Okay, here we go:
1) It seems that Wright does not hold the traditional beliefs of the Asian and African people in very high regard, instead thinking that the way forward for them has more to do with following the ways of the Western educated elites. Early on in the piece he states, in reference to those who still believe in the traditional ideas, "they are the doomed ones, men in a tragic trap. Any attempt on their part to wage a battle to protect their outmoded traditions and religions is a battle that is lost before it starts." (652) Do you think Wright is being too harsh in essentially tossing out these traditions and values? Can't there be something of use within these traditions that Wright is missing? What about his use of the word "outmoded" in discussing these traditions?
2) "The more Westernized the native heart became, the more anti-Western it had to be, for the heart was now weighing itself in terms of white Western values that made it feel degraded." (656) This quote makes me again think of my previous question and Wright's ideas on the outmoded nature of traditional beliefs because in many ways by rejecting them is he not becoming that which he seems to speak of in the quote? How do you come to terms with this contradiction?
3) Wright's notion of Acting was something I found rather interesting, particularly the way in which Wright talks about the elite of Asia and Africa joining forces with the minority section of white society if only for a means of "climbing out of its ghetto." Essentially using these groups as a means of rising in society. Do you find this troubling? The way in which these people must forever be two different people depending on who they are around. And also do you see this as an effective way of creating change? Wright also points out a similar form of Acting occurring within the religions brought to these people from Europe. How do you come to terms with that as well?
4) Communism is mentioned fairly often within the text and I wonder if this is something that on some level dates the work, giving it over to a particular time and place in history. Do you agree or can you see Communism as standing in for something that will always be present within this struggle? A presence that will always seem to exist in opposition to traditional Western beliefs.
I'm really into these questions, Matt.
ReplyDeleteTo respond to your fourth question, I think I agree with the latter part of your assessment, that Communism in this text is a placeholder for the social construction and reification of bodily concerns. To an extent, yes, I think it dates the work due to its early cold-war status, but I also think it's helpful to think about communism in that pluralistic sense and discuss whether or not the purpose is to further institutionalize the degradation of the people or address their degradation. The way Wright discusses how displaced and disenfranchised people cling to or turn to communism is merely emblematic of the benefit and cost of social ideology. He sees it as at once necessary to sort of inspire or fulfill people (particularly the youth), but perhaps also a substitute for the absence of a central culture(?). Maybe I'm off base there.
In response to Question 2, I am not certain how to begin to come to terms with such a contradiction. What I can say as I said and how I feel on this subject is that, someone has to be the voice of the voiceless people in society. Again in White Man, Listen! Wright mentions that educated Blacks who go against the grain come across as traitors and are associated with negative loyalties. My question then is who exactly are they, being traitors and exhibiting negative loyalties toward? Is it fellow Asians and Africans who are in lesser positions and looked at as the lowest of the low in society? Or is Wright writing to serve notice to both sides, I find it hard to believe that he just packed up shop and left for France after working hard as an advocate for the struggles of Negroes within the U.S. to focus on writing about other underrepresented peoples affected by Colonialism. I believe that he was well aware at the criticisms that would come his way for what many viewed as his abandonment of the social struggle for equality within his country and venturing off into for his critics what seemed to be quizzical literary genres. So my way of looking at his decision is that Wright was merely putting the question and ideas out to both people White and Black, European and U.S. Colonial structures as well as laying a new foundation for Black intellectuals and the everyday voiceless Black individuals to first familiarize themselves’ with his assertions and then agree or disagree with his stance.
ReplyDeleteIn response to the communist question, obviously communism is not a concern, but black people who feel a disconnect are reaching out to other radical and sometimes dangerous groups; such as terrorist groups. The names have changed but the feelings and sentiment are all the same.
ReplyDelete