Last week we read “Still I Rise” by Maya Angelou and while discussing it, I started thinking about how it applied to Their Eyes Were Watching God. In her poem, Angelou’s narrator is a woman who is speaking out strongly against everyone who “wants to see [her] broken.” We asked the question in class about does this apply to Janie. Overall, it seems she doesn't really. She spends most of the book finding love, or what she thinks it is, and then losing it. But then after going through all of this we see her how we are introduced to her in the prologue, a woman who walks into town with her hair down and wearing overalls, not caring what all the others sitting on the porch are saying about her. Although she is not quite at the level of the speaker in “Still I Rise,” she is on her way. Zora Neale Hurston on the other hand is very similar to the speaker. From what we learned about her in the documentary we watched, she is confident and also not afraid to pursue her career. One of my favorite quotes from her is “Sometimes, I feel discriminated against, but it does not make me angry. It merely astonishes me. How can any deny themselves the pleasure of my company? It's beyond me.”
Thinking about Janie and Hurston as strong characters reminds me of Richard Wright’s criticism. He writes that “Miss Hurston seems to have no desire whatever to move in the direction of serious fiction” and that her books willingly continue the minstrel tradition. He doesn’t like that the book is not openly a protest novel, and that it doesn’t have an idea that “lends itself to significant interpretation.” I agree with Wright that this book isn’t a protest novel. Maybe if Janie gained her confidence a little bit earlier and if she displayed that confidence in front of a white community, like the speaker in “Still I Rise,” but she doesn’t. And while Wright might not agree with that, there is literally no problem with it. Maybe Hurston didn’t want her book to be explicitly about social problems, maybe she just wanted to focus on the more romantic aspects. And that is perfectly acceptable and led to an amazing novel.
I definitely agree that wright was being unfair to describe Hurston's work as not serious fiction. It is a really important book for Women, African American writers, and African Americans living in rural Florida, even if its not a protest novel.
ReplyDeleteI also agree that their Eyes Were Watching God is not a protest novel. But I don't think that necessarily means it isn't political. I think its existence alone is pitical. The fact that Hurston chooses to take a traditionally white washed genre (love!!) and make the the main character an independent, loving, strong black woman is important and I hate that wright didn't acknowledge that.
ReplyDeleteYeah I agree, it's existence is inherently political! And like even parts of their love story is kind of political - like the fact that the white jury rules in favor of Janie is kind of a testament to their love, but in an ironic way because it comes from the people they least expect. So that message that true love transcends racial boundaries is also pretty political.
DeleteI honestly don't think Their Eyes Were Watching God is a protest novel. I think of it more as a sappy love story, kind of like Twilight with less werewolves and vampires. I know if I were forced to write about oppression everytime I wanted to write about something, it would grow tedious and uninteresting. More power to Zora Hurston!
ReplyDeleteI agree with the other commentors that Their Eyes shouldn't have to be placed under the heavy label of protest novel. But that doesn't mean that her novel is any worse as a work of art. I think it's very interesting that you drew parallels with Maya Angelou's "Still I Rise" and this poem, I didn't think about that at all. I don't know if Janie is weaker than the narrator in "Still I Rise", though. THey seem to be equal in power.
ReplyDeleteI totally agree that Their Eyes Were Watching God shouldn't have to be a protest novel. I think, as we discussed in class, that this novel is important anyway simply because is portrays African-American life. The legitimacy of her novel shouldn't depend upon it being political.
ReplyDelete