Jumping back to the beginning of the novel, I felt a lot of déjà
vu, but couldn’t quite pin point it exactly. One day in class when we were discussing
Grant and his role at the school, it clicked—I realized that the environment is
strikingly similar to that of Invisible Man
(for those of you that were in African American Lit last semester). Grant
follows a very similar arc to that of the Narrator. The Narrator in Invisible Man, had the opportunity to
attend an all-black university and break the cycle. Similarly, Grant was able
to get away from his community and attend college. Both characters, despite their
opportunities ended up in a similar place. The Narrator was kicked out of school
and continued to strive to break the cycle – specifically by advocating black
rights in Harlem. While Grant decided to return to his community to teach
school, in an attempt to break the cycle of other black schoolchildren.
Grant and the Narrator both same the same end goal in mind.
For Grant it is to help Jefferson achieve “manhood”, but he comes to realize
that Jefferson has been given an opportunity to prove his innocence, and take
the moral high ground. By doing so Jefferson can break the cycle. Grant’s goal
is to move Jefferson from his depressed state of thinking himself a “hog” and
get him to break the cycle. The Narrator is also trying to prove to other
people that blacks are intelligent and he is encouraging people to break the
cycle.
Another interesting parallel is that of Mr. Norton and Dr.
Joseph. Both characters are white and are high up in the hierarchy of the
school. The part that gave me the most déjà vu was the way these two characters
interacted with the school. Dr. Joseph is described as being very discriminatory
and treating the students like animals – inspecting their hygiene and treating
them less than the white students. Even though his treatment of the kids is
visibly worse, he tells Grant that he should be proud and that he is raising a
crop of students. It is obvious to us as the reader, that despite trying to put
on a show and acting like he cares, he actually doesn’t. Similarly, Mr. Norton “takes
interest” in the university. He comes to check on the students and tells the
Narrator that the school is his one true interest and that it means the world
to him, yet we all get the feeling that he doesn’t really care.
This is an interesting comparison, and not an obvious one (since the surface-level styles and settings of these novels are so different). We might think of Grant as the narrator if he'd never gone to New York (or never stayed there), but instead went back home to teach. The theme of ambivalent consciousness--of knowing enough to know that the racial situation is profoundly messed up, but now knowing what to DO with that insight, or with the increased prejudice that his own education brings on him--is certainly common between the two.
ReplyDeleteMany critics have viewed _Lesson_ as a kind of "response" to Wright and _Native Son_, in fact: think of Max's (and Wright's) defense of Bigger as a victim of circumstance, a product of his environment who couldn't be expected to develop an independent moral consciousness but acts only on impulse and reflex. In a way, Gaines takes up that story where it ends, by contemplating what happens to Bigger *after* that construction is put on him. Bigger is more "guilty" than Jefferson seems to be, but there's the same sense that they're both there because of situations beyond their control. Gaines asks the question of how one should act once they are in that situation.