Oh Richard Wright how your book is so.... ewwie (technically speaking)
So, many of you out there are not reading Native Son which is a shame,but I do not blame you because it is a horrible, disgusting work that I can not image someone thinking up . I mean masterbating in a movie theatre, groping, killing,and assualting all in the first book, that is a great way to start off a book. Native Son , summarized, is a crazy African American guy who molest, kills, and rapes young women and complains and makes being poor and black as an excuse. And everyone dies. The End :). See it is such a lovely book. (pure sarcasm by the way) Maybe it is just me, but I am frustrated by Bigger; he comprehends his actions so it is not like he has a mental disorder and feels empowered after committing such graphic and disturbing movements; so why does Wright show tones of sympathy towards the demented protagonist.I do not care that Bigger is an outsider or that he is an archetype I still do not like him; I actually loath him.
And what is the point of the random Communist guy, the Jews, the Irish, and blacks. I know it is to show the ignorance of many of the characters and the hardships that come with being a certain race, religion,political system or ethnic culture, but Wright just confuses me. Stick with one topic and do not throw obstacles to the reader, it makes them hate you.
And the ending wow. I do not want to ruin it for any one who has not read it yet, but I am totally irritated and actually mad at the outcome of everything.Yes Bigger can finally call a white man by his name, but Bigger has not changed. Is it sad I wish Bigger had a mental disorder to give excuses for his actions and way of thinking?
....overall good book...good book
-Vaness C.
Vaness,
ReplyDeleteYour strong reaction is great to read! I wonder, why do you want to be able to excuse Bigger's actions? You say if he had a mental disorder it would allow you to excuse him -- why do you want that? Does your loathing of Bigger's character make his oppression and demoralization by the dominant society any less real? And do you think perhaps Wright wants you to be mad at the novel's conclusion? Why would that suit him? You say Bigger has not changed -- how do you mean? Finally, you say that Bigger molests, rapes and kills young women -- plural -- but he didn't rape or molest Mary. Is it hard to believe he didn't? Why is that? Thanks for the provocative post!
Mrs. Elliott
What I found interesting, honestly is that after you say everything that you despise about the book, the characters, and just the overall disgusting story, you say that overall it's still a good book. I personally am not reading it- and honestly I'm glad after the depressing Tess of the d'Urbervilles that I have opted out of this one- but I've heard many people discuss the book and all have seemed to agree with you, that Bigger is unlikeable and awful. So, I'm confused as to how its still a good book, could you clear that up?
ReplyDelete-Emily S
Hmm.. why do you say it's overall, a good book, after you just said how disgusting and confusing it was? But wow, reading your comments about the story in Native Son has made me regret my choice in reading Invisible Man.. To me, Invisible Man wasn't exciting and straightforward. Maybe the author of Native Son added those specific "disgusting" elements to convey a message during those times? And also, maybe the "upsetting" ending was also created for the purpose to sending a message to the readers.. I'm curious now.
ReplyDeleteBoa K.
Mrs.Elliot-I want Bigger to have excuse because I find those actions to be so wrong and bad that I don't want to image an average person being able to commit such terrible crimes.Honestly it would help me, emtional, to believe there is something wrong with him to cope with his killings. It makes me uncomfortable knowing that this story could be real. And when I was reading Native Son I felt something dramatically overcame Bigger and he changed, not physically or even mentally, but I felt like there was some tick and then he'd act upon it in a negative way almost like a "The Strange Case of Dr.Jeckle and Mr.Hyde"but obviously in a different way..am I making sence?My loathing for the character actually helps me to see the reasoning behind the demoralization and oppression,although it is obviously not morally correct, and it does not make it any less real. I believe that these actions should have still occured because Bigger learned from them. But,I do not believe that Wright wanted the reader to be upset or unsatisfied by the ending because he wanted to potray how he learned and accepted the consquences and to show that could very well be an accurate chronological ending to this story.Bigger has changed, but I feel there was not a dramatic change and something in Wright's tone and describitions made me see Bigger the same way, angry,emotional,and a lust for power in any form he can get it.That was my error I did not mean to put rape and molest in the plural form and no it is not hard to believe that Bigger did not rape or molest Mary or more women because he did have good in him.
ReplyDeleteEmily-What I ment was the idea and figurative language and characters and setting were all so incredibly real. Wright just took me to the 1940's Chicago and I could walk away from the book still imagining it and later when I would come back I would pop! right back into the same place with the charater. Bigger's actions and some of the character's thoughts and ideas disgusted me...but i guess that is what Wright wanted to convey to the reader.
I see what you mean about how at times the book seems discusting but Wright must have been trying to convey something important by making Bigger such an unlikeable character. I have no idea if this is correct, but it's the best conclusion I came to on my own. I think that Wright wanted us to feel distain towards Bigger because he was trying to prove that the racism and hatred of white society had led him to become the sterotype that white society thought he was. Because Bigger and other members of his race were not given opportunities to become more, they eventually lost hope and became the sterotypes the whites thought they were, as deomstrated by many of the other characters. For instance, Bessie constantly pities herself and says how all she does is work and tire herself out, and then drinks so that she can escape. She doesn't seen herself as ever having a better or happier life because she feels that would be impossible because of the barriers the whites set. In her time, she really didn't have much of a choice, so it's easy to understand why she became who she was and simply pittied herself because unfortunately, there truly was no way out of the life she had in that time period. This was a really good topic Vaness, it's been bothering me since Mrs. Elliott mentioned it to our table a while ago, but I still don't have the answer so what does everyone else think about Bigger's character?
ReplyDeleteI have no idea if this is even close to why Wright portrayed Bigger the way he did, but that's what I made out of it. :)
-Hillary D.
Haha Hillary I love you, you are so wright.(bad pun sorry). Honestly I have no idea if this is how Wright was trying to portray Bigger either!But Wright is definitely trying to make a tainted sense to Bigger's character. I do, although, believe that Bigger, is family, and fellow black race had opportunities, but not as many as the rich white male society in Chicago during this time; therefor this did cause some loss of hope for the African American race.
ReplyDeleteI am glad to say we are done reading and discussing this novel, but I admit I did learn a lot about philosophy, life and death, and sacrifice. This story really helped me evaluating what I seek and sacrifice and to write the in-class essay.
-Vaness C.
this book was terrible in detail. bigger is a terrible person, especially for a protagonist but i think that's Wright's point. the entire theme of the whole novel is said is the last statement by bigger's lawyer, and that is that you are a product of the society you are brought up in, and since bigger grew up in a society that bid him guilty since birth, he was bound to do what he did.- Brenda
ReplyDelete@Brenda- I totally agree. I went back and read Native Son a second time and actually found one of Bigger's last statment to help the agrument of the book. "He had no right to..." It is really really long, but basically it says he had no right to feel that simply his race, African American, gave him a reason to hate whites and that the society had produced these thoughts and action he committed earlier in the novel. I explained all of this in the AP Literature&compostion exam :)where I totally beasted the last question if I do say so myself.
ReplyDelete-Vaness C.