In the excerpts we read from "Between Laughter and Tears," Richard Wright puts forth a very severe critique of Zora Neale Hurston's novel Their Eyes Were Watching God with respect to its content and failure to address the pressing issues of the times. Wright's main point of disapproval towards the novel lies in his belief that it does nothing to challenge the issues of racism and white supremacy in the early 20th century, but rather has the reverse effect and actually bolsters white misconceptions of the simplicity of black life. Wright's claims do have some merit considering the context of blackface during the times. Blackface minstrelsy was a popular occurrence at the time, as white people would mockingly dress up as blacks to disparage them, and Wright believes that Hurston's depictions of black life throughout the novel do nothing to go against this. Hurston places a great focus on getting across the nuances of everyday black life by describing the actions of Janie and Tea Cake in detail throughout the novel. Because she devotes so much of her novel to this desire to get across the interactions between black characters themselves, rather than how black characters in her novel interact with racism and white characters, we can see in part how Wright's frustrations with the novel are justified. While several of the claims that Wright makes throughout the excerpts are valid considering the grand scheme of things, we also must understand Hurston's purpose in writing her novel, as it seems as though Hurston had no intention of writing Wright's ideal protest novel in the first place.
Wright is extremely harsh in his comments directed towards Their Eyes Were Watching God, but it's important to realize that from his perspective, several of his claims are justified. Interestingly, Wright actually acknowledges Hurston's writing style at times during his critique, saying things such as "Miss Hurston can write," to show that his primary concern is with the specific things Hurston chooses to write about in her novel. This small acknowledgement furthers his argument in that it places the focus of his criticism on the content of the novel rather than Hurston herself. Wright's first issue with the novel is in its inability to address any topic that he considers significant during the times, saying that "neither of the two novels has a basic idea or theme that lends itself to significant interpretation. Miss Hurston seems to have no desire whatever to move in the direction of serious ficiton..." Racism and white supremacy were the two connected areas of major controversy in the first half of the 20th century, and Wright is correct in stating that Hurston seems to have no desire whatsoever to combat these issues. This can be seen by the utter lack of significant white characters throughout the novel. Hurston actually exhibits racism in her novel, but not in the traditional sense, instead through Mrs. Turner's unsettling remarks about race and skin color. The fact that Hurston doesn't just not address a major issue in her novel, but instead mentions racism without condemning it, provides fuel of Wright in his argument of the futility of the novel to get a significant point across. While it is true that Wright can't really fault Hurston for copying his style of protest novel, his main point lies in the unintended result of Their Eyes Were Watching God on a predominantly white audience. Wright states that "Miss Hurston voluntarily continues in her novel the tradition which was forced upon the Negro in the theatre, that is, the minstrel technique that makes the "white folks" laugh. Her characters eat and laugh and cry and work and kill." Wright believes that through Hurston's seemingly harmless depictions of the essence of daily black life, she inadvertently supports blackface minstrelsy and the racist beliefs of supremacy that white people use to discriminate against blacks. While it may seem as thought Hurston's depictions of Janie and Tea Cake laughing, eating, and especially playing in the muck are harmless, in Wright's eyes these descriptions simply provide racist whites with more evidence to establish a feeling of superiority over the supposedly "simplistic" blacks.
We can see why Wright is so emphatic in his critique on Hurston's novel specifically, but we also must consider Hurston's side in her own purpose in writing the novel. Hurston surely didn't write the novel to support white racist beliefs, as Wright suggests her novel did, but likely took her novel as an opportunity to delve deep into the beauty in the seemingly mundane aspects of Janie's life. Hurston didn't write a protest novel because she had no desire to write a protest novel, and we should not hold Their Eyes Were Watching God to a standard such as Wright's Native Son when the two novels were written for completely different reasons. Wright's claims are valid in the novel's unforeseen impact on a wider white audience, but we must also give Hurston some freedom in shaping her novel however she desires, in this case, as one woman's story of love rather than a shock-inducing protest novel.
I think you did a really good job of summarizing the argument while taking both sides into account. While I do see where Wright is coming from, I think that some of his arguments are not useful because Hurston didn't necessarily intend this book to be a protest novel. We also have to consider that many important parts of Hurston's book speak to feminism and come from the female point of view. As such, many things she wrote about wouldn't apply to Wright.
ReplyDeleteI think you explain Wright's argument very well. Hurston did not write the book as a protest novel, bus instead as an anthropologically accurate depiction of a culture that is often hidden from white eyes. Minstrelsy is based upon a similar culture, so her writing may resemble that, not because she used minstrelsy to appeal to a white audience, but because they were both inspired by the same thing. I think the novel also separates the characters from white supremacy by showing that there can be order, control, and even hierarchy within a community that has no white residents.
ReplyDeleteNobody can argue that Wright didn't do his research or back up his points, but that doesn't mean anybody necessarily has to agree with him. He does make good points though; Hurston wrote an immensely popular novel that has stood the test of time (so far), and yet decided not to include any overt discussions of racism, which is Wright's main focal point in Native Son. But I wouldn't say that Hurston doesn't make a commentary at all, instead the tepid and safe depiction of culture makes it accessible to all audiences, then bringing to light a revealing image of real African-American life. She aimed to make an anthropological and factual novel; Wright wanted a protest, and that difference in goals shines through in their respective novels.
ReplyDelete