Thoughts on Native Son by Richard Wright
For me, the most prominent question that arises from Native Son concerns Bigger’s justification. This work resembles The Stranger, written by Camus at roughly the same time. In that work the character Mersault was also sentenced for death for inadvertently killing someone. Ultimately, his real crime was indifference to the world (a world that was indifferent to him). He was not an active participant in his own life. The same can be said of Bigger. However, in his case, there seems to be something more than indifference. Once he gets himself into this situation, his attempt to get out becomes more ruthless, to the point that he is willing to kill again - even the person closest to him.
There are several situations where Bigger notes a disconnectedness from himself, as when he claims that “he felt he had no physical existence at all right then” (67). He is certainly not exerting direct control over his actions. His mother notes that he needs to apply himself or he will suffer, yet he hesitates and wavers about taking the job while contemplating committing robbery. From the beginning he essentially lost and drifting along. Just as he does not fully recognize himself as a person, Bigger doesn’t see others in the world as individual people. For him “white people were not really people; they were a sort of great natural force” (109). This idea of force along with Bigger’s inability to act consciously suggests that the world is merely opposing forces caught in a struggle and human beings are just caught in that maelstrom, unable to escape. While Bigger is living in an oppressive time and place, the one possible escape might have been the way suggested by Jan and his communist idea of equality. However, he is not given the chance to pursue this idea, as events put him in an unwinnable situation. After killing Bessie he finally realizes that “he had committed murder twice and had created a new world for himself” (279). In contrast to the earlier ideas of external force, the word created suggests that Bigger did indeed play a role in forming the situation. It is not a world that one would choose, but given his role in it he must deal with the consequences of it. Bigger has not only fought against the whites and the oppressive conditions they set up, but by killing Bessie he has committed crimes against his own people, and there seems no clear justification for this action. His only motivation seems to be a pure animalistic drive for self-preservation, regardless of what color his opponents possess. The divisions of color have disappeared, and he is alone against the world.
It would seem that Bigger will either have to face the realization that he has no freewill or take responsibility for his actions. In the Stranger, Mersault accepts what he has done and learns to live with it (for as long as that lasts). In Bigger’s case, he will have to do that as well, if he is to ever justify himself. On the other hand, if Wright is arguing that there is no freewill and that all of us are merely exhibiting instinctive responses to external forces, then there is no hope of freedom for anyone regardless of race, color, or social status.
A large amount of Part 3 contains arguments that attempt to minimize Bigger’s criminal actions. While Max’s argument makes some sense in reference to the system set up by the whites that has caused repercussions of this kind, not all of it seems to hold justification. His claim that Bigger was in a kind of “war” and forced to kill, does not directly justify the two murders. First, Mary was trying to help Bigger. While her behavior could be felt as patronizing, killing her in some kind of war effort would be counterproductive. In this sense, during the Civil War, slaves would be justified in killing sympathetic Northerners, which would clearly hinder their own efforts. Second, this argument does nothing to explain Bessie’s murder. She was not an enemy to Bigger, and was not really involved in a race conflict. Unlike her, there were black members of the clergy who Bigger viewed as being like the whites, as they held some power. Even in war soldiers have to make ethical decisions, and ultimately Bigger’s actions come down to his own responsibility. Max argues that “it was an act of creation” (466). While Bigger may have found some kind of autonomous personhood and freedom in his actions, ultimately his denying the personhood of others, black or white, by killing them would contradict his own freedom. If Bigger had made deliberate decisions in order to act in ways that would eliminate his oppression, then a better claim could be made that his actions were necessary.
I found the most compelling argument to be the indictment of religion. Bigger rejects religion, and Wright seems to be suggesting (in a Foucauldian way) that it is one more instrument used to separate people. Bigger looks at white people like a transcendental force. “I always think of white folks. . . well, they own everything. They choke you off the face of the Earth. They like God” (409). His rejection of white society and its dominate power system goes along with religion. He states that he “wanted to be happy in this world, not out of it. I didn’t want that kind of happiness. The white folks like for us to be religious, then they can do what they want with us” (412). Perhaps the most shocking image in the book is the contrast of the burning KKK cross to the cross that Bigger has worn. Religion that he had previously been a part of, was not really his religion and, in the end, it couldn’t do anything for him. He realizes that “whatever he thought or did from now on would have to come from him and him alone, or not at all.” However, along with this feeling of freedom and self-reliance, there is a side effect of despair. He states that “never again did he want to feel anything like hope” (394).
In the end Bigger does seem to have some idea that connections to others are what matter, but he doesn’t seem overly affected by this realization, nothing that would suggest remorse or awareness of the value of others. Max (and presumably Wright) makes the case that the problem isn’t racial division, it’s economic. Wealth, and its power, create classes and divide people and because of this system individuals will sometimes rebel as products of this society. However, he does not make a claim of how individuals should act and feel towards others. By omitting this, Wright seems to be claiming that the world is fully deterministic, and he doesn’t reveal an easy solution, other than reducing the cycle that dehumanizes and produces these crimes. If Bigger was created by society, and unable to act in a conscious manner, then there is no hope for him to feel.
No comments:
Post a Comment