A more compelling story than Native Son has not been written in the 20th century by an American writer. That is not to say that Richard Wright created a novel free of flaws, but that he wrote the first novel that successfully told the most painful and unvarnished truth about American social and class relations. As Irving Howe asserted in 1963, "The day Native Son appeared, American culture was changed forever. It made impossible a repetition of the old lies [and] brought out into the open, as no one ever had before, the hatred, fear and violence that have crippled and may yet destroy our culture."

Other books had focused on the experience of growing up black in America--including Wright's own highly successful Uncle Tom's Children, a collection of five stories that focused on the victimization of blacks who transgressed the code of racial segregation. But they suffered from what he saw as a kind of lyrical idealism, setting up sympathetic black characters in oppressive situations and evoking the reader's pity. In Native Son, Wright was aiming at something more. In Bigger, he created a character so damaged by racism and poverty, with dreams so perverted, and with human sensibilities so eroded, that he has no claim on the reader's compassion:

"I didn't want to kill," Bigger shouted. "But what I killed for, I am! It must've been pretty deep in me to make me kill! I must have felt it awful hard to murder.... What I killed for must've been good!" Bigger's voice was full of frenzied anguish. "It must have been good! When a man kills, it's for something... I didn't know I was really alive in this world until I felt things hard enough to kill for 'em. It's the truth..."

Wright's genius was that, in preventing us from feeling pity for Bigger, he forced us to confront the hopelessness, misery, and injustice of the society that gave birth to him. --Andrew Himes

Jump to concurrent topic "Discussion Questions for Native Son"
 

 Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (1 of 15), Read 30 times 
         
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      Ann Davey davey@tconl.com 
 Date: 
      Friday, March 01, 2002 12:59 PM 


March 1 is the official start of the discussion of Native
Son by Richard Wright. Please post your notes here.

I'm still reading, but hope to join in soon.

Ann

 
 

 Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (2 of 15), Read 27 times 
         
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      Kay Dugan okaychatt@yahoo.com 
 Date: 
      Friday, March 01, 2002 02:25 PM 


It's been several months since I read this book. 

One thing that struck me was the constant references to
color and the ingenious, subtle way Wright used them to
emphasize his story. White appeared most frequently,
followed by its contrast with black and the coal (black)
hot red of that ungodly furnace, otherwise known as
Bigger's conscience. Ultimately, though, the contrast is
always with white.

Everywhere Bigger turned, there was white. White
tablecloths, white snow, white moon. Every aspect of
Bigger was determined by his relationship to the white
people. Even his white hot rage was created by his
interaction with the white world. He never once felt an
impulse that wasn't somehow dictated by the white
world that surrounded him. I found that overwhelmingly
sad.

Bigger's story had an impact on me. Until I read it, I
thought I had a reasonable understanding of what it
would be like to grow up black in a white dominated
world. I was wrong, despite all the conversations with
friends and despite all the documentaries I've seen and
novels I've read. 

What I admired about Wright's work was how he pulled
me into Bigger's mind and made his actions seem
reasonable - at least at the time. When I would close
the book, I would be shocked at how much empathy I
felt for a murderer and dismemberer. I felt as if I was
Bigger, not just someone reading a story about him. 

I would love to know how this novel was originally
received. Did its readers see themselves, and was the
lesson taken to heart? How much flak accompanied its
publishing? I know parts were edited out. Does anyone
know what Wright's take on that was?

K


 
 

 Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (3 of 15), Read 26 times 
         
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      R Bavetta rbavetta@prodigy.net 
 Date: 
      Friday, March 01, 2002 03:00 PM 


It must be 30 years since I read this book, but your note
brought it back to me in an emotional way, Kay. That
contrast between black and white, that sympathy for a
killer...

Ruth

"Writing is like prostitution. First you do it for the love of it,
then you do it for a few friends, then you do it for money."
Moliere 

 
 

 Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (4 of 15), Read 25 times 
         
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      Kay Dugan okaychatt@yahoo.com 
 Date: 
      Saturday, March 02, 2002 10:06 AM 


I think it will continue to resonate emotionally for me too,
Ruth. In addition to the power of Bigger's story, the
novel issued all sorts of ethical challenges for me. 

One was my stance on "Thou shalt not kill." I tend
toward holding each of us to the choices we make -
good or bad. I'm big on accepting responsibility for what
we do - no matter the circumstances. Having a bad
childhood is not an excuse. Poverty is not an excuse. "I
just couldn't stop myself" is not an excuse. Nor is, "He
made me do it."

Don't get me wrong. I know all those situations are
factors, but ultimately, I believe we have a choice, no
matter how difficult the situation.

But I can tell you, I would not want to sit on Bigger's jury
with the insight I gained from NATIVE SON. From his
perspective, he truly did not feel he had any other
options. It takes a gifted author to make me feel that.

That was a major quandary as I read this novel. Did
anyone else find themselves trying to resolve conflicting
personal ethical stances?

K


 
 

 Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (5 of 15), Read 25 times 
         
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      Beej Connor connorva@mindspring.com 
 Date: 
      Saturday, March 02, 2002 05:04 PM 


Wasn't the thing with the rat in the beginning of the
book just a shocking, absolutely chilling, symbolism for
Bigger, himself, and the events that transpired within
this novel? 

As a said before, this book had me spellbound. I didn't
agree with some of Wright's philosophy, but wow, what
a punch this book packed.


When did this story take place? In the 30's? I didn't
realize women were not permitted to be part of a jury as
late as the 30's! Incredible! When did women get the
right to be on jury duty?


Beej

 
 

 Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (6 of 15), Read 25 times 
         
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      Kay Dugan okaychatt@yahoo.com 
 Date: 
      Sunday, March 03, 2002 08:35 AM 


Beej-

What part of Wright's philosophy did you disagree with?

K


 
 

 Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (7 of 15), Read 22 times 
         
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      Ann Davey davey@tconl.com 
 Date: 
      Sunday, March 03, 2002 12:25 PM 


Beej and Kay,
I finished Native Son last night. I agree with you both
that it is a very powerful story. I admire Wright for
choosing a protagonist who has almost no redeeming
qualities and then forcing his readers to recognize this
man's basic humanity. 

Make no mistake about it -- Bigger Thomas is a vessel of
rage and frustration who is programmed to hurt other
people. Mary and Bessie just happened to get into his
way early on. If they had escaped, he almost certainly
would have killed someone else later.

Bigger is so damaged that he has no feeling for anyone
other than himself, including his own family and friends.
He never feels remorse for his actions - an unprovoked
attack on a friend, the inadvertent killing of a white
woman, and the planned murder of a girlfriend after he
forces sex on her. He feels no remorse because he feels
he has no choice. He hurts others to protect himself.
Paradoxically, these acts are the only thing that makes
him feel like he is in control of his life.

So how can the reader feel sympathy for such a man?
Wright argues that a racist society is responsible for
creating stunted and twisted human beings like Bigger
Thomas because it gives them no hope and treats them
as less than human. By showing how disgustingly racist
the white power structure is, he demonstrates that
Bigger Thomas is also a victim.

To a large extent, this book is polemical. The sections
which explain the complicated tangle of emotions which
motivated Bigger Thomas succeeded for me. This was
difficult for Wright because he is dealing with a character
who is so inarticulate that he has almost no
understanding of self. However, Wright made me
understand the extent to which fear and shame can
warp and destroy a human being. 

Other parts of the book, especially Max's long courtroom
defense of Bigger at the end were not so successful. I
felt this speech was so long and disjointed that it
detracted from the dramatic impact of the story. How did
the rest of you feel about this?

All and all, however, I will never forget Bigger Thomas.
He is certainly one of the most alive and interesting
characters I have met in literature in a long, long time.

Ann

 
 

 Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (8 of 15), Read 24 times 
         
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      Beej Connor connorva@mindspring.com 
 Date: 
      Sunday, March 03, 2002 01:30 PM 


Kay, I tend to bristle a bit when any author blatantly
uses a book as a soapbox for personal philosophies.


Anne, that entire defense speech at the end irked me to
no end. Tho I understand the point he was making, I felt
uncomfortable with the idea that Bigger had any
justification for his actions (an explanation, yes, but not
a justification.) Granted, Mary's death was accidental,
but Bessie's was premeditated, and yet Wright makes
his beliefs very clear, that even tho the premeditated
murder of Bessie was a far worse crime than the
accidental killing of Mary, Bessie's death would be less
important than Mary's, in the eyes of the law, simply on
the basis of race. Granted, I am not really
knowledgeable as to the laws of that era, and how they
would relate to the murder of a Black person, especially
by another Black person, but I have a difficult time
believing it wouldn't carry any legal consequences.


Two of the more altruistic characters were members of
the communist party. Of course I'm aware of all that
celebrity communists went thru during the following
McCarthy era, but I do not believe the prejudice, fear
and frenzy aimed toward this group can nearly compare
with what the Blacks in our country went through.
Wright was a member of the Communist Party at the
time he wrote NS. Apparently he re-thought his stand,
because he later left the party. But, the legacy of his
former beliefs were made immortal because of this book.

I think I do understand why these murders made Bigger
feel free for the first time. In the words of Kris
Kristofferson, Freedom's just another word for nothing left
to lose. Bigger had crossed the line of no return and had
nothing more he could lose, so from that point forward,
consequences were a moot issue. 


Beej

 
 

 Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (9 of 15), Read 23 times 
         
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      Ann Davey davey@tconl.com 
 Date: 
      Sunday, March 03, 2002 02:47 PM 


Beej,
Good point that Bessie's murder was by far the more
chilling crime. I think that Bigger could easily have been
convicted of that alone if the police had cared enough to
investigate the murder of a poor black woman. Her
murder certainly would not have attracted any attention
in the press. I think the point was that white society
didn't much care about black on black crime, but they
became absolutely rabid if they felt a white person were
being threatened.

Wasn't it interesting that the whites were certain that
Bigger had raped Mary even though there was not a
shred of evidence that this had happened? This hysteria
about the sexual violation of white women has cropped
up a lot in American history and many black men have
suffered horribly because of it. In reality, it was almost
always the black women who were being sexually
exploited by white men. I wonder what the psychological
source of this white hysteria was. Any ideas? 

Wright didn't make me like Bigger Thomas, but he made
me understand him and people like him a little. I think
that was a major accomplishment. He could have taken
the easy way out and written about a case of very
obvious legal injustice, like Gaines's A LESSON BEFORE
DYING, but he purposely picked a protagonist who was
both dangerous and unlikable. I wonder if he was trying
to shake up white society and scare it a little. And I
wonder if he succeeded.

I find his attraction to Communism in the 1930's very
understandable. It was a time of great social suffering
and the lure of an organization which preached racial
equality must have been very strong.
Ann

 
 

 Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (10 of 15), Read 28 times 
         
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      Beej Connor connorva@mindspring.com 
 Date: 
      Sunday, March 03, 2002 03:15 PM 


I think the wealthy whites in this novel, had a terrible
fear of Blacks, born out of guilt for such horrendous
treatment in the name of 'Making Money,' that the
easiest way to justify this fear was to blame it on the
potential danger Blacks posed to the 'helpless' white
women. It allowed them to keep their unjust practices
under an emotional barrel. And that way, they could
continue, with a clear conscious, to scam the Blacks and
prosper financially. 
I suppose this is all part of what Bigger's attorney was
attempting to say, in his summation. 
And, what a laugh to charge these people exorbitant
rents for substandard housing and then appease
feelings of guilt by donating ping pong tables to black
community boy's clubs. 
Beej

 
 

 Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (11 of 15), Read 14 times 
         
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      S. Bohinka bohinka@riconnect.com 
 Date: 
      Sunday, March 03, 2002 11:42 PM 


I'm lagging behind in my reading. I do kinda know the
story and so I agree that the scene with the rat is a
precursor of things to come.

I saw the PBS show on Ralph Ellison a couple weeks ago
and I have to admit that I haven't read either him or
Richard Wright. The program contrasted them in an
interesting way. 
(Ellison wrote The Invisible Man)

They described Wright and many other of his successors
as writing "protest literature". Whereas Ellison didn't fit
into this category (and was criticized by Wright and
others because of it.) Ellison felt as though he was
writing more about people like Wright who actually
achieved a lot more in their lives than the characters
that Wright wrote about.

I found this an interesting concept to contemplate while
reading Native Son. Why did Wright choose Bigger and
his particular story?

BTW, did any of you see the discussion questions for
Native Son posted with the book on Amazon? When I
get a chance I can copy them over here.

And for the person asking about Black Boy. It's out
individually in a paperback in the restored version and is
also in the collection Later Works by Richard Wright in
the restored version.

Bo

 
 

 Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (12 of 15), Read 10 times 
         
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      Kay Dugan okaychatt@yahoo.com 
 Date: 
      Monday, March 04, 2002 05:48 AM 


Beej-

I also tend to bristle when an author lectures to me. For
some reason, until the trial, I did not feel that way with
NATIVE SON. Perhaps that was because each step
Bigger took seemed logical. Wright had me living in
Bigger's shoes, seeing the world as he saw it.

I was shocked that I could have any inkling of
understanding of such an unlikeable and enraged
person like Bigger. Remember, he did have the love of
his family and Bessie, but was not able to make that
enough. In fact, that seemed to make him even angrier.
Why was that?

Would Bigger have been a better person if he had better
opportunities? Or was he inherently a misfit? How much
of his basic nature was due to his heritage and how
much was just born with him? I kept wondering if an
education would have made the difference. It would
have given him a channel for his rage and ambition. 

I agree. The trial was definitely a lecture of the obvious.

K


 
 

 Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (13 of 15), Read 9 times 
         
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      Sherry Keller shkell@starband.net 
 Date: 
      Monday, March 04, 2002 06:55 AM 


Ann, I agree with you about Mr. Max's summation. I don't
usually read fast, but I forced myself through that at
lightning speed. It seemed to take up an inordinate
amount of space. None of what he said was particularly
astounding (maybe it was in the '40's) but when he said
the murders were an act of "creation" I think he went
way too far. I just don't get it, no matter how much I
empathize with Bigger and his situation. 

As far as the book as a whole, I was spell-bound, with
reservations. I think Wright cheated a little bit. In order
to put Bigger in as much peril as possible, I think he was
illogical in several instances. The most obvious one, to
me, was the murder itself. Picture yourself in Bigger's
place. You don't want to be discovered with a drunk
white girl, her blind mother shows up (It also seems to
me that Wright made her blind solely for this plot
device). If I were the "intruder", I would want the
mother to hear the girl, because not hearing anything
out of her would be more suspicious. And smothering
someone probably isn't as quiet an activity (especially to
a blind person) as portrayed in the book. Wouldn't there
be sounds of gasping and struggling? I had a hard time
with that. It seemed like a plot device more than
something that would naturally occur. 

The next illogical thing to me was: why have a press
conference in a basement where the furnace is? This
seemed highly unlikely, and done purely for dramatic
purposes so that Bigger could get discovered. 

I guess I've just read too many mystery stories, where
I'm always trying to figure things out. 

As I said before, I was spellbound by the book (except
after he was caught -- it lost its drive and was too
political after that), but I could see the author pulling
strings too much for me to call it an unqualified success.
Having said that, however, I think it was a brave book. It
reads much later than the forties to me. The language is
clear and concise and I did empathize with Bigger.

Sherry


 Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (14 of 15), Read 10 times 
         
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      Beej Connor connorva@mindspring.com 
 Date: 
      Monday, March 04, 2002 08:07 AM 


Sherry, the constant scenes in the basement puzzled
me, too. Then, when I went back and read Rampersad's
intro, and the first line of that dealt with the symbolism
of the 'sound of the alarm clock that opens Native Son'
as a wake up call to America about the reality of race
relations, I began to think of the basement as a place
not to be taken literally at all. It's entirely symbolism, I
think.
Then, it made more sense to me. 

So very much in this book is symbolic..the rat in the
beginning of the book, the basement, Mary's inability, as
a sympathizer, to make a difference with being heard,
the mother's blindness, even the chute Bessie tries to
climb out from..that it just boggles my mind trying to see
all Wright is saying.



Beej


 Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (15 of 15), Read 1 times 
         
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      Ann Davey davey@tconl.com 
 Date: 
      Monday, March 04, 2002 09:53 AM 


Beej,
I'm sure you're right about the blindness being a symbol
because late in the book Bigger looks at everyone he
knows and thinks how blind they are.

Sherry, now that you mention the plot devices I can see
how obvious they are. I have to admit, however, that I
was so wrapped up in the story that I didn't notice when
I was actually reading the book.

Kay, you asked an interesting question about what
Bigger would have been like if he had grown up in a less
racist society. Wright attributed his rage and
destructiveness to the racist society that nurtured him.
While not denying society's contribution, I think that
more personal factors are just as important in molding
individuals like Bigger Thomas. For example, I wondered
what influence the never mentioned father might have
had.

Why do you suppose Wright called him "Bigger?" Was it
irony?

Bo, I tried to wade through Ellison's The Invisible Man but
I don't think I ever finished it. I think its social
significance was more important than its literary merit.

Ann 

 

 Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (16 of 29), Read 32
      times  
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      Robert Armstrong rla@nac.net 
 Date: 
      Monday, March 04, 2002 10:14 AM 


Despite various flaws ( I agree that Max's speech is
too long and unwieldy) I still feel that this is an
eye-opening novel that has changed my perception.
Like Ann, I will not forget Bigger Thomas, nor the
experience of looking at the world from his eyes. What
a gutsy choice to present such an unsympathetic
protagonist; and then to pull it off sympathetically!
How did he do that? I suppose it comes from the depth
of Wright's own sympathy for Bigger (rhymes with
"nigger") Thomas and his life predicament. The central
achievement of the novel was the degree to which I
became aware of and sympathetic to the black
predicament beyond my own liberal viewpoint. Being
gay I find parallels there but after reading NATIVE SON
I am more aware of how much I don't know what it's
like to be a black American and never will. It's a start to
realize what you don't know. 

At times the novel flew and I felt raw and mesmerized.
At other times I wearied of the crime drama formula
with which we have become so familiar. There were
echoes of Dostoevsky's CRIME AND PUNISHMENT,
which predates it, and Truman Capote's IN COLD
BLOOD and Alan Paton's CRY, THE BELOVED COUNTRY
which were possibly influenced by it. I've also read the
first three of Maya Angelou's autobiography series and
am in the middle of the fourth. I'm interested to find
out how they compare to Wright's autobiography
BLACK BOY. 

Robt

 
 

 Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (17 of 29), Read 29
      times  
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      Sherri Kendrick sheval@hotmail.com 
 Date: 
      Monday, March 04, 2002 11:42 AM 


I didn't reread this, having read it twice, once in high
school, and then later.

I don't recall many specifics. But I have been left with a
sense of it being a powerful story. I feel sorry for
Bigger, despite all the horrendous things that he does.
Like him, I have the feeling that so much was out of his
control. Even the communists were using him for their
cause and not really trying to help him. 

I feel that Wright was a strong writer, for his times,
and always wanted to read something else, but have
been a bit scared because his images are strong.

Sherri
Not all who wander are lost - Tolkien

 
 

 Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (18 of 29), Read 23
      times, 2 File Attachments  
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      Karen Slongwhite bookworm@greeneland.com 
 Date: 
      Monday, March 04, 2002 09:02 PM 


Someone on this thread or the thread from prior to the
official discussion wondered how this book was
received at the time. I own Books of the Century: A
Hundred Years of Authors, Ideas and Literature which is
a collection of the New York Times Book Review
published at the time 100 works of literature were
published. Attached are two documents -- one in text
format and one in Microsoft Word format -- of the
review for Native Son.

Karen

      NATIVE SON.DOC (29KB) 

      NATIVE SON.TXT (7KB) 

 
 

 Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (19 of 29), Read 26
      times  
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      Sherry Keller shkell@starband.net 
 Date: 
      Tuesday, March 05, 2002 07:25 AM 


Karen, thanks for that review. I think it is quite fair and
even-handed and has stood the test of time. 

Beej, on the subject of symbolism, I agree that there is
a whole lot of symbolism in NS, but I think in a novel
that seems as realistic as this one is, it would be even
more powerful if the symbols served the logic of the
story. I was pulled out of the story several times by
wondering how something could have happened the
way it did. Another example brought up in the
Introduction, was the scene in Bigger's jail cell where
everybody in the book shows up. I remember
wondering at the time, what kind of cell he was in.
Wright acknowledged that it was unlikely for everyone
to be there simultaneously, but he did it on purpose for
the emotional impact. I'm not sure that I think this is
good writing. I found it confusing. Even is this had
been an allegory, the symbolism works better when it
follows the internal logic of the story. 

Sherry

 
 

 Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (20 of 29), Read 28
      times  
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      Beej Connor connorva@mindspring.com 
 Date: 
      Tuesday, March 05, 2002 08:08 AM 


Sherry, that cell scenerio struck me as completely
unrealistic, too.
And you're right about the symbolism not logically
fitting in. The more I think about it, the less impressed
I become with the book.


Beej

 
 

 Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (21 of 29), Read 26
      times  
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      Ann Davey davey@tconl.com 
 Date: 
      Tuesday, March 05, 2002 11:03 AM 


Some of the plotting was clumsy, but this book has
such great emotional power that I am still very
impressed with it.

Thanks for the review, Karen.

Ann

 
 

 Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (22 of 29), Read 32
      times  
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      R Bavetta rbavetta@prodigy.net 
 Date: 
      Tuesday, March 05, 2002 11:09 AM 


From my reading so many years ago I remember little
of the details that are bothering people. I think
everyone has hit on what I do remember. How that
book made me empathize with an ignorant,
bull-headed murderer. That's an accomplishment, even
though the book is flawed.


Ruth

"Writing is like prostitution. First you do it for the love of
it, then you do it for a few friends, then you do it for
money." Moliere 

 
 

 Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (23 of 29), Read 26
      times  
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      Sherry Keller shkell@starband.net 
 Date: 
      Wednesday, March 06, 2002 06:32 AM 


I think it's an impressive book, too. Beej, I sure didn't
mean to take away from your enjoyment of it (not
exactly the right word for NS). I wish Steve would come
by and post why he thinks this book is not as good as
Invisible Man, which he alluded to in another thread.
I've read IM twice, and the second time, I wasn't as
impressed by it. This is the first time for NS and I know
I would have liked it much better in my youth. I
wouldn't have been as unforgiving about the plot
devices (I probably wouldn't have noticed them), and
when I was young, I saw things in black and white (no
pun intended, really). Today I seem to live in shades of
gray. 

I know some of you probably cringed at the blatant
racism in the newspaper accounts and in the language
of the prosecutor. But having grown up in the deep
south, I know everyday speech was just as
vituperative as that (and worse). It made for one-sided
characters in the book, but people really did talk like
that -- unfortunately. (My grandfather was one of
them). So trying to grow up non-racist was an act of
rebellion for me. I was fortunate that my parents did
not spout that drivel, so I had a buffer, but just about
everyone else I knew was as racist as they came. So
that part of the book rang true for me.

Sherry

 
 

 Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (24 of 29), Read 30
      times  
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      Robert Armstrong rla@nac.net 
 Date: 
      Wednesday, March 06, 2002 10:26 AM 


The timing of the publication of NATIVE SON adds to its
important and stature, for sure, even though some of
the novel doesn't age well. Reading the beginning
portions of BLACK BOY I see that Wright's upbringing
mirrors Bigger's upbringing and Wright's act of defiance
was to write this book instead of act out violently,
something he easily could have done. BLACK BOY
contains strong, violent images right from the start. But
the more I think about NS, the more I think it is a really
important work, one that is illuminating to its readers,
certainly to me. 

The choice of "Bigger Thomas" as the protagonist's
name seems perfect: a blend of bigger-- as in trying to
become bigger and intimidating in order to become a
man because he felt, and was made to feel, smaller,
insignificant-- along with rhyming with the odious
epithet "nigger" which is an association almost
branded into him given his setting and circumstances.
"Thomas" reminds me of Uncle Tom, a type that Bigger
is trying to expand beyond, hence, Bigger Thomas. 

Injustice is the villain of the novel. Although Max's
rambling plea to spare Bigger's life lacks a coherent
center, it still felt right to me in that it was perhaps
impossible for Max to articulate the degree of
outrageous social cruelty that precipitated Bigger's
rage and action. There was a touch of rightness in
Max's failure to say the right thing or to perfectly
summarize America's shame. There was exasperation
in Max's fulsome philosophizing, but given his audience
and the public at large, how could there not be? It
would be a rare man who would maintain his
equanimity. Wright's courage to blast out with this
book makes it noble and indispensable to our social
evolution. 

Robt

 
 

 Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (25 of 29), Read 25
      times  
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      Ee Lin Kuan eelin@althor.fsnet.co.uk 
 Date: 
      Wednesday, March 06, 2002 03:38 PM 


Hi everyone,

This is one of the few times I've actually managed to
finish a book on time
with the CR discussion and the discussion is enjoyable.
This story didn't
wholly grab me but parts of it did. I found myself being
absorbed in some
parts but skimming quite a bit of it too.

Kay, in one of your notes you said that Bigger had the
love of his family
and Bessie, but was not able to make that enough. I'm
not sure if Bigger
really had the love of his family. In the beginning, I had
a good bit of
sympathy for Bigger since his mum and sister seemed
to be picking on him all
the time. Only Buddy seemed to worship him. And
although Bessie seemed to
love Bigger, he didn't love her in return. So, I think that
consideration
for her feelings wouldn't have influenced his decisions.

The part of the story where Bigger first met Jan and
Mary, and when they
tried to show him that they were not racist and treated
him as an equal felt
real to me. They seemed so young and idealistic and
perhaps bent on
convincing themselves that they were supporters of
equality for all despite
race. But somehow, because of their lack of experience
and understanding,
they just didn't seem genuine to Bigger and he sensed
that and felt that
they were toying with him.

This story made me think that it could be applied to a
wider context than
racial relations in the US. It could well be relevant to
the violent
conflict between Israel and Palestine, such as the
thoughts expressed in the
story about the divisive line between races and forcing
people to stay on
their respective sides of the line resulting in no other
option but
violence. That only with violence did they feel that they
were in control of
their own lives. The situation is more complex of course
but it just made me
stop and think for awhile.

Ee Lin

 
 

 Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (26 of 29), Read 20
      times  
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      Ann Davey davey@tconl.com 
 Date: 
      Wednesday, March 06, 2002 05:35 PM 


Robt,
Thanks for that excellent analysis of Bigger's name.

Ee Lin,
Good to hear from you. I agree that the parts
describing Jan and Mary's treatment of Bigger, and his
negative reaction to it, were some of the strongest
parts of the book. Jan and Mary were hopelessly naive,
weren't they? Still, I did not anticipate either the
strength of Bigger's resentment or the fear and
confusion that their behavior evoked. Wright made me
understand that, from Bigger's point of view, their
attempt to ignore the normal standards of white/black
interaction were more upsetting than outright white
hostility. It was like Jan and Mary were pretending the
rules didn't exist, when Bigger knew all too well how
tightly they circumscribed his own life.

Good point about Bigger's relationship with his family.
He was the kind of character only a mother could love.
By the time we met him at least, I don't think he was
really capable of loving anyone else. He was too afraid
and too twisted inside. I was very interested in the
extent to which fear motivated his behavior.

Ann

 
 

 Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (27 of 29), Read 22
      times  
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      Kay Dugan okaychatt@yahoo.com 
 Date: 
      Wednesday, March 06, 2002 06:06 PM 


Ee Lin-

You're so right about Bigger's violence being the only
means he had to direct his own life. Yet even that
violence was dictated by the white world. He had no
recourse in his own.

Would any of us have trusted Jan and Mary if we were
in Bigger's shoes? As a reader, I wondered about them
myself. I think they considered themselves liberal and
well-intentioned. Yet that whole scene in the
restaurant had a ring of falsehood for me. They were
playing a game, to a degree. 

Mary was hanging out with Bigger in defiance of her
father. Jan wanted Bigger's allegiance for the
Communist cause. Those were their ultimate motives, I
think. Neither seemed to see Bigger as an individual.
He represented a group of people to them.

I'd forgotten how the mother and sister picked on
Bigger. It seems the only person that ever really
touched him was his brother.

Robert -

Loved the analysis of Bigger's name. 

K


 
 

 Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (28 of 29), Read 15
      times  
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      Robert Armstrong rla@nac.net 
 Date: 
      Wednesday, March 06, 2002 09:59 PM 


Ann and Kay,

Thanks! Regarding Jan and Mary: I was surprised by
Bigger's reaction to them and learned a lot from it. Your
comments about them are excellent:

Ann: "I did not anticipate either the strength of
Bigger's resentment or the fear and confusion that [Jan
and Mary's] behavior evoked. Wright made me
understand that, from Bigger's point of view, [Jan and
Mary's] attempt to ignore the normal standards of
white/black interaction were more upsetting than
outright white hostility. It was like Jan and Mary were
pretending the rules didn't exist, when Bigger knew all
too well how tightly they circumscribed his own life."

Kay: "I think [Jan and Mary] considered themselves
liberal and well-intentioned. Yet that whole scene in
the restaurant had a ring of falsehood for me. They
were playing a game, to a degree. Mary was hanging
out with Bigger in defiance of her father. Jan wanted
Bigger's allegiance for the Communist cause. Those
were their ultimate motives, I think. Neither seemed to
see Bigger as an individual. He represented a group of
people to them."

The parallel that I see between NS and Alan Paton's
CRY, THE BELOVED COUNTRY is that Paton has a
well-intentioned white man murdered by a black man in
racially divided South Africa. Both authors start out
with unsympathetic black crime and by the end of their
stories they have the white reader hold the injustice of
the system as culpable. Ahh, I'm indulging in
speculation of authorial intent and also I'm assuming
how readers will respond; I should rework my last
comment but I'll let it stand for now. 

Robt


 Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (29 of 29), Read 12
      times  
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      Sherry Keller shkell@starband.net 
 Date: 
      Thursday, March 07, 2002 06:17 AM 


I was surprised by Bigger's reaction to Jan and Mary's
overture's, too. But I'm sure that's because I'm looking
at the situation from my white, friendly, accepting
viewpoint. Even though I think Jan and Mary were
naively well-intentioned, their overtures were
patronizing to Bigger. They were blind to his feelings of
discomfort and wanted to force him out of his "role."
They should at least have asked him if he wanted to
participate in the "show" at dinner, and not spring it on
him like they did. They assumed, in their youthful
exuberant rebellion, that Bigger would be happy to be
treated that way. They had no idea how it would make
him feel. This part of the book was a big revelation to
me, too. One of the more valuable lessons. 

Sherry

 

 Topic: 
     March Discussion - Native Son (30 of 34), Read 19 times  
 Conf: 
     Classics Corner 
 From: 
     Robert Armstrong rla@nac.net 
 Date: 
     Saturday, March 09, 2002 10:11 AM 


On the back cover of my restored edition of NS one of the quotes
says: "This new edition gives us a NS in which the key line in the
key scene is restored to the great good fortune of American
letters." Does anyone know what that line is?

Robt

 
 

 Topic: 
     March Discussion - Native Son (31 of 34), Read 16 times  
 Conf: 
     Classics Corner 
 From: 
     Kay Dugan okaychatt@yahoo.com 
 Date: 
     Saturday, March 09, 2002 06:23 PM 


Not sure, Robt, but I wonder if it's in the scene where Bigger
smothers and dismembers. I remember reading that many of
those lines were edited out of the original publication, due to the
sexual innuendo. 

K


 
 

 Topic: 
     March Discussion - Native Son (32 of 34), Read 20 times  
 Conf: 
     Classics Corner 
 From: 
     Beej Connor connorva@mindspring.com 
 Date: 
     Saturday, March 09, 2002 10:07 PM 


I sympathized with Bigger right up until he murdered Bessie.
Mary's death was an accident. I could understand why he
destroyed the body. I could even understand why he attempted to
blackmail the Daltons. And I can most certainly understand why
Baldwin calls NS a protest novel, but the minute Bigger kill Bessie,
Wright lost me, at least as far as any psychobabble defense went.

Wright HAD to have included the murder of that young Black
woman for a reason, but I just can't fathom his purpose. I don't
believe she was merely a literary tool to show how differently a
black woman's murder is treated from a white woman's. Wright
damages the reader's perspective of Bigger too much for the
answer to be that simple.
Beej

 
 

 Topic: 
     March Discussion - Native Son (33 of 34), Read 19 times  
 Conf: 
     Classics Corner 
 From: 
     Kay Dugan okaychatt@yahoo.com 
 Date: 
     Sunday, March 10, 2002 07:56 AM 


Beej-

I wondered about that, too. Again, it was as if Bigger couldn't help
himself. The only way he had ever felt control in his life was to
take another's. It was the only way he could feel alive.

If that's the case, then my vote goes to Bigger being one sick
puppy from the get-go. Bessie was an opportunity for him to gain
something good in his life, and he chose not to take it. In fact, he
chose to destroy it. At that point, I wondered if he wasn't just one
mean son of a bitch. 

I questioned early on in the discussion how much Bigger's plight
was due to nurture and how much to nature. Of course, it's both,
but in Bessie's case, I think the answer is "nature."

If a person is inclined toward meanness, then a bad situation will
simply feed that.

I don't think Bigger changed by the end of the novel. He did begin
to glean the option of reaching out and connecting to others.
However, for me, it seemed he was realizing a missed opportunity
rather than a real internal change. Bigger never felt a
responsibility to anyone other than himself.

I would vote to convict.

K



 Topic: 
     March Discussion - Native Son (34 of 34), Read 17 times  
 Conf: 
     Classics Corner 
 From: 
     Ann Davey davey@tconl.com 
 Date: 
     Sunday, March 10, 2002 11:16 AM 


Beej,
Interesting question. I think that Bessie's murder was integral to
Wright's vision of Bigger Thomas. Bigger was not just some some
poor kid caught up in a outrageously biased legal system. Bigger
was bad - Wright knew it and he wanted to make that very clear
to the reader. He could kill Bessie without a qualm because she
was just someone he used to satisfy his own needs. He never
really cared about her, just as he never cared about his family or
his friends. He was too twisted and damaged inside to form any
real bond with another human being.

Wright would say that the system was responsible for creating
people like Bigger Thomas. Bigger acts out the inarticulate rage
that so many others merely feel. He represents a danger both to
his own community and the larger white community. I think part
of Wright's purpose was to shake people up and scare them into
making some changes.

Ann

 

 Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (35 of 52), Read 29 times 
         
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      Beej Connor connorva@mindspring.com 
 Date: 
      Monday, March 11, 2002 09:36 PM 


Thanks, Ann. So, basically, Wright is saying the effects of
this dehumanizing treatment went deeper than to
generate rage, but actually, in some cases, abetted the
development of an amorality? This makes sense to me,
that Wright would be saying the very fiber of personalities
were being (negatively) altered as opposed to 'merely'
effecting emotions.


Beej

 
 

 Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (36 of 52), Read 23 times 
         
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      Ann Davey davey@tconl.com 
 Date: 
      Tuesday, March 12, 2002 01:09 PM 


I agree with that, Beej.
Ann

 
 

 Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (37 of 52), Read 29 times, 1
      File Attachment  
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      Robert Armstrong rla@nac.net 
 Date: 
      Wednesday, March 13, 2002 01:22 AM 


Recently I purchased (inexpensively) at a local auction a
box lot of correspondence and memorabilia including a
letter from Carl Van Vechten. After some Googling I have
discovered that Van Vechten was a writer, music critic and
photographer who, among other achievements, had a
passion for photographing many of the great black writers,
actors, artists, and musicians of his day (photos circa
1932-1964.) I'm attaching a Van Vechten photograph from
the Library of Congress collection of Richard Wright (1939.)


Robt

      RICHARD WRIGHT BY CARL VAN VECHTEN.JPG (18KB) 
      Richard Wright 

 
 

 Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (38 of 52), Read 21 times 
         
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      Joe Barreiro barreiro4@attbi.com 
 Date: 
      Wednesday, March 13, 2002 04:40 AM 


Has anyone here seen either of the filmed versions of
Native Son? I have not, but from what I have read the
first, released in 1950 and featuring a middle-aged Wright
portraying Bigger, was embarrassingly amateurish. The
1986 film looks like it would be much better, with Oprah
Winfrey, Carroll Baker, Geraldine Page, Matt Dillon and
Elizabeth McGovern in featured roles. I haven't seen either
film available for rental at Blockbuster or Netflix, though
both are available for sale in VHS video format. 

 
 

 Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (39 of 52), Read 20 times 
         
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      Sherry Keller shkell@starband.net 
 Date: 
      Wednesday, March 13, 2002 07:05 AM 


Robt, that photograph was on the paperback copy of NS
that I borrowed from the library or at least it looks just like
it in angle and expression. I've returned the book, so I
can't look it up. 

Sherry

 
 

 Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (40 of 52), Read 20 times, 1
      File Attachment  
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      Robert Armstrong rla@nac.net 
 Date: 
      Wednesday, March 13, 2002 09:20 AM 


Joe,

I've not seen either film. I'm attaching another Carl Van
Vechten photograph of Canada Lee (1941) playing Bigger
Thomas in the stage production of NATIVE SON. 

Sherry,

The photograph on the back of my paperback edition of NS
is similar, too, but is a different photo.

Robt

      CANADA LEE BY VAN VECHTEN.JPG (16KB) 
      Canada Lee 

 
 

 Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (41 of 52), Read 23 times 
         
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      R Bavetta rbavetta@prodigy.net 
 Date: 
      Wednesday, March 13, 2002 12:22 PM 


That's sure not my mental picture of Bigger. 

Ruth

"Everywhere I go I'm asked if I think the university stifles
writers. My opinion is that they don't stifle enough of them."
Flannery O'Connor 

 
 

 Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (42 of 52), Read 23 times 
         
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      Robert Armstrong rla@nac.net 
 Date: 
      Wednesday, March 13, 2002 09:48 PM 


Did you picture Bigger bigger?

 
 

 Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (43 of 52), Read 18 times 
         
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      R Bavetta rbavetta@prodigy.net 
 Date: 
      Wednesday, March 13, 2002 10:12 PM 


Guhroaaaaaan. Well, actually, wider. Stocky and scowling.

Ruth

"Everywhere I go I'm asked if I think the university stifles
writers. My opinion is that they don't stifle enough of them."
Flannery O'Connor 

 
 

 Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (44 of 52), Read 22 times 
         
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      Beej Connor connorva@mindspring.com 
 Date: 
      Wednesday, March 13, 2002 11:16 PM 


Oh, my gosh. Look what I just found. Yes, it's O.J. Simpson.



God, that sends chills down my spine.


Beej

 
 

 Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (45 of 52), Read 23 times 
         
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      R Bavetta rbavetta@prodigy.net 
 Date: 
      Thursday, March 14, 2002 12:26 AM 


I.......... think........... I............. am.............. going............
to............... ............ ............. .................. ........barf...

Ruth

"Everywhere I go I'm asked if I think the university stifles
writers. My opinion is that they don't stifle enough of them."
Flannery O'Connor 

 
 

 Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (46 of 52), Read 21 times 
         
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      Sherry Keller shkell@starband.net 
 Date: 
      Thursday, March 14, 2002 06:48 AM 


What was this an issue of, Beej? 

Sherry

 
 

 Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (47 of 52), Read 22 times 
         
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      Kay Dugan okaychatt@yahoo.com 
 Date: 
      Thursday, March 14, 2002 07:34 AM 


Sorry. Don't buy it. Simpson was privileged and wealthy,
with all sorts of positive international recognition. He was a
wife beater and I think he killed Nicole and Goldman
because he thought she was having an affair. No
comparison.

K


 
 

 Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (48 of 52), Read 29 times 
         
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      Beej Connor connorva@mindspring.com 
 Date: 
      Thursday, March 14, 2002 07:51 AM 


Sherry, This was from an e-magazine once called
'Meanderings' and now called 'Gravity.'

Kay, I agree with you, but these folks are comparing OJ's
youth to Bigger's and basically trying to use the same line
of defense as Bigger's attorney.

Check THIS out!:

http://www.newsavanna.com/meanderings/me205/me20504.html


Ruth, barf is right. Pretty disgusting to see this same line of
crap applied to a real case, isn't it? 

Beej

 
 

 Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (49 of 52), Read 13 times 
         
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      R Bavetta rbavetta@prodigy.net 
 Date: 
      Thursday, March 14, 2002 11:55 AM 


It's not that it's connected to a real case that barfs me,
Beej. It's that the only way OJ's situation was comparable
to Bigger's is that they were both black. 

Ruth

"Everywhere I go I'm asked if I think the university stifles
writers. My opinion is that they don't stifle enough of them."
Flannery O'Connor 

 
 

 Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (50 of 52), Read 13 times 
         
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      Sherry Keller shkell@starband.net 
 Date: 
      Thursday, March 14, 2002 12:02 PM 


I must have missed the part in the book where Bigger
marries Mary, becomes an international celebrity and runs
through the airport. But then I'm often not a careful
reader.

Sherry

 
 

 Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (51 of 52), Read 18 times 
         
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      Beej Connor connorva@mindspring.com 
 Date: 
      Thursday, March 14, 2002 12:09 PM 


Not to mention OJ's innocence and his devotion to
spending the entire remainder of his life hunting down the
REAL killer!

I'll bet there are a whole lot of people who believe the
Bigger/OJ comparison is a valid one. (rest assured, I'm not
one of 'em.) And, with that, I'm keeping my big mouth shut
before I get myself in a passel of trouble. Again. 
Beej


 Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (52 of 52), Read 11 times 
         
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      Ann Davey davey@tconl.com 
 Date: 
      Thursday, March 14, 2002 11:12 PM 


Interesting----

Well, first of all, I agree with Ruth that physically Bigger
didn't look like any of these pictures. They're too pretty. 

Leaving aside all of O.J.'s advantages and his crimes, his
personality is completely opposite that of Bigger. O.J. is glib
and loves to hear himself talk. Bigger was almost
completely inarticulate and not nearly so smart. 

Ann


 Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (56 of 59), Read 14 times 
         
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      Mary Anne Papale mapreads@hotmail.com 
 Date: 
      Sunday, March 24, 2002 03:56 PM 


Sorry to join this discussion so late, but that's the way
things have been recently.

I have to say that I am rather amazed with this book:
Amazed that it could conjure up such intense emotions in
me. When I read about Mary's murder, I had to set the
book aside for a day or so. Then, when I went back, I
could hardly put the book down.
I felt that the murders of Mary and Bessie were similar,
actually. In both cases, Bigger murdered to keep the
woman quiet. In both cases, Bigger didn't just stop at
murder, but brutally disposed of the bodies. This second
act, in both cases, got to me more than the first because
it seemed so extreme. Why didn't Wright have Bigger
stop with the acts of smothering or beating with a brick?
The emotional pitch of this "piling on" the brutality is
immense.

I agree that Bigger didn't intentionally murder Mary, but
he had plenty of anger welling up inside of him during
that evening. The way they make him sit in front with
them. The scene at the restaurant. Then when they
return to the Dalton's, she passes out and Bigger has to
carry her upstairs. This is all above and beyond what a
driver should be expected to do.

Once Bigger has murdered Mary, the hateful bigotry is
unleashed. There is nothing to stop the torrent of white
rage. Wright's depiction of the white reaction was brilliant
expose of prevailing thought at the time.

One of the racist views portrayed was that Bigger must
have had help because blacks were too stupid to
cunningly cover up such a murder. I think the courtroom
speech Max made was a device to remind the reader that
the author is black, and he's quite smart, thank you. That
speech is the most intellectual thing in the book.

O this learning, what a thing it is! - W. Shakespeare
MAP


 Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (57 of 59), Read 12 times 
         
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      Kay Dugan okaychatt@yahoo.com 
 Date: 
      Sunday, March 24, 2002 06:40 PM 


MAP-

I hadn't considered that Wright was trying to point out
his own intelligence. If so, was that really necessary? For
me, his brilliance shines in the text of the story. Perhaps
that's another reason why the courtroom scene doesn't
sit well. It's the only part of the book where I felt
preached at. 

Wright had already made his point, I think.

K



 Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (58 of 59), Read 15 times 
         
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      R Bavetta rbavetta@prodigy.net 
 Date: 
      Sunday, March 24, 2002 06:58 PM 


It's been years since I read this, so my comments may be
a tad off base here, but everyone's reaction to the
"preachiness" of the courtroom scene puts me in mind of
the way much good poetry works. 

It works by putting the stuff out there with little
comment, and then letting the reader bridge the gap to
make the conclusion for himself. The image that always
comes to my mind is that synaptical gap between the
hands of God and Adam in Michelangelo's painting on the
Sistine ceiling.

In novels, as in poetry, there is writer's work and there is
reader's work. When Wright uses the voice of the
defense lawyer to tell us what the book is about, he has
jumped the fence into our territory as readers, and we
feel intruded upon.

Ruth

"Everywhere I go I'm asked if I think the university stifles
writers. My opinion is that they don't stifle enough of them."
Flannery O'Connor 


 Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (59 of 59), Read 15 times 
         
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      Kay Dugan okaychatt@yahoo.com 
 Date: 
      Sunday, March 24, 2002 07:03 PM 


I like that analogy, Ruth. After all, if the reader hasn't
gotten the point by the courtroom scene, nothing is going
to penetrate that dense of a mind.

K



Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (60 of 60), Read 14 times 
         
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      Mary Anne Papale mapreads@hotmail.com 
 Date: 
      Tuesday, March 26, 2002 01:28 PM 


Kay, I didn't mean to say that Wright used the courtroom
speech to wave his own intelligence. I do believe there's
a difference between "intellectual" and "intelligent", and I
agree that Wright had proven the latter before that in the
book.

O this learning, what a thing it is! - W. Shakespeare
MAP

  

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS FOR NATIVE SON:

 

 Topic: 
     Discussion Questions for Native Son (1 of 10), Read 43 times  
 Conf: 
     Classics Corner 
 From: 
     S. Bohinka bohinka@riconnect.com 
 Date: 
     Thursday, March 07, 2002 05:51 PM 


Hi,

I went back to Amazon and pulled this off their site in case anyone
was interested. 

I thought there were some good thoughts here.

Bo

_____

About This Book

Impoverished, angry, and poorly educated, Bigger Thomas drifts
around the seedy South Side of Chicago until he finds work
chauffeuring a wealthy, liberal white family named the Daltons. On
his first evening of work, Bigger drives the Daltons' college-age
daughter Mary and her Communist boyfriend Jan Erlone around
town while the two of them get drunk. Bigger carries the
intoxicated Mary to her bedroom and becomes sexually aroused
while putting her to bed; when Mrs. Dalton, who is blind, comes to
the door, Bigger silences Mary by covering her face with a pillow
and inadvertently smothers her to death. He burns her corpse in
the furnace and desperately tries to destroy evidence of the crime
and frame Erlone for it, but when a reporter discovers Mary's
bones in the furnace, the police quickly close in on Bigger and
take him to jail. The final section of the book recounts Bigger's
trial. His lawyer, a Jewish-American Communist named Boris Max,
pleads that Bigger is not responsible for his violent actions
because social forces drove him to crime, and he urges the judge
to spare Bigger the death penalty. The state's prosecutor
responds that Bigger is a cold-hearted, depraved criminal and
must die as the law requires. The judge rules for the prosecution
and sentences Bigger to death. In the final scene, Max attempts to
console Bigger, but Bigger rebuffs him. What I killed for, I am!
Bigger insists, and Max leaves him to his fate. 

Discussion Questions 

Wright writes of Bigger Thomas: These were the rhythms of his
life: indifference and violence; periods of abstract brooding and
periods of intense desire; moments of silence and moments of
anger--like water ebbing and flowing from the tug of a far-away,
invisible force. Does Wright intend us to relate to Bigger as a
human being--or has he deliberately made him an unconscious
embodiment of oppressive social and political forces? Is there
anything admirable about Bigger? Does he change by the end of
the book? 

James Baldwin, an early protege of Wright's, later attacked the
older writer for his self-righteousness and reliance on stereotypes,
especially in the character of Bigger. In his famous essay
Everybody's Protest Novel, Baldwin compared Bigger to Harriet
Beecher Stowe's Uncle Tom and dismissed Native Son as protest
fiction with a naked and simplistic political agenda. Do you agree? 

When Bigger stands confronted with his family in jail, he thinks to
himself that they ought to be glad that he was a murderer: Had he
not taken fully upon himself the crime of being black? Talk about
Bigger as a victim and sacrificial figure. If Wright wanted us to pity
Bigger, why did he portray him as so brutal? 

Bigger repeatedly says to himself that the accidental killing holds
the hidden meaning of his life: He had murdered and had created
a new life for himself. It was something that was all his own, and it
was the first time in his life he had anything that others could not
take from him. Discuss the disturbing concept of killing as a
supreme and meaningful act. Is this Wright's own view of the
killing--or are we meant to see it only as Bigger's internal
conclusion? 

When first confronted with the accusation that he raped Mary,
Bigger thinks: rape was not what one did to women. Rape was
what one felt when one's back was against a wall and one had to
strike out. Discuss the group's reactions to this controversial
passage. Does this redefinition of rape reveal an insensitivity on
Wright's part to women and the oppressions that they experience
in American society? 

How dated does this book seem in its depiction of racial hatred
and guilt? Have we as a society moved beyond the rage and
hostility that Wright depicts between blacks and whites? Or are we
still living in a culture that could produce a figure like Bigger
Thomas? 


 Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (53 of 55), Read 19 times 
         
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      Robert Armstrong rla@nac.net 
 Date: 
      Monday, March 18, 2002 04:17 PM 


BLACK BOY by Richard Wright is a great read throughout;
a sustained, taut, urgent, mesmerizing tale of courage
against all odds. Wright's achievement was to reveal with
clarity his evolving perspective as a black man first in the
racially divided south (1908-1927) and then the
ghettoized north (1927-1936) during the Great
Depression. It is a perfect companion piece to Eudora
Welty's autobiographical ONE WRITER'S BEGINNINGS as
Wright and Welty both grew up in the south (they were
one year apart in age and both lived in Jackson,
Mississippi for awhile.) Both black and white perspectives
gained my sympathy and revealed the races to be
co-inhabiting two different planets. Part two of BLACK BOY
chronicles Wright's enchantment and rejection of
Communism. The whole book was a revelation to me and
I've never been educated in a more entertaining manner. I
can't recommend this book enough.

Robt


 Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (54 of 55), Read 18 times 
         
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      Robert Armstrong rla@nac.net 
 Date: 
      Monday, March 18, 2002 06:36 PM 


I have to amend my comment about how entertaining
BLACK BOY is. Engrossing, vivid, and swiftly moving is a
better way to describe it. Most of the autobiography is
focused on overcoming injustice and this necessarily
brings to light sorrow and suffering. However, Wright
transcends this through his life's story and his artistic
vision. There is in all this a great victory.

Robt


 Topic: 
      March Discussion - Native Son (55 of 55), Read 16 times 
         
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      Ann Davey davey@tconl.com 
 Date: 
      Monday, March 18, 2002 07:45 PM 


Thanks for the review, Robt. I definitely hope to read this
in the future.
Ann


 
 

 Topic: 
     Discussion Questions for Native Son (2 of 10), Read 28 times  
 Conf: 
     Classics Corner 
 From: 
     Ann Davey davey@tconl.com 
 Date: 
     Thursday, March 07, 2002 11:01 PM 


Bo,
Those are much better questions than those contained in the
average reading guide. Thanks for posting them.

I think we have to be careful not to confuse the character's
feelings with the author's. I would certainly not confuse Bigger's
feeling that the murders had given his life meaning with Wright's
personal beliefs regarding killing. Nor did I think that Bigger's
definition of rape meant that Wright lacked sensitivity to women. 

Did Bigger change at all? That's an interesting question and I
would really like to hear what others have to say about that. At
the end when he was with Max, he seemed to be reaching out of
himself to make some kind of human connection, but I don't think
he really succeeded.

Are we living in a society that could still create a Bigger Thomas? I
wouldn't have been nearly as interested in Bigger if I didn't think
that there are still people around like him today who feel the same
kind of fear and inarticulate rage. Look at some of the criminal
types who seem to totally lack empathy with their victims. Is
"society" and racial injustice responsible for their twisted psyches?
Maybe in part, but I think individual experience is a lot more
significant.

 
 

 Topic: 
     Discussion Questions for Native Son (3 of 10), Read 36 times  
 Conf: 
     Classics Corner 
 From: 
     Sherry Keller shkell@starband.net 
 Date: 
     Friday, March 08, 2002 06:54 AM 


"Bigger repeatedly says to himself that the accidental killing holds
the hidden meaning of his life: He had murdered and had created
a new life for himself. It was something that was all his own, and it
was the first time in his life he had anything that others could not
take from him. Discuss the disturbing concept of killing as a
supreme and meaningful act. Is this Wright's own view of the
killing--or are we meant to see it only as Bigger's internal
conclusion? "

This is the part of the book I had the hardest time with (besides
the plot devices). Maybe I'm just too far removed from being able
to feel Bigger's situation, but this felt like a kind of romanticizing
of murder. I can understand how the act of murder could serve to
wake up a soul half-dead with boredom and fear, but to place any
kind of positive spin on it rubbed me the wrong way. However, it
didn't keep me from being sad for Bigger, and hope (without
reason) that he wouldn't get the death penalty.
I agree with Ann, though, that I don't think this was Wright's view
of murder. I wonder if this attitude is what made Baldwin call the
book a "protest novel." 

Sherry

 
 

 Topic: 
     Discussion Questions for Native Son (4 of 10), Read 28 times  
 Conf: 
     Classics Corner 
 From: 
     Robert Armstrong rla@nac.net 
 Date: 
     Friday, March 08, 2002 11:21 AM 


Discussion question:
"James Baldwin, an early protege of Wright's, later attacked the
older writer for his self-righteousness and reliance on stereotypes,
especially in the character of Bigger. In his famous essay
Everybody's Protest Novel, Baldwin compared Bigger to Harriet
Beecher Stowe's Uncle Tom and dismissed Native Son as protest
fiction with a naked and simplistic political agenda. Do you agree?"


Without having read Baldwin's essay it sounds like he overstates a
point which has some merit. NATIVE SON is definitely a protest
novel. So are ABSALOM! ABSALOM! and BLOOD MERIDIAN.
There's nothing wrong with a protest novel, per se. I agree with
Baldwin that NS's agenda is naked but I give Wright more credit
than to call his protagonist stereotypical and his writing simplistic.
Bigger exemplifies a type that existed and still exists and he yet
comes across as a unique identity, too. Stereotype denotes a lack
of individuality. I'm inclined to see Bigger as more of a prototype
of black rage and impulse. Perhaps there is a bit of semantic
gaming here-- stereotype vs. prototype-- but the distinction is in
whether or not one regards the character to be successful and
Bigger lives in my imagination too firmly for me to dismiss him as
a stereotype. Also, the fact that we are discussing NS 62 years
after it was published speaks for the power of the character. 

Wright's ability to let me into Bigger's mind and motivations with
sympathy despite his crimes is well beyond simplistic. However, I
can't say that Bigger is as fully realized a character as ABSALOM!
ABSALOM!'s Colonel Sutpen or BLOOD MERIDIAN's judge Holden.
Also, I haven't read James Baldwin's GO TELL IT ON THE
MOUNTAIN to see how well he fared with his character
development. 

Robt

 
 

 Topic: 
     Discussion Questions for Native Son (5 of 10), Read 23 times  
 Conf: 
     Classics Corner 
 From: 
     Ann Davey davey@tconl.com 
 Date: 
     Friday, March 08, 2002 03:41 PM 


Sherry,
I think there are still plenty of Bigger Thomases involved in gangs
in the inner cities. When I read about the violence they inflict on
innocent bystanders and on rival gang members, it is often
difficult for me to understand their brutality. 

I think the protagonist of NATIVE SON provides us some insight
into their psyches. Hurting or murdering another human being
apparently provides a wonderful sense of power to some people,
especially those like Bigger who are trying to act the total tough
guy but who actually often feel confused and afraid inside. Also, I
think they share with Bigger this feeling that their life has already
been mapped out for them. It will almost certainly lead to death
and destruction, so they might as well get the show on the road.
Ann

 
 

 Topic: 
     Discussion Questions for Native Son (6 of 10), Read 24 times  
 Conf: 
     Classics Corner 
 From: 
     R Bavetta rbavetta@prodigy.net 
 Date: 
     Friday, March 08, 2002 03:52 PM 


Ann, I'm impressed by the insight of your last remarks about gang
members. Makes me both feel sorry for them and be scared of
them .

Ruth

"Writing is like prostitution. First you do it for the love of it, then
you do it for a few friends, then you do it for money." Moliere 

 
 

 Topic: 
     Discussion Questions for Native Son (7 of 10), Read 19 times  
 Conf: 
     Classics Corner 
 From: 
     Sherry Keller shkell@starband.net 
 Date: 
     Saturday, March 09, 2002 06:43 AM 


"Might as well get the show on the road." Wow. How fatalistic. This
is a simplistic question, I know, but how would you compare the
"chances" of boys in gangs today and boys in ghettos in Bigger's
day?

Sherry

 
 

 Topic: 
     Discussion Questions for Native Son (8 of 10), Read 18 times  
 Conf: 
     Classics Corner 
 From: 
     Ann Davey davey@tconl.com 
 Date: 
     Saturday, March 09, 2002 11:14 AM 


Sherry,
Many years ago I spent 4 miserable years as a case worker for
the welfare department. This experience left me with a permanent
sense of cynicism and pessimism.

How is the situation different today than it was in Bigger's time?
From a black person's point of view I'm sure that we still have a
considerable ways to go, but I believe that our country has made
huge strides in overcoming racial discrimination. A kid from the
ghetto in our own day theoretically has a world of opportunities
open to him compared to a boy living in the 1930's, and many are
succeeding wonderfully. 

However, there are still kids trapped in a culture of poverty who
feel just as cornered and full of rage as Bigger Thomas. These are
the kids whose mothers started having them at 14 or 15, kids who
have parents on crack or other drugs, kids who are not sure who
their fathers are or whose siblings all have different fathers. Some
of them get involved in gangs and take it for granted that most of
their buddies will end up dead or in prison at an early age. Maybe
they assume they'll be the exception. 

The causes of their despair and anger might be a bit different, but
I think their feelings are very similar to Bigger's.

 
 

 Topic: 
     Discussion Questions for Native Son (9 of 10), Read 17 times  
 Conf: 
     Classics Corner 
 From: 
     Sherry Keller shkell@starband.net 
 Date: 
     Saturday, March 09, 2002 04:46 PM 


I can see why a job like that could make you cynical, Ann. I agree
that the social climate is different now than in the thirties, just not
different enough. The element of Native Son that I think is
important and will probably be what keeps it in the "classic"
category is Wright's ability to give readers (even middle-age white
women) an inkling what it feels like to be Bigger. It is powerful
stuff.

Sherry


 Topic: 
     Discussion Questions for Native Son (10 of 10), Read 17 times  
 Conf: 
     Classics Corner 
 From: 
     Robert Armstrong rla@nac.net 
 Date: 
     Saturday, March 09, 2002 06:02 PM 


The first half of BLACK BOY is even better than Maya Angelou's I
KNOW WHY THE CAGED BIRD SINGS. I find it even more powerful
than NATIVE SON. It is an engrossing, swiftly moving memoir of a
brilliant mind being mistaken as a mule. I rank it with the best
autobiographies I have read.

Robt, not sure which thread to post this in


 Topic: 
      Discussion Questions for Native Son (11 of 12), Read 17
      times  
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      Ee Lin Kuan eelin@althor.fsnet.co.uk 
 Date: 
      Monday, March 11, 2002 05:10 PM 


Sherry, 

Despite the brutal acts, Wright's writing was so good that
it made it easy for me to understand how these acts could
make Bigger feel empowered. It was the only thing that he
had ever done for himself that was outside the rules
dictated to him for the whole of his life. For once, he'd
broken free.

Ee Lin


 Topic: 
      Discussion Questions for Native Son (12 of 12), Read 14
      times  
 Conf: 
      Classics Corner 
 From: 
      Sherry Keller shkell@starband.net 
 Date: 
      Tuesday, March 12, 2002 06:56 AM 


It's just sad that that's the only way he had to break free.
I suppose no other act would have had as much power
and force behind it to create enough force to enable the
break. How tragic.

Sherry