Invisible Ellison?
For my blog post, I
wanted to compare Ellison’s life (based on the video documentary shown in
class), to the life of our narrator.
When we first
started reading this book (like all the way back in the prologue), I envisioned
Ellison sitting at his desk thinking about how he could make this novel funny,
ironic, symbolic, and confusing, yet serious, straightforward, and clear. I didn’t
think he had very much connection with the narrator except for the fact that
they both joined communist-like parties. I also know that when reading a book,
the author doesn’t always identify with the narrator. As we continued reading,
I envisioned less of Ellison and more of the story and meanings behind
everything. Then when we watched the documentary, I realized how similar the
narrator’s and Ellison’s lives were.
Ellison and the
narrator both received scholarships to attend college. Both left college (one
by choice, the other by force), to go to New York. They both became involved in
the “Brotherhood” or communist party and disagreed with strong black activists
(Ras the Destroyer and Amiri Baraka). During these activists’ glory days (one
way of describing it), the narrator and Ellison sort of disappear. Ellison
isn’t seen in the activists fight and kind of becomes invisible himself. I also
found it interesting how Ellison was called an Uncle Tom by a critic and in
Invisible man, there are also Uncle Tom connections at certain points. Yet
today, Ellison is not remotely connected with the name. As for the narrator, I
don’t believe the narrator followed the Uncle Tom teachings after organizing
Clifton’s funeral and going underground (despite potentially being accused of
such name during his previous faithful times with the Brotherhood).
I just found all
these things really interesting while listening to the documentary. I didn’t
know very much about Ellison before the documentary so please correct me if you
disagree with anything I’ve said above!
I also found it really interesting how biographical Invisible Man actually seemed after watching the documentary. I think that your title "Invisible Ellison" is really good because it does seem like he based the narrator on himself. But that also adds some complexity, because we don't know a lot about the narrator's childhood but we do about Ellison's. Which is weird, I wonder if because we know more about Ellison we'd impose his life story on the narrator's if we reread the novel.
ReplyDeleteI agree with many of your first thoughts on the novel. I too was perplexed as to how Ellison went about writing this work, because it is so interesting and every aspect seems to be working towards his overarching allegory. I wish Ellison wrote an essay describing his writing process similar to Wright's "How Bigger was Born" because I think it would give some helpful incite. I also believe that Ellison and the Narrator have many things in common and think that in the closing line, where the Narrator insinuates that others are invisible, as well, he might be referencing himself.
ReplyDeleteI remember Mr. Mitchell saying something about some of this stuff and I thought it was really interesting too. I feel like Ellison was definitely describing some of his experiences while he was writing and I really think it is plausible that the whole invisibility theme was talking about himself. It seems likely that a theme like that could easily come out of personal experience and I think that, even though a lot of the other details were fictional, many of them were also very plausible at the time and I think that they could have been based on stories from other people that he had heard or even more of his own experiences. Or maybe he made the whole thing up I don't really know, but it's a cool idea that its semi-biographical.
ReplyDeleteYeah I actually missed half of the documentary, but I was definitely intrigued by how similar Ellison and the narrator's lives were. I wonder if Invisible Man was first thought of when Ellison described himself with the term. It could also explain why at the end of the novel he suggests that everyone invisible. Why would he say that if he didn't feel invisible himself? I don't know any answers to these questions, but it's very intriguing to me all the same.
ReplyDeleteYou're post makes some really great points. It's definitely hard not to imagine that Ellison based some aspects of the narrator's life on his own. But in that sense, it kind of makes you wonder how much of the narrator embodies Ellison. It's interesting to compare Ellison going "invisible" to the activism that happened during his lifetime. Maybe what he was writing about in the book was an attempt to explain some of his thought processes behind his choices in life? I'm honestly not sure.
ReplyDeleteWhen watching the movie you can't not see the parallels between Ellison's life and the narrator's life but perhaps that's just what he envisioned the life of someone who is invisible in the society is like? The comparison between uncle tom and Ellison not very well supported. I think that Ellison simply describes a life that some black people live and that life doesn't really fall in the same views as Amiri Baraka. I think that Ellison also has critiques of both sides of the story, I don't think that he puts himself on one side of the story.
ReplyDeleteI agree that the movie was really interesting because it showed just how similar Ellison and the narrator are. It seems almost like Ellison was writing his own life story. That would imply, i guess, that Ellison felt invisible, which like you said is a little bit ironic because he ended up being a hugely influential author - anything but invisible.
ReplyDeleteIt is sometimes uncanny when the story of a fictional character lines up with the authors experiences. Perhaps Ellison felt that he himself had been invisible, and in writing the book he could establish the same kind of identity that the narrator finds in the conclusion?
ReplyDeleteCheck out Ellison's 1981 Introduction to _Invisible Man_, where he describes his living situation during a large part of the composition of the novel--in a borrowed apartment, in a white section of New York, where he was at home during the day (writing, coming in and out) and generally felt "invisible" as an outsider in this context. I'm sure his writing room looked a lot different from the narrator's "hole," but there are some underlying similarities in the sense of "withdrawal" from his usual circuits.
ReplyDelete