Miscegenation of Macon Detornay

The title of the novel is Angry Black White Boy, but in smaller print it says “Or the miscegenation of Macon Detornay”. Mansbach picked the word miscegenation very deliberately. The word itself literally means “the interbreeding of people considered to be of different racial types”. Macon is a white man, yet Mansbach describes it as “the miscegenation”, meaning that Macon is going through the process of miscegenation and becoming interracial. The idea that miscegenation is a process that an individual can go through violates the definition of the word, yet it fits the bill perfectly. When the novel begins Macon is a self-aware white male who wants to actually help the black community without imposing a savior complex. He does so in a way that he thinks will actually help instead of the “help” that he sees other white people give. Macon’s intentions are pure, and he really puts himself out there. He doesn’t try to act black or fit in, and he makes it explicit that he is just a white guy that is trying to help out. At this point there are no signs of miscegenation, he is just a white guy involved in a black community.

After his rise to popularity we see his mentality change. He begins to get caught up in the moment, and starts to see himself above both other white people and black people. When he is in the spotlight, people listen to him and he feels like he is starting to make a difference. His ego gets a little too large however, and when he goes on the different media networks gets a little carried away. He criticizes the host, and indirectly accuses the audience, for thinking the n-word in their heads. He brings the host to tears, and then we see Nique and Dre a little on edge because Macon used the n-word even though he is white. This is the first indication of Macon’s miscegenation, yet it is not a very positive step. He thinks he is better than the white audience that is listening, and he distances himself from the black audience by using the n-word in a way that isn’t really acceptable for white people.  

At the end of the novel, the process of miscegenation comes full circle. Macon goes into the south to embrace his whiteness and distance himself from his old ideologies and views about race. Yet, when he is recognized by white supremacists in the south we really see Macon being considered to be equivalent to a black man in the white supremacists’ eyes. By being a race traitor, they lump Macon into the same category and treat him the same way they treated Leo. Macon is begging for his life, and telling them that he is white and he even beats on Leo to prove it, yet he is still treated like a black person. He truly is interracial on a psychological level at this point. Because when the gun is pointed at him, and he is told he is going to be a martyr for the black cause he shakes his head and denies it because he is white.

Minor Characters Play a Major Role

The story of Jack and Ma has been told, but we fail to acknowledge the roles that the minor characters play in the novel. After all, Jack’s story is all about integration into the real world and his interactions with people other than Ma. When Jack first enters the outside world he is dazed and confused, and can’t seem to connect with anything or anyone. The first person he makes any sort of connection to is Grandma.

Unlike every other person Jack has met, Grandma doesn’t seem to give two thoughts before treating Jack as a normal human being. Everyone else, especially the media, sees him as a unique creature that has emerged from Room after 5 years and they are treating him more like a test subject than an actual person with feelings. Grandma is the total opposite, when she first meets Jack she is very accepting and Jack is able to connect with her way faster than anyone else. Ma’s father, on the other hand wants nothing to do with Jack. While it seems that this action would harm Jack, I think it gives him very valuable perspective. It allows him to see that the world isn’t perfect. While Jack was in Room, while it is awful to think about, he was technically in a “perfect place”. Now take this with a grain of salt, but he was subject to no diseases, everything was provided for him, he was surrounded by the one person he loves constantly; it seems to me that Room seemed to display many Edenic qualities.

When Jack finally entered the outside world, he needed to realize that there are flaws in the world, and that not everything is perfect. Which is why Ma’s father is a key character in Jack’s integration and development in the world. Similarly, Ma’s overdose was a very important aspect of the book. Not because it made Jack realize anything about death – because Jack didn’t understand the total gravity of the situation—but because it gave Jack a reason to be separated from Ma and become better acclimated to society. During Ma’s recovery Leo played a much more traditional role of the “father figure”, this figure is also incredibly important in establishing some sort of anchor for Jack. Jack has been able to understand quite a bit about the world, but he still struggles with communicating with others in a way that they understand him. Leo teaches him the ins and outs, and becomes more of a friend to Jack than another judgmental adult. 

Jack's Intelligence

Despite Jack’s malnourishment and below average size and height, his intelligence seems to be way above average. I don’t really remember being a 5-year-old, but being 5 years old is around kindergarten age and already Jack is able to empathize with the characters in the fairytales and understand concepts way deeper than most 5 year olds could dream of. In the story about the mermaid and the baby, Jack asks Ma why the mermaid doesn’t take the baby with her at the end of the story. Ma corrects the story and says of course the mermaid takes the baby. Jack recognizes that he acts as the baby in this story, and that from his narration we understand that something doesn’t sit well with Jack about leaving the baby behind. Jack sort of understands that he is more of a hindrance to Ma and that he is somehow messing up her plans.

The most shocking part is that Ma has been trapped for years and years, and has had all the time in the world to plan some sort of escape plan involving and using Jack to her advantage. Yet, in all those years she never came up with a solid plan. That is until Jack proposed that they could “trick” Nick, and suddenly a plan forms in Ma’s mind. Since we want to see Jack as the hero of the story, this revelation from Jack doesn’t come as a surprise. However, if we take a step back we realize that Jack is 5 years old and he has come up with a better plan in 1 day than Ma has in 5 years.

Jack’s intelligence is also manifest in his ability to adapt to plan B after they plan it all out. Very few 5 year olds are able to sit still, let alone fake playing dead for an extended period of time. Despite Jack’s physical limitations – which are made obvious to us again when he pees and poops a little while wrapped in the rug – he is able to stay silent and carry out a pretty extensive plan. In addition to staying silent he finds motivation through the fairytales and stories; like “GingerJack be nimble be quick” and imaging Old Nick is a giant and is “coming to tear me in half fee fie foe fum” (p140). He is able to take the themes of the fairytales and relate them to his own life and situation.

Invisible Man and A Lesson Before Dying

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. 

Shameless and As I Lay Dying

As someone who watches maybe a little too much Netflix, I couldn’t help but compare the characters in As I lay Dying to a show called Shameless. The show is set in Southside Chicago and the basic premise is that an alcoholic father has six children who have to provide for themselves. Frank, the alcoholic father, embodies a modern representation of Anse. Not only is Frank lazy and refuses to work like Anse, but Frank also has quality of “I don’t want to be beholden”, yet he is always a burden for everyone. Frank always makes the argument that it is hard work to care and provide for so many children, so he expects others should do favors for him to help him out. One of my favorite scenes is where Frank is promoting neglect. He says that the best gift you can give your children is self-reliance, and that you need to make fisherman out of your children, rather than giving them fish after fish. The scene really shows Frank’s attitude towards work. On numerous occasions Frank even steals money from his kids to buy alcohol, this is strikingly similar to Anse who took Cashes money to pay for a new team of mules.

Frank’s oldest, Fiona, pretty much runs everything. She is very organized and takes care of everyone. She is very similar to Cash. Cash we know to be very composed and he seems to always have his sh*t together, at least in comparison with the other children who each live in their own little world. Fiona seems to be the only one that knows what needs to be done, and works her tail off through the worst conditions –just like Cash works non-stop through the rain— to provide for her family.

It is difficult to relate Darl to anyone, but the comparison is still there. Darl, as we know, has a talent for somehow knowing things that are impossible to know. Living in Southside Chicago doesn’t allow the greatest of educations for the kids, yet somehow Lip is off the charts in terms of intelligence. He even takes SATs for other students and can get whatever score they want.

One episode, Lip and Ian went to go blood tests done once to see if they were really Frank’s children. Ian wasn’t too excited about it, but Lip somehow knew that one of them might not be Frank’s kid. As it turned out, Ian wasn’t actually Frank’s kid. This is the comparison that first sparked the comparison for me. Just like Darl somehow knew that Jewel wasn’t Anse’s kid, Lip knew that Ian wasn’t Frank’s kid.

There are also other comparisons such as Debbie who is a little girl and is sort of ignored by the rest of her family, just like not much attention is payed to Dewey Dell. There is Carl who gets into a lot of trouble for being a little crazy, and sort of is confusing to understand just like Vardaman.

It is one thing to compare characteristics between characters, but after all this is Hero’s Journey, so it is more important to see how the storylines equate. Numerous times in class we have discussed the conflicting themes of an epic journey vs a foolish fiasco in As I lay Dying. I came to the conclusion during our discussions that while there are elements of epic and heroic moments, it seems that the journey as a whole is more comical and foolish than a normal Hero’s Journey. While the individuals in Shameless, don’t make a “journey” per se, they have to continuously provide for themselves and their goal is to just get through whatever life throws at them. For example, one time when Frank loses a bet of $10,000 to a local gang and doesn’t have the money to pay, the gang takes his 2-year old son Liam as ransom. Fiona has to find a way to get Liam back, and so she storms the gang’s residence and pays them all her saved earnings and promises to pay the remainder later. This action can be seen as heroic, yet just like in As I Lay Dying it can be seen as just the cleanup of someone else’s mistake. Like Darl in the river scene trying to save the coffin, after Anse foolishly led them into an awful position. Or Jewel saving the coffin from the barn fire that Darl set. In both works, you can look at the actions of any one character and define them to be both heroic and as part of a journey turned disaster.  

Everett and Odysseus

O, Brother, Where Art Thou presented an excellent parody of The Odyssey and I particularly enjoyed the adaptation of many of the problems into a more modern presentation. The Odyssey has been a popular epic poem since its creation, but it is possible that a lot of the meaning and familiarity with the topics is lost on us because of the cultural differences.

In my opinion the best parallel was between Ulysses Everett McGill and Odysseus. In the Odyssey we are told over and over that Odysseus is “tactful” “great” and “wise”. It often seems to be over exaggerated and makes Odysseus to look extra heroic. Odysseus is also made out to be even more heroic by contrast of his crew. The crew is described in the opening “He [Odysseus] could not save them from disaster, hard as he strove—the blind fools”. (Homer 1.10) Similarly, Everett is accompanied by Pete and Delmar who are both not very bright and blindly follow Everett.

Everett tricks them the entire time saying they are going after a treasure but really Everett is just trying to stop Penny from getting remarried. Everett tells them that he needed them to help him escape and to help him through his journey. Odysseus also would not have been able to get home if not for his crew, and most of them die because Odysseus convinced them to follow him and help him get home. Both Odysseus and Everett tricked their “crews” in order to get home.

The best similarity between Everett and Odysseus is the use of pride. Odysseus, as we have seen in many scenes, loves to boast and even trash talk people who oppose him. Everett similarly has a very witty tongue and often displays his intelligence. Like when Pete questions Everett’s leadership he responds with “Well Pete, I figured it should be the one with the capacity for abstract thought. But if that ain't the consensus view, then hell, let's put it to a vote.” Everett also has Odysseus’ pride which is epitomized by his obsession over his hair. Throughout the movie is concerned about his hair, he only uses Dapper Dan hair gel, and wears hairnets to sleep. Just like Odysseus’ pride was his downfall with the Cyclops, Everett leaves a hairnet in their camp one night and so the sheriff continues to follow him.

Athena the Author

As the story progresses, we gain more confirmation that Athena is constantly orchestrating the whole the story, while still playing a large role in the story. This arrangement becomes most obvious during the scenes leading up to the climatic slaughter of the suitors. We know from other passages that Athena’s continues to test Odysseus at every turn. When Odysseus first arrives at Ithaca Athena tests his wit and patience by shrouding his view of the island. Odysseus concocts a solid fake identity and passes the Athena’s test. Once Odysseus is reunited with Telemachus, they plot to get rid of all the suitors. Telemachus expresses some desire to spare some of the suitors, but Athena tells Odysseus that he has to kill them all. Odysseus doesn’t question Athena and so they plot to kill all of them.

Once they are inside of the palace and the plan is in place, Athena takes a back seat to watch it all go down. It seems that everything has come to a perfect ending for Athena’s story: Both Telemachus and Odysseus have completed their journeys to heroism. Telemachus is even described as “Prince Telemachus, son of King Odysseus…”. It seems that the weeping and fearful boy we saw at the beginning of the story has reached the peak of his development and “come of age”. Odysseus’ climatic reveal and theatrical speech almost seems like a performance put on to please Athena.

However, it seemed that Athena’s perfect entertainment production has a little hiccup. Even though we just saw Telemachus reach a new height, he makes the mistake of leaving the storage room door open allowing the suitors to get some weapons. This causes a moment of fear in Odysseus and he asks for Athena/Mentor’s help. After he asks for help “Athena hit new heights of rage, she lashed out at Odysseus now with blazing accusations: “Where’s it gone, Odysseus—your power, your fighting heart? The great soldier who fought for famous white-armed Helen, battling Trojans nine long years – nonstop, no mercy…” (22. 446). It seems that Athena’s plan to slaughter all the suitors as gone awry and now she has a little miniature blow up at Odysseus for messing up her moment.

Yet she still turns it into an experience for Odysseus and Telemachus. “But she gave no all-out turning of the tide, not yet, she kept on testing Odysseus and his gallant son, putting their force and fighting heart to proof” (22. 446). Even though her ideal fight didn’t happen, she was still able to continue to shape the story and make the bloodbath into a test for Odysseus and Telemachus to prove their bravery and wit. 

A Unique Type of Hero

Most fictional heroes are created to display a few unique characteristics that make them different than any other hero. Superman can fly, the Flash has super speed, Harry Potter is a wizard, each person while they often follow similar developments have something unique about them. These characteristics are defined at the discretion of the author, however in the case of Sherlock Holmes, there are many iterations of his character each with a slightly different take on the original persona written by Arthur Conan Doyle. I haven’t had the pleasure to read many of the original works, but I still would like to look at the modern versions of this hero.

On the surface, Sherlock hardly has any distinguishing characteristics, he has no super powers, and from his job description he is just another detective trying to solve a crime. Does this make every detective a hero in some way? I guess in a sense it does, in that they all work towards a goal of solving murders and other crime and often face setbacks and opposition during their “journey”. So what sets apart Sherlock from any other detective? Every iteration of Sherlock characterizes him as incredibility intelligent and possessing almost supernatural deductive talents. Sherlock uses these talents to rush into danger and solve crimes that to a normal audience seem unsolvable.

In the recent BBC TV Series Sherlock, a different approach to this character is taken. In a more modern setting, Sherlock’s deductive reasoning and intellect is taken to a whole new level, so much so that it comes at a cost. The cost being that Sherlock seems to lack all emotion and seems to almost have sociopathic qualities. He is incredibly impulsive and lacks regard for the safety of himself and others. There seems to be nothing heroic about such a character. Imagine a madman running around the city chasing after murders and trying to solve crimes without being attached to any law enforcement agency. Such a man would have no place in our society, he would constantly be putting himself and others in danger, and in a way acting as a vigilante.

Yet, as we watch this TV series we can’t help but encourage such behavior. We constantly hope that Sherlock is able to solve the next case even faster than before. However, what makes this show enjoyable is that it depicts no win scenarios, (Spoiler) but in one case Sherlock kills a man in cold blood rather than let him get away with what he did. This is not a very heroic act, yet we continue to hope that Sherlock won’t face the consequences. Sherlock embodies a very unique type of hero that blurs the lines of justice.

Impossible Choices

When we examine the pivotal moment of Beloved we can notice that it is similar in a lot of ways to the critical moment in Native Son. Both characters are placed into a position where they have to make an impossible choice. Bigger either had to choose being accused of rape which would most likely result in death, or killing Mary and having some hope to move on. Similarly, Sethe had to choose between being captured by Schoolteacher and going back to Sweet home, or kill her children.

Both characters picked the choice with most ambiguity. Bigger knew the consequences of being caught, and so rather than accepting that we would be caught he chose what, in his mind, was the better option. He acted completely out of instinct and self-preservation and so we cannot blame him for doing so.  

Sethe was placed into a very similar position when the four horsemen showed up. As soon as she saw them she acted instinctively and made a choice. Her only other option was to let Schoolteacher take her children to Sweet Home and live a life of slavery. Sethe knew that his option was a terrible one and so she chose what, in her mind, was the better alternative. Which was to kill her own children. In my opinion we are not allowed to judge whether this action was justified or not, and frankly it doesn’t matter if we do. The point of both of these passages is to show that these characters are placed in impossible situations and are forced to make a choice. It is to protest against slavery and oppression, but more specifically to demonstrate the absolute horror of slavery.

Another demonstration of this horror is the portrayal of the characters in the eyes of white characters. In Beloved, we get insight into the thoughts of the four white horsemen and the way in which they see Sethe. When they discover that she has killed one of her own children their immediate reaction is to view her as an animal. Not only do they see her as property, but they literally hunt her down. Just like hunters hunting down prey, they view her as something similar to a beast.

This dynamic is also present in Native Son, where we see Bigger being hunted down by the police for the murder of Mary. We see Bigger running away from the police on the rooftops until he is finally caught by the “hunters” and thrown in prison. Both novels are protest novels attempting to demonstrate the horrors and portrayals of slavery and discrimination. 

Minstrelsy in Ellison, Hurston, and Beatty

All of the books this semester have had some degree of similarity, and we used those similarities to compare characters plots and themes. One very unique theme present in each of the novels is minstrelsy. While often not specifically stated or explained the ideas and notions come up very often. However, each author has a different take on the implications and use of minstrelsy.

Hurston’s outlook on Minstrelsy seems to be the most positive. When Janie is living in Eatonville there are many scenes where we see the use of minstrel entertainment. The gossip and comedy that occurs on the porches is a prime example of black “performers” entertaining the white readers. Hurston later also idealizes the muck and shows how the farmers live in the moment and are always happy and having fun. Despite working under a white landlord, Hurston chooses to focus on the pastoral aspects of glades. Hurston is criticized by Richard Wright for this exact idea. Wright says that black writers should be continuously advocating for more rights and protesting the system. He criticizes Hurston for employing such an idealized view of sharecropping without any mention of suffering or hardship. Wright makes his stance on minstrelsy very clear, that every African American novel should be protesting the ideas that minstrelsy creates, not promote them like Hurston does.

Ellison’s narrator encounters a blackface cast iron figurine, and he freaks out. The narrator is appalled that Mary would keep such an offensive object in her house. The figure depicts a performer with a large grin. While the minstrel performer is supposed to be happy, it seems like the grin could also be seen as choking. After freakishly beating the figurine into smithereens, he packs it up in his briefcase and attempts to get rid of it. Every time he attempted to get rid of the briefcase someone ends up returning it to him. He is trying to get rid of the racial stereotypes put upon him, but it just keeps coming back to him no matter how hard he tries.

A similar dynamic can be seen with Gunnar in White Boy Shuffle. Despite his seemingly successful life, Gunnar is very apathetic in his basketball career. He always feels like the oddball out. Even though the white kids in his school treat him well, he is still treated in a special way. Even though he is put on a pedestal and everyone idolizes him, he feels isolated. This is very similar to the narrator’s experiences; No matter how successful he is Gunnar can’t get away from feeling isolated and treated differently because of his race. Beatty even illustrates this point by creating a satirical reverse minstrelsy dynamic. Gunnar dresses himself in “whiteface” before his game against Phillis Wheatley. Gunnar describes his endeavor “While the whites pep-rallied over banana pancakes, I planned my first rebellious act.”(Beatty 163) This original minstrel dynamic displayed white actors portraying black people because black people were deemed to be inferior actors. Gunnar being the best player on the team dresses as a white player implying that he is stooping down to an inferior level of play.  This seems to be Gunnar’s attempt to defy the white power structure and try to “fit in”. Of course this entire seen is made into a satire, just showing the absurdity of the situation, and how it is impossible for Gunnar to get away from the racialized stereotypes enforced on him.  

Gravitating Towards Gunnar

Books are very unpredictable, sometimes they are just awful, other times a book just clicks, and you can’t put it down. For me, The White Boy Shuffle clicked in an instant. I’m not trying to be cliché, but Beatty’s use of humor and Gunnar’s sarcastic joking character really made the book come alive. For me most fictional books and characters seemed so distant. Good authors, like Wright for example, are able to create situations where I can feel emotion or create situations that I can relate to, but Beatty does this and more. Beatty goes the basic empathetic style, and creates a character that we really want to be around, someone that we want to get to know better.

People in this class describe him as the “funny, cool black guy” (28). Characters in the novel gravitate towards Gunnar and I seemed to be drawn to him as well. Within the first few pages, I already knew I loved Gunnar. Gunnar’s book “Watermelanin” had me laughing from the first page. While the title in and of itself is funny, it has also “sold 126 million copies”. Beatty surrounds Gunnar with an incredible aura of satire that makes every scene seem like an occurrence that we see every day. We know that a book of poetry would never actually sell 126 million copies, but because the way he presents it is so nonchalant and direct we end up wanting to believe him.

I also feel Gunnar’s character is very tailored to our generation and age range. Gunnar uses “swear words” to the point that they seem normal. In high school I feel this same way, I hear the language so often that it feels normal to hear it every day. Gunnar even uses the language in a way that I hear all the time. His purpose for using foul language isn’t exclusively to insult or belittle others. Most of the time it is for comedic value. Like when he writes his letter to David Schoenfeld he ends the letter with “Shalom, motherf***er” (40). This is exactly the type of language I see every day in high school.

Also the fact that Gunnar uses such language at such a young age makes it seem even more satirical. Gunnar seems to be so mature, and instead of using his maturity as a way to put himself above everyone, he uses it to make everyone like him. Gunnar, despite his very nonchalant carefree attitude, is very intelligent which furthers my respect and attachment to him. In the third grade Ms. Cegeny asked Gunnar “what was the last thing Melissa read” (29), and even though Gunnar was daydreaming and talking to Cecilia he was able to summarize the passage Melissa read. All of Gunnar’s qualities make him a very entertaining character that keeps me turning. While I am curious to see where the plot takes us, I am more interested in the humor and witty comments that Gunnar is sure to keep bringing to the table. 

Is love a choice or a feeling?

Janie's view of love and sexuality is constantly changing and adapting. When her story begins Janie is first discovering her sexuality. As she is sitting under the pear tree, she sees the bee pollinating the blossoms and she enters this stupor and for the first time she understands that love and marriage are a natural occurrence. This view is contrasted very heavily by the view of the Grandmother. Because of the Grandmother's experiences as a child, she sees that she needs to protect Janie and marry her off as soon as she reaches womanhood. She the Grandmother see's Janie kissing Johnny Taylor, she knows it is time for her to marry someone safe. The grandmother views marriage and love as something that should be arranged, rather than something natural.

When Janie marries Logan Killicks she says "He look like some ole skullhead in de grave yard". She associates Killicks with death, as opposed to her view of love which is full of life and nature. When Joe Starks comes along, he is the better option by far. While she knows their love isn't perfect, she is willing to give it a go, rather than living and working for Killicks her whole life. For the first few years of their marriage it is implied that they had fun. But now that fun had begun to dwindle. " The bed was no longer a daisy-field for her and Joe to play in. It was a place where she went and laid down when she was sleepy and tired." Janie's expectation for love had been fulfilled for the first seven years, but now that Joe has begun to mistreat her she begins to look for something else.


After Joe dies, she immediately feels like a large burden has been lifted and that she has a lot more freedom. Janie has felt the two extremes of a marriage. Killicks worked her too hard and treated her literally like an animal-- something to do the farm work. On the other hand, Joe treated her too "special" and she felt isolated from the town and she still had to work too hard. Even though Joe mistreated her she still learned something in their marriage. As Joe was dying, Janie tried to mend their relationship even though she didn't feel that spark of love like she did initially. When she tries to help Joe it is showing that she is trying to love him out of a choice, instead of pursuing love just as a natural feeling. This shows that maybe Janie's view of love is beginning to change.  
I bet as we see the relationship between Janie and Tea Cake progress, we will see Janie's view of love change even more.

Becoming Invisible

The concept of invisibility and the narrator’s self-awareness are very tightly related. From the prologue we learn all about the concept of invisibility, but it doesn't totally make sense to us. We only start to understand the idea, when we look at the narrator’s realization of freedom and agency. At the beginning of the novel the narrator seems absolutely clueless. When he gives his speech at the Battle Royal, he doesn't understand that the audience is messing with him. When he gets kicked out of the school, he doesn't realize that Bledsoe is setting him up for failure. Even when he joins the brotherhood it takes a long time before he wonders if he was being used as “a natural resource”. In all of these instances we see no thoughts on "invisibility" and he is still oblivious to everyone shaping his life for him.

The first steps to his realization start in the hospital. After being subjected to the machine, the narrator is very disorientated but he has a brief moment of clarity after the nurses made him angry.

“And suddenly my bewilderment suspended and I wanted to be angry, murderously angry. But somehow the pulse of current smashing through my body prevented me. Something had been disconnected. For though I had seldom used my capacities for anger and indignation, I had no doubt that I possessed them; and, like a man who knows that he must fight, whether angry or not, when called a son of a bitch, I tried to imagine myself angry -- only to discover a deeper sense of remoteness.” (p 237)

Before this point, we have never seen the narrator express a whole lot of emotion. Maybe a few instinctual feelings of fear and panic with Mr. Norton, but they were natural feelings that everyone in that situation would feel. This is the first time where we see individual thoughts and emotions that were personal to the narrator. He even says “I seldom used my capacities for anger and indignation”, so we can recognize that he is making some headway into making his own decisions.

Later when he first joins the Brotherhood he gives a speech that is emotional, but is criticized for not being scientific enough. The Brotherhood’s ideology states that people need to think for themselves, rather than just being energized into a thoughtless mob. This is ironic, because by forcing the Narrator’s speeches to be scientific they are taking away his personal thoughts and replacing them with a concrete strict set of rules. The Brotherhood is taking advantage of the narrator and it is a while before the narrator realizes he is being used in this way.

The next turning point for the narrator is the scene of yams. This is scene is very consequential because it is shows that the narrator is doing what he wants to do. This scene contrasts with the scene in the diner where the narrator refuses the pork chop and coffee and instead takes the toast and orange juice. In the diner he is only taking the toast in order to defy the stereotype. This time he eats the yams because he wants to. “I walked along, munching the yam, just as suddenly overcome by an intense feeling of freedom -- simply because I was eating while walking along the street. It was exhilarating. I no longer had to worry about who saw me or about what was proper.” (p 264) As the narrator begins the realize that he should be making his own decisions, he starts to question everything else. Around this time the narrator wonders if the Brotherhood was just using him “as a natural resource”, and he starts to realize that people don’t see him as a person and are using him for their own self interests. This begins the path to the narrator becoming “The Invisible Man”.  

Steps towards the Prologue

In class we have discussed the prologue and how it the Narrator seems completely different in the prologue compared to the other chapters of the book. On top of that it seems that after almost every chapter our Narrator seems to be a different person. There is of course the idea of "invisibility" and you could argue that the Narrator progresses from a very eager member of society who is ready to enter the field of established power to a person who is seen but really is "invisible" and falls from the world of recognition and power. While his argument is totally valid, I would just like to look at the smaller changes between chapters and look at his character development.

In the opening chapters it seems that the Narrator is on top of the world, in his opinion. He is very optimistic about life and is pretty naive in the the sense of "the game". In the battle royale scene, he doesn't really notice that the audience is messing with him. He gives his speech with the intent of impressing all the important people in town, but he doesn't realize that they are there for entertainment -- that he is being mocked as a form of that entertainment.

In chapter 2, we see him in a similar light. He is super cocky and tries to look good to impress Mr. Norton. He thinks "Of course I knew he was a founder, but I knew also that it was advantageous to flatter rich white folks, Perhaps he'd give me a large tip, or a suit, or a scholarship next year"(p38). Similar to the speech, he just wants to impress people to look like an educated intelligent black student. But again he lacks understanding of the bigger picture, and it seems that his short term goals are going to be his downfall. This want to impress Norton can be seen as the cause for his expulsion. In order to give Norton what he wants and impress him, he takes  Norton to Trueblood, which in the end gets him kicked out of school.

Even after getting expelled he continues the over-the-top optimism. He sees it as a good opportunity to work in New York and gain experience before going back to college. This blind sense of optimism creates a stark contrast to his first personality change. This change happens after the Narrator discovers what was actually in the letters. This event causes the Narrator to switch from the happy-go-lucky optimism to a deep hatred for Bledsoe and him swearing revenge upon him. This very rapid change is rather confusing, and it is the first step, of many, towards the Narrator from the prologue.

Is Bigger Really Human?

Is Bigger Really Human?

I'm not about to argue for some absurd reality or complex conspiracy, rather I would like to take a look at Bigger's "choices" and evaluate whether he is merely responding to his environment or if he is consciously making decisions of his own free will. Conscious decisions are what separate us from animals. A predator displays an imitation of human choices, but they are not really aware of their decisions.They are simply recognizing stimuli and responding to it. Bigger Thomas can be seen in a similar light, and a variety of critics have commented on Bigger’s  inhuman qualities. At the same time Bigger in many instances does exhibit complex thought and unique ideas.

There is an extensive argument for both sides of this loaded coin. After analyzing Native Son in class for a week my gut instinct is to side with the Naturalist point of view, more specifically the "lab rat" analogy. That Wright is simply placing Bigger in a variety of compromising situations and simply observing his reactions and responses to the environment. The principal evidence for this argument is the quintessential scene of Bigger suffocating Mary. As the observer we can’t help but feel sorry for Bigger, he was only trying to protect himself and any action he performed would have ended up in a compromising situation. In those moments Bigger is driven solely by fear and panic. He does not think ahead, rather just responds to each event. The text is filled with reactionary language. There is a common pattern in the way the paragraphs are structured.

(p 85)

“The door behind him had creaked.” “He turned and a hysterical terror seized him, as though he were falling from a great height in a dream”

(...)

“Mary!” she spoke softly, questioningly.” “Bigger held his breath.”

(...)

“Mary!” “He felt Mary trying to rise and quickly he pushed her head back to the pillow”

The pattern continues for the rest of the scene, but it is obvious that every action Bigger does is directly in response to something Ms. Dalton does or says. He makes no independent actions, and his only thoughts during the scene are observations rather than assessments and impressions of the situation. This makes me think that Bigger is not in control of his actions and is just being Wright’s puppet to make a point. I agree with one of James Baldwin who said that the point of fiction is to show the development and complexity of characters. Bigger Thomas is not someone who displays this complexity. At this climactic moment Wright writes Bigger as a visceral character driven out of pure instinct rather than a complex character driven by individual thought.

There are still plenty of instances where Bigger looks like a completely different character. The main example that comes to mind is Bigger’s whole plot to frame Mary’s murder as a kidnapping and make a ransom demand. This plan, even though it spawned from the framework of Leopold and Loeb, took effort to put into place. Even after Bigger was caught people asked who his accomplices were, because no one thought that a black man would be capable of such a plan. This implies that his plan had to involve some careful thought out ideas.Bigger also considered the option of fleeing multiple times, but he made the decision to go through with his plan.

The two contradictory points of view both have very compelling arguments. It is important to think about the reasons why Wright would include two sides of such a contradictory character. I believe in some instance Wright purposefully trapped Bigger to illustrate that in the real world many people really are trapped and any decision they make leads down a bad path. Wright didn’t want the whole book to be solely based off of forced decisions because then Bigger would cease to be human and the corollary between Bigger and the rest of the world would cease to have value.

Grant for Project Based Learning

Executive Summary:

My name is Ezra Johnson and I am applying on behalf of University Laboratory High school. I have been teaching at “Uni” for over 10 years and have really enjoyed my time here. The students are very intelligent and eager to learn more. As a “Laboratory” school we are supposed to preform many projects inside the class room. This idea has been thwarted by financial issues for a very long time and thus our equipment is often broken and out of date.

We recently updated a single room to be more technology based, with a projector and touch-screen TV. This room has a had a lot of success with teaching and with engaging the students. We wish to apply a similar concept to other classrooms in hopes of encouraging more project based learning. Many of the students have complained that they get bored with lectures, and want something exciting to do. We really want to encourage this enthusiasm and culture it into something that they can use the rest of their lives.

We would like the Toshiba America Foundation to consider a grant of $10,000 to support our efforts of establishing a more project-based learning environment.

Needs Assessment:

One of the areas we are really lacking is the science department. Multiple times this year my colleague in the physics department commented on how old and broken his equipment is. I would really like to see physics be a class where the students can experiment with the information they learn and apply it in structures or machines. Projects like mouse-trap cars, or building trebuchets, any sort of project that would engage the students and allow them to apply the concepts they learn in their science classes.

One of the problems with this new project based curriculum would be creating new lesson plans and adapting them to accommodate these new projects. Some of the grant money would go to the teachers for their efforts in planning out these new projects for the students. The majority of the money would go to buying new equipment for the students to use. The equipment could include but is no limited to:

1.       New Physics equipment. Including new large magnets, new circuitry sets, materials for building bridges and trebuchets and other projects determine by the teacher

2.       *I’ll add more specifics 

Esports Editorial

The majority of parents, at some time or another, have told their kids to stop playing video games and go do something productive. Well, what if I told you video games could become the child’s career. In the not so far future the world of “ESports” could become a whole new form of entertainment. The emergence of massive online gaming has made it possible for people to become Esport athletes and compete at a pro level. MOBAs (Massive Online Battle Area) such as League of Legends and DOTA 2 have risen to new heights. With over 70 million active players, League of Legends is the largest online game in history. Riot Games hosts an annual international competition with the prize pool in 2015 being $2.3 million dollars. Not only are tournaments huge but viewership is also at record highs. The 2015 League of Legends World Championship final totaled at 36 million unique views across the globe. In comparison the 2015 Super Bowl had a total of 114 million viewers. It is shocking to see that a single video game is approaching the viewership of traditional sports.

Even universities are beginning to recruit young talent and offer scholarships to Esport athletes. Recently UC-Irvine announced that in the coming fall they would be offering scholarships to these athletes. UC-Irvine is one of the first offer scholarships to athletes that will compete in the ULoL (U-League of Legends) collegiate series. Many other schools have school teams that also compete in ULoL. Thirteen of the Fourteen Big 10 schools have collegiate League of Legends teams. In fact, earlier this week Big Teen Network and Riot games agreed to televise the Ohio State vs Michigan State League of legends match. This is the first time an event has been broadcasted on a collegiate network.

Many other games such as Counter Strike: Global offensive have also had huge success in the Esports industry. Many of these pro players are payed salaries similar to those of traditional athletes, some making over 2 million dollars a year. In total the Esport industry is predicted to bring in 17 Billion dollars in 2016. These athletes also can get P-1A Visas so that they can travel to other regions when they are drafted by professional teams. These Visas are given to “Internationally Recognized Athletes” and these Esport athletes fall under this category.

This new generation of Esport athletes could really change the way we look at video games and the way we view traditional sport athletes as well. Parents might rethink their statements about video games and might possibly encourage talented kids to pursue careers in Esports. 

The problem with Super powers

What superpower do you wish you had?

Flight or invisibility? Super-strength or super-speed? Control over the elements? The possibilities are endless. But which to choose? They all have advantages and disadvantages. I kind of like to think of it as rock paper scissors -- except way more complicated, sometime ask Daniel Vardy about his complicated version. Beyond the advantages there are conditions about practicality and of course the entertaining nature of the superpower. I mean who would want the power to turn trees into jellybeans, sure it might be cool but compared to all the possibilities it looks pretty lame.

Now that I have thoroughly avoided the question and blabbered about vague concepts, I’ll answer. Nothing. Now is the point where you all scream at me for being a fool. It might sound arrogant or over-the-top but I really think that having a super power wouldn’t be fun. Maybe for the first few days it would be cool, but eventually I would begin to take it for granted. I would be so full of myself that I might forget what life is like for others. It would separate me from my friends and family and alienate me from the rest of the world. Not just alienate me in the sense of separation, but I would literally become an “alien” as in a being that is non-human. No matter what the super power you are going to feel this isolation from everyone else. I wouldn’t ever know what it would be like to lead a normal life.

I mean if you woke up one day with some amazing super power your life would change forever. Your friends would view you differently, they wouldn’t care as much about the type of person you are, they wouldn’t care as much about your friendship. They would just start to care about the physical aspects of your body rather than looking at your character. You might be summoned places for tests and experiments, and the media would explode.

Everyone’s attention would be drawn to you. I’ve always wondered what is like for celebrities. I feel like not being able to go shopping without people staring at you would be incredibly hard. Even the super heroes eventually get their identity revealed and they could no longer live a partially normal life. I would never get to go to college and major in whatever I want. From that point on I would never be able to settle down with a job and a family. I would always be busy, and get all the attention. At the same time I might start to feel depressed, it’s sort of part of being an “alien” the idea of isolation and not having someone to talk to would begin to wear away at your already forgotten personality.

I don’t mean to destroy anyone hopes and dreams of flying, but in my opinion it just isn’t as practical as people make it out to be. As for me I’m perfectly content with just being a average Joe and living my life the way I want rather than having a super power dictate my life for me.

Why we lie

How comfortable are you with lying?

Exodus 20:16 “Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.” I always thought why it was never “Thou shalt not lie.” Many of the other commandments are straight forward like “Thou shalt not kill.” Or “Thou shalt not commit adultery”. So why not state plainly “Thou shalt not lie.” I think this is deliberate, and that there is a difference between lying and “bearing false witness.”

Many people say that “Honesty is the best policy.” While this may be true there are situations in which it is possible to be too honest. Brutal honesty can be very hurtful, it is often better to tell a small lie to avoid any trouble and benefit both parties. For example, when your prom date walks down the stairs, no matter what you actually think, you are going to compliment them. When you say “You look great!” you are technically lying, but in the process you are raising their self-esteem. This is why the commandment is not “Thou shalt not lie”, it is sometimes the better option to lie. I would take the small lie over brutal honesty any day. Like with anything, take this with a grain of salt. Continuous “white lies”, as they are called, can destroy your credibility and be a hindrance to serious relationships.

So what does “bearing false witness against thy neighbor” mean anyway? The key difference is the way the deceit is used. Bearing false witness means to plan or devise lies designed to hurt others. It is the intent to hurt others that sets it apart from simply lying. For instance, if I needed a 4.0 to get the scholarship I really wanted, I might be motivated to cheat and lie to get there. I might make a plan to break into a teacher’s laptop to change everyone’s grades. Give myself a perfect and give all the people I dislike 0’s. I then proceed to lie to the teacher when they ask me if I changed the grades. Most people with a decent set of morals wouldn’t lie and cheat in this way.

These two types of lies are the extremes, and of course there is a variety in between. Lies really do depend on the situation, it is hard to write a guidebook with a perfect balance of honest and beneficial lies. It also depends on personality. As I see it lies are just gateways to worse things. I’ve seen it in my oldest sister, I remember when she became a teenager that she began to lie more and more to my parents. It started with small things like practicing the piano. My parents would ask “Did you practice while I was gone?” and she would answer affirmatively. Well, I knew for a fact that she hadn’t, but I didn’t want to rat her out. In a sense I was helping her lie. Soon she began to lie about what time she was going to come home. Or where she was going, or who she was hanging out with. Of course she also kept everything from me, so it I don’t know exactly what went on. The one thing that I could notice is her relationship with my parents. Remember how I said that you begin to lose credibility, well that’s what happened. My parents couldn’t trust her, they couldn’t tell the difference between the truth and the lies anymore. Trust is hard to win back, and I just saw them growing further and further apart. I’m pretty sure she was thrilled to leave home and be free from the constant hovering of her parents.

After seeing this example, I knew that I didn’t want to have that kind of a relationship with my parents. I want to be trusted, I want people to be able to rely on me to follow through and get things done. That’s why I try my best to tell my parents exactly what is going on. Peer pressure, especially in high school, can be to rebel against your parents and “live a little”. I would encourage people to listen to their parents more, I’m not discouraging anyone from “living a little” or having fun, but at least listen to what you parents have to say. The last thing you want is a parent to say “I’m not upset that you lied to me, I’m upset that from now on I can’t believe you.”

Assumptions and Judgments

What assumptions do people make about you? *Help me with transitions please.

In it’s early history America became known as the “melting pot”, immigrants and ex-slaves and everyone in between came to the new world for a better life. However, things didn’t always go the way people wanted. Stereotypes began to arise, ideas like Asians have “squinty eyes” therefore they have bad eyesight, or blonde people are ditsy and clumsy. We still have stereotypes today, and whether or not they are offensive we still make assumptions when we really don’t know much about the person.

Well, I’m a white Caucasian male. I’m sure there are many stereotypes, but I have never really been subjected to them. There are broad general stereotypes, but people also make assumptions on a personal level. For pretty much as long as I can remember I was the “goodie-two shoes” the “teacher’s pet” or what have you. I don’t intentionally suck up to teachers, it’s just sort of my personality to be nice to people. I’m pretty sure I have never been hated, that obviously sounds incredibly arrogant, but I think it is true for the most part. I can’t remember anyone who despised me and was always rude and angry with me.

This is the point where you are expecting some cheesy line like “If everyone was kind we would live in a much better world ”. Ya whatever, everyone is different and if we live in a place where everyone had the same ideals and same morals the world would be pretty damn boring. The world needs some sort of contrast. If everyone was perfect there would be no evil, if there was no evil there would be nothing to compare perfection to, and thus perfection would be a neutral concept and we would know no real happiness. Basically what I am beginning to understand is that the world needs to have these stereotypes to succeed. Don’t think I am promoting stereotypes, or advocating bullying or anything of the sort. I’m merely stating that they assumptions and judgments we make are what make us human. We all have the natural instinct to compare ourselves to others, and for better or for worse it's part of our society.

Getting back to myself, as I said I have been classified as a nice person, a trustworthy friend, a agreeable individual. While these traits have some truth, it is not exclusively true. I, like many others, have different personalities or at least different ways of acting around certain people. Around my friends I think I am the closest to being “myself”. However, we all do things to impress other people, and this happens the most among our peers. Whether we call each other “posers”, “fake”, or whatever, we are all guilty of it to some degree.

A lot of people know me as a Mormon. People assume that because I’m a Mormon I act and doing things differently. Parts of my religion my religion may seem different but they don’t define me as an individual. In our society we group people all the time, whether it be race, economic status, gender, religion, we make judgments about a person based on all these characteristics. As a Mormon I probably get more questions about religion than an average person does. It is probably because people know less about my religion than say Catholicism. There are also many generalizations made about me because I’m a Mormon. Things like having multiple wives, which isn’t a thing anymore by the way, or being rich. These assumptions don’t hurt my feelings and I am always glad to correct stereotypes. We shouldn’t be offended by these assumptions. You are the only person that knows you perfectly, and therefore only you can define yourself. So don’t let others hurt you or bring you down based on their impressions and assumptions.