip hop, he is able to portray a more stereotypically black environment, but tries to challenge the expectations of race in our new world. Beatty critiques it through humor and mockery, but also validates the very real circumstances that many blacks (black men in particular) are in. And for Gunnar -- Beatty shows that it’s not his “calling” to be a leader, but just something that Gunnar has fallen into. This is different than many “black novels,” but I think sets a different trope to black male agenda. The population around him needs him to fit this role, even when he doesn’t care for it. Gunnar’s politics and culture are interspersed throughout the novel, and that re emphasizes the new type of leadership that White Boy Shuffle introduces.

The Flow of The White Boy Shuffle

I am sure that like me, you all have felt the different languages that each of the books we have read carry. Native Son was fairly straightforward to read, but had such specific detail that it needed (and we wanted to) close reading. Invisible Man was more layered because it was our narrator recounting his own story, but also because packed in many metaphors and parts where we needed to read between the lines. Their Eyes Were Watching God, of course, was in that "black" vernacular that Richard Wright wasn't too fond of. That was more difficult to start reading, but became an easy trope to follow. And finally, we are at White Boy Shuffle, and it has its own themes. 

As I was reading Chapter 8, I was especially thinking about the overall pace of White Boy Shuffle -- it doesn't acknowledge the reader as much as some of the other books in that it moves more in Gunnar's preferred pace. I think that's the point of the book, though. Not only to display Gunnar's life, but to let the reader feel his thoughts through the constant movement of the novel. 

"Gasping for air, I almost took the remedial schedule and the weeks' worth of lunch money my counselor, Ms. Baumgarten offered me, but my pride got the better of me" (153). In this moment, I was thinking "here we go...," and then he is off into "Just stop patronizing me and do your job." Gunnar jumps at the chance to live through honesty, and I definitely admire him for it. 

As we talked about recently in class, I appreciate the way Gunnar doensn't conform in the same way most of us would. College, the shots in the basketball game, the wife -- they all mean something different to him (if they mean something at all) than we might expect. And the language plays right along with this in that it parallels with piled on quotes or metaphors allowing Gunnar to let his mind run. I'm not saying this book is just unedited work, I'm just saying that the plot and the language go hand in hand. In the same Chapter 8, Gunnar has an encounter with the Harvard recruiter. The Harvard recruiter begins to teach him how to mountain climb, but Gunnar just goes "home." He "lowered himself into the night," and that represented his disinterest for Harvard. The next line reads "Mom was disappointed I wasn't going to Harvard" (160). I admire this decision making -- I wish I had the same skill. 

Kanye or Kim Appreciation?

Guess who still rests as the background of my blog!? Kanye! I thought I would take a moment to showcase his written reaction of an infamous photo of Kim Kardashian's butt that is swarming the internet currently. He used one of his tweets for this message.

I know this doesn't have much to do with race, but the Kim-Kanye relationship is very central to what he identifies with (black man marrying woman with large butt). I won't take time to talk very much about this right now, but if any of you have any comments about this dynamic, I would love to hear! Thanks.

Ethnic Notions

Ethnic Notions struck me in several ways: the culture of entertainment in the United States, the way that oppression continues because it psychologically controls people, the fashion in which blacks were supposed to be non-threatening, and also the way that our opinions of these caricatures have changed over time... or have they? Sorry, that seems like most of it. But I was very glad I watched the youtube video because it got my juices flowing (and now my words, I suppose).

Throughout my lifetime, I have been exposed to examples of blacks as entertainment for white people. This movie and Invisible Man have been more recent ones with their Sambo dolls and Mammy figures. But I am also thinking about the ridicule of black names by my classmates. Many black names are more creative or out-of-the-box than many “white” names, often times because they are newly invented. Part of this, I think, comes from the culture of R&B and jazz. I am thinking about many examples of blacks not being considered for voting or jobs because of their inadequacy. In all these ways, the idea of blacks being on the same level was hard for people to grasp. It’s interesting to me that we tend to poke such fun at anything that is different than us. I believe that many of the Sambo dolls and other black caricatures come from the insecurities of many figures in history (and today as well). There are many sayings that proceed along the lines of, “If you don’t get out now, you’ll never get out.” This has been applied to relationships, the Midwest, etc. But I think that often poor stricken areas keep their members in. In Ethnic Notions, there was a bit of talk about the oppression of blacks. It is easy to see that even though many obvious trails of racism are no longer here, racism persists, even if its forms are less overt. The caricatures displayed in the video may not be gone, but are black females really portrayed as “sexy” in our media today? Models are almost exclusively white;but does that mean that the “Mammy” character is really gone? If any of you have any ideas, I encourage you to share!

I would like to finish with a little piece of advice -- something that I have been thinking about since the summer but also since the movie. We, as a class at Uni, are privileged to be able to talk about the way that race manifests itself. We have education that many people are not able to get. I think that if you ever find yourself with someone who either racially crosses the line, or has questions about this topic, you are responsible for sharing your knowledge with them as well. Education really is the key in the erosion of racism in this country. And it’s cool that this class has a very real world aspect, because there are many things we can do with the tools we are acquiring!

Feminine Marriage

Onto the next book -- wow this year is going fast. Their Eyes Were Watching God by Zora Neale Hurston has been a new kind of book in context of this class so far. The language is more phonetic, the perspective is from a woman and feels like it’s claiming a feminine portrait in a way, etc. As we were talking in class today, I couldn’t help but think about my own views on marriage and how they tie into what Janie has felt throughout her two (failed?) marriages.

Janie’s grandmother, Nanny, recounts the stories of her earlier life. She was raped by her master in slavery, and ran away with her child, Leafy, so that they could live a better life. Leafy ends up being raped by her school teacher, and runs away from home eventually. It seems that after all this hardship, it is so natural for Nanny to be skeptical about love or marriage or truth. What role do men have in her life so far besides to rape her or the people she cares about. And even if that is an irrational fear she has, it is all she knows.

From the generational pattern of events that Nanny describes, it seems inescapable that Janie will suffer from the men that she encounters or marries. False hope is prevalent; first in that she thinks after her marriage to Logan, their love will come naturally, and second in that she sees Johnny as a positive get away from a deteriorating life. This is like Nanny’s life -- running away from a rape to only find another rape. I think Hurston gives us these plot patterns to show the type of place a black women is in. Their role may not be invisible, but it seems to carry much less hope than a black man’s plight does.

Rinehart

We’ve talked about it before, we’ll talk about it in the future. But I want to talk about it now: What’s up with this Rinehart character. Rinehart is never met in the book - we just know him through our narrator as he’s walking the streets of Harlem. Everyone recognizes the narrator as Rinehart, but sees him in many different forms: a pimp, a preacher, etc. This imagery seems kind of obvious -- playing off the idea of our narrator questioning his own identity and working through his atmospherical and inner changes as well as the misconceptions that other people have of him. It also seems to show that people are so easy to accept our narrator as completely invisible -- not even being the wind or the water -- just being nothing. That’s scary in a way. But I think the Rinehart character stands for more than just an obvious metaphor reflecting our narrator’s life. I think he serves as an example of a  character that is consciously invisible.

Our narrator seems to be struggling to be this, and by the end of the book he realizes he has been invisible throughout his whole story . But then the book is over, and he is still underground, so we, as the reader, don’t completely see his understanding of his conscious invisibility. Rinehart is a consciously individual character, but isn’t given much space to show himself in the book, in the same way. So, in a way, Ellison is telling the reader that he has to restrict this space so that we can understand the plight of our narrator. If there was a character that was strong, central, and constant in the book that also exhibited conscious invisibility, our narrator wouldn’t have to fight or struggle in the same way that he does. And also, that character might not be so invisible anyway.

Perhaps Ellison is deceiving us throughout the book -- in the same way our narrator is constantly being deceived. We don’t really get to taste what our narrator’s success looks like (if it is “success), and so we have to see our narrator through other eyes.

Blood Birth -- Child or Demon?

On Friday, I presented the poem Blood Birth by Audre Lorde. Audre Lorde was a black, lesbian, feminist poet who wrote mostly about herself and her own experiences. I felt that in light of some discussion we had in class about women in the two men-dominated books we have read, it would be cool to explore a feminist side of the poetry anthology. And also, I like feminist poetry.

The start of the poem is a very emotional and descriptive account of what seems like childbirth. The first two lines -- “That which inside of me screaming/beating about for exit or entry,” accompanied with the title, sets up a very motherly and tangible space for the reader’s thoughts to go.  It’s also interesting that the word “screaming” is in the first line because the act of screaming is generally expressive and violent, and therefore twists the poem to seem angry -- or anxious. It’s apparent there’s tension and Lorde isn't afraid to show the reader details. Lorde’s honesty with us continues throughout the poem.

In the third and fourth lines -- “names the wind, wanting winds’ voice/wanting winds’ power,” her purpose seems to change from explaining or expressing childbirth to the process of creating poetry. To have a “voice” or “power” explains the writing process and something she is struggling with in the very moment. After I read those lines a couple times in context of the first two, I realized that poetry is also inside of her, wanting to come out. I think it’s very clever of Lorde to create a mash-up of poem writing and childbirth, but it also makes sense because both acts are so emotional and involved.

The next couple of lines -- “it is not my heart/and I am trying to tell this/without art or embellishment/with bits of me flying out in all directions,” really illustrate the conflict Lorde is having. She wants to create the raw story of her giving birth, and explain the details without “art or embellishment,” but she also wants to make a poem. She thinks that poems are different than how she wants to write about her life, but she is also a poet. Her words are “flying out in all directions,” but also show the disorder of childbirth and how it doesn't stick to one formula. So, again, she is both talking about writing poetry (this poem in particular), and childbirth.

The word “screams” comes up again in the line “screams memories old pieces of flesh.” I hadn't realized this verb showed itself twice until someone in class mentioned it. I think the verb is very powerful and the reason it is used twice is because it’s neither very positive or very negative, but more shows a different extreme emotion. Lorde is keying in on the fact that the processes of writing poetry or giving birth are more just intense rather than belonging in the bad or good categories, but are still extremely painful and involved. I am not saying that Lorde seems at ease with the pain she experiences -- she doesn't -- but more that she knows it’s important to write about. The following lines -- “stuck off like dry bark/from a felled tree, bearing/up or out/holding or bringing forth/child or demon/is this birth or exorcism or,” do display her pain and rawness of childbirth. She uses the word “exorcism,” which was very weird for me to read. She is also continuing to talk about poetry -- that if she writes about childbirth, is her poem a child or a demon? It was comforting to me that she asked questions in this poem. As much as it was a very personal poem, I still felt in control of my read of it, and I would say that makes it a successful poem. Lorde doubted herself too much, but understandably.

After these lines, the tone seems to change a bit -- “The beginning machinery of myself/outlining recalling/my father’s business -- what I must be/about my own business/minding.” She is saying that what she is now has to be a reflection of her “father’s business,” and that as a female she really can’t stand alone. She is defined by the men around her: for poetry, for childbirth, for everything. Each line becomes more complicated and possesses a different meaning once it’s paired with the next line. After this is the end of the poem which shines light on the fact that words have color or “complexion” -- “Shall I split/or be cut down/by a word’s complexion or the lack of it.” Up until this point, I was unsure what this poem really had to do with her being black. Of course, because she defines herself as a black feminist, when she talks about childbirth, it is automatically paired with her skin color because they both define her. However, to the reader, it doesn't seem as obvious until this point. She is saying in the poem that whether or not she says these words or doesn't say them, she will still be reflected upon by her skin color. So, ultimately, she is also defined by her color, as is her poetry. She is trying to show that poetry has color, and so even if she only tries to talk about childbirth, it is still about her black identity. I don’t know if I read that part completely correct, but I think that’s the message she might be trying to get at.

The last lines are “and from what direction/will the opening be made/to show the true face of me/lying exposed and together/my children your children their children/bent on our conjugating business.” She concludes the poem questioning what her true identity is -- “from what direction.” This self she describes isn't isolated, but with others and responsible of a future generation because that’s what childbirth results in. This poem ends up being an overall question of her own pain and why it’s important for her to use poetry. Even after trying to explicate it, I am seeing more in the poem than I did before. There are so many layers of feelings and questions that are important for this poem. I am sure there is much more to be said about this, and if any of you have other thoughts, I would love to hear them.

Staying in White Lines

Hello everyone,

I love having blogs as a way to express ourselves -- It’s so informal and therefore very refreshing and peaceful. I have enjoyed reading blogs so far and I feel very inspired by all of the thoughts people have about the books, or how they relate to other things, or just life.

I am now in this place where I have to write about Invisible Man, but I am a little stuck what to write about -- there’s definitely a lot going on through these chapters. But I first wanted to touch on something that I think about often, and that may, in some way, relate to Invisible Man.

Throughout my whole life I have gone to school, to restaurants, I’ve watched movies that take place in the 1940’s and 50’s, etc. What do these all have in common? Schools have janitors, restaurants have waiters, and movies have all sorts of “help” in them. I’m the type of person to strike a conversation with a random person, so this category of people is no exception. They are supposed to be behind the scenes, but yet are right in our faces. They pick up after us, they make things look shiny and like there was never a mess in the first place. So, I try talking to waiters and janitors (waiters more often), but most of the time I’m given a stare, and they’re generally surprised I am trying to engage with them. They are told to be invisible and they are used to being invisible. By now, especially in a college town like Urbana, most waiters and waitresses are college students and happen to pick up those jobs for money during college. But a lot of the janitors at Uni, other schools, or even for university buildings, do have those jobs for life. So, it becomes more awkward, right? They pick up the slack, but not in that “respectable” type of way (I don’t completely understand). They are forced to work behind the scenes, to be cast into a group of the invisibles, and aren’t really allowed to defy that.

When I was writing Invisibles, it felt like I was writing Incredibles (haha). Anyway, what I am talking about here is a very present thing, but not something that we ever really discuss in a conversation-based level. But we read Invisible Man, a story where the narrator is also invisible in many senses -- classified into the groups he’s a part of that he can’t control, solely a representation of something instead of actually being a solid, tangible person… Of course there’s something powerful about this invisibleness -- it gives the narrator a lens on which to change and find who he really is, but also it must be this constant mind whir of confusion and forced schizophrenia (this is a little intense, I know, but there’s a lot of hallucinogenic images  in here). As a class, we take the idea of this invisibleness so seriously, right? The book is this space where we can explore how awful our narrator’s life is, and I think it’s incredible Ellison was able to include this huge concept in a novel, but I also feel torn. I care so much about this book, I can read and write blogposts about it, I can even feel like my life is so much more connected to this very book than to the help that serves me at a restaurant or in school. We all know that those trash cans lying around with trays on the side holding spray bottles have been touched by human beings.

I am sure this stems from an insecurity of my own -- not the fact that I can take these books seriously, but just why I have to criticize that. I need to have more appreciation for book analysis, I think. Or maybe it’s something else. But still, I do think it’s interesting what space this book serves for us, and how it contrasts to other aspects of our lives. Oops for not writing so much about the book (I am interested in the Jolly Man scene, though, don’t get me wrong).

Expectations

We began to read Invisible Man by Ralph Ellison in class, and honestly I have been both confused and pleased by the different experiences that our narrator has experienced. Ellison leads us through a somewhat uncomfortable, dream-like journey of some of the narrator’s early experiences. It’s interesting I am so quick to say “Ellison leads…” because our narrator is technically the first person. But I guess they work together to create these images.

There are a lot of things to touch on in the earliest chapters, but I am especially interested in the scenery change from the South to the North when he is sent to New York by this “fatherly/authority” figure Mr. Bledsoe. I think 2nd hour and myself aren’t completely sure what his intention is of this? Is Bledsoe giving the narrator another chance? Is he mocking him? Is he giving him false potential? I think it’s hard to figure out because Bledsoe’s character challenges both our narrator and the reader (not what we’re used to). On page 179, the narrator comments “Whether we liked him [Mr. Bledsoe] or not, he was never out of our minds. That was a secret of leadership.” It’s interesting to me that the narrator sheds some type of positive light on Mr. Bledsoe, and I think it’s partly because he thinks he’s satisfied with the new life he is living, and because he wants to become Bledsoe. 

However, I think there is some correlation between the narrator’s change in environment and change in action. On page 179, “I slapped the dime on the counter and left, annoyed that the dime did not ring as loud as a fifty-cent piece,” indicates the more emotional and angry take he now has.

I can relate this to my own life in a way -- and perhaps you can too. I know I’ve had situations where I have to make a transition, and I end up having high expectations of what it’s going to be. And then when it doesn’t fit those expectations, I end up being angry at myself and at my current situation. It hurts to see our narrator in that place, even if he has it a little different than me. So, if I was to give advice to our narrator, I would tell him to go to some therapy, find a way to be happy with Northern life, and live. I believe in him (more than I did Bigger for sure).

Intro to African American Literature Class with Mr. Mitchell

I have dabbled with various journals and diaries before, and I have really enjoyed finding a space where I can explore honest thoughts and feelings. They have often been places that I can maybe share with a few close friends, or occasionally open up to a random person, but most of the time they have been for me. So, this will be a different experience, but I am ready to share with you all some of my ideas. I am so open to any feedback at all, so please feel free to comment, challenge and say anything. Thank you in advance for your eyes and fingers.

The first thing you probably notice when you open up my page is the background picture -- Kanye West, acclaimed songwriter and husband of Kim Kardashian, etc. To me, Kanye is one of the biggest symbols of black art, performance, and life in the world right now. He symbolizes some of what black culture is, what black culture is going to become, and how it has formed over time. I don’t particularly like using the words “black culture” because I feel like they generalize and put people in boxes, but I don’t know of another way to quickly describe the history, present, and future of a whole race (whoa). In many ways, Kanye is an envoy for black culture, and even though he is not “black culture” himself, I think of him as a pretty good representation. What we are mostly covering in this class is black history through literature, but I think it’s really important to realize that there is a ton of relevance today, and hence his image on my blog.

You will have noticed, however, that none of what I have mentioned so far actually talks about the first book we read for this class: Native Son by Richard Wright. I wasn’t sure what to expect when I first picked up this book, but I read Section 1 in one reading and found myself with many emotions and questions. Why is murder suddenly involved? How did Bigger get in this predicament? Is this a typical historical “black” novel? I finished the book and began to contemplate a number of the questions that were posed in class. In Book 1, how does Wright depict/draw Bigger? What is the larger context of this story? We talked about fear and Bigger’s emotions a great deal, which was confusing because he is a fictional character controlled by an author. One question that I began to ask myself was “Where does Bigger fit in his environment?”

Throughout the book, Bigger struggles to find the community he belongs in, and questions whether he should even belong in one. He constantly embraces and rejects the people and environment around him, and it’s never really clear to me what he wants. At the start of the book, we are confronted with some of Bigger’s behavior problems:the way he dangles a dead rat over his sister; the way he acts out the father/abuser figure in his family because he’s the only one with power; and the way that he wants to jeopardize his safety in one robbery of Blum’s shop. It’s overwhelming to read about all the roles he plays in the first twenty pages of the Native Son. So, initially, we think he rejects his mother, Vera, and Buddy, and only wants to indulge in his own passions and pleasures.

Quickly, though, things change as he willingly takes the job at the Dalton’s. This reminds me of the phrase “with power comes responsibility,” and finally it seems that Bigger is willing to take positive responsibility over his family and embrace his community. Thinking about his mother, I was happy that he was willing to do this. I felt sympathetic for her and her lifestyle, but didn’t realize that the job Bigger was sliding into would be just as hard for the reader to hear about as his previous hobbies such as robbing banks and chain smoking. So, is that the reality? Are we to think that whether it’s a white world or black world or an in between world that it’s uncomfortable for the reader to read? I think Wright plays a lot with his reader; he makes us feel weird and uneasy about where the book is heading.

But now, we are confronted with a new phase in which the white world everything at the Dalton’s. Bigger is forced to forget about where he comes from, even though he might not fully realize it. Part of that is because he is faced with an unfamiliar environment, and has to respond to the Daltons in a way that he isn’t used to, but also because the Daltons are willing to provide for him more than his mother ever has, and that catches him way off guard. It’s a job, yes, but I think in Bigger’s mind, the white culture he has begun to work in serves as more of a lifestyle. Ms. Dalton asks him about education and if he would be interested in continuing with his studies; Jan and Mary force him to choose between them and his own girlfriend at Ernie’s Kitchen Shack; Peggy prepares him a meal he would never be used to eating, and so on. And this pattern continues -- where whether he likes it or not, he has to choose between one community or another (or none). When he is running away from everyone, he decides to act single-mindedly (part of the reason he kills Bessie). But when I think about what would have actually been best for Bigger, I think that acting on his own and letting his own head seep through the walls of his body would be beat rather than letting other figures control him like they have been his whole life? In what way does his violence and destruction come from this control others have had over him? That’s where his so called “freedom” comes in; in the final analysis what I most want to make sense of is if the way he gets to finally take control of his communities and to be where he wants to be whenever he wants is a good thing.

My final question -- one that might not be so important but that is connected to Bigger's communities -- is “Does Bigger die alone?”