Skip to main content

The existential flaw of the Brotherhood

The Brotherhood in Invisible Man is a very strange organization. The leaders are hypocritical, corrupt, and blindsided by their beliefs, which is made increasingly obvious to the narrator and the reader throughout the book. The Committee is made up of ideologues, who, if you remember from Mr. Butler's class, are historically extremely disconnected from the realities of society. Clifton's death really brings this key flaw into the narrator's mental spotlight, and this creates more distance and tensions between the narrator and the committee.

The narrator really starts to realize the flaws in the Brotherhood's overarching generalizations after Clifton is shot. Because the narrator saw Clifton's death as very individual, he starts to see Harlem as a collection of individuals instead of a generalized mass. He really sees the men in the zoot suits for the first time, even though he has seen people like them many times before. He notes that the Brotherhood overlooks people like that, and this plants a small seed of doubt about the Brotherhood in the narrator's head.

The narrator's lack of faith in the Brotherhood intensifies when he meets with the Committee and he realizes that they don't really see him, or know who he is. He's just a pawn in their scheme, and he has been willingly playing his part. Just as quickly as the narrator once latched on to the Brotherhood, he begins to detach himself. At the end of the most recent reading, the narrator is actively countering the Brotherhood. Is the narrator's separation from the Brotherhood directly a result of Clifton's death, or would the narrator have eventually left anyway?

Comments

  1. I agree with your comparison of the Brotherhood members to idealogues. Rather than focus on the personal aspects of the people they are supposedly helping, they are driven by their own obsessive political agendas. From when the narrator was first approached by the Brotehherhood, there were red flags that jumped out to only us readers. These red flags always made me ponder the narrator's fate with the Brotherhood and even what led up to Tod Clifton's disappearance.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think the narrator would've eventually left the Brother even if Clifton hadn't died, but Clifton's death definitely sped up the process. Even before Clifton died, the narrator was already becoming a bit detached from the Brotherhood, and I'm sure there would've been various other events that would've caused division between the narrator and the Brotherhood.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I think Clifton's death was a pivotal turning point in the narrator's character development and detachment from the Brotherhood. Not only does he see the real consequences of ideology over action with the brutality of the police over something relatively unthreatening, but he also starts to put individual faces to the casualties of the movement. Because someone he knew well was a casualty, it forced him to confront the issue from two sides: from that of a grieving and mad individual and a collective movement. He eventually decides that the individual that died and the personal responsibility he has to remember Clifton matter more than the ideology of the Brotherhood. He has to take something personally and he has to feel for Clifton as an individual.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I completely agree that the narrator starts to see past the mask of the brotherhood after Clifton is shot. He realizes that people mean more than what they show externally, and begins to truly understand the concept of invisibility. He really sees the zoot suiters for the first time only after Clifton dies because now he understands that they as individuals could be anyone. They're more than just the facade of young men in funky suits.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I think that the death of Tod Clifton is such a crucial turning point during the novel. The narrator finally begins to start seeing the truth about the brotherhood. You might call this the beginning of the sequence of events which end with his retreat underground. Previously the narrator had let the brotherhood do his thinking for him, but now he is beginning to approach ideas from his own perspective.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

How Disney perpetuates voodoo stereotypes

In the opening chapters of Mumbo Jumbo , we've been introduced to Papa DaBas, a voodoo priest. In class we talked a bit about the largely negatively perception of voodoo in America. This immediately made me think of the Disney princess film, The Princess and the Frog . This movie is set in New Orleans, and follows a princess who falls in love, blah blah blah...but the villain is a voodoo-practicing witch doctor, Dr. Facilier.  I found it really interesting to look back at Dr. Facilier's character after discussing the American perception of voodoo, because Dr. Facilier is portrayed as a man of pure evil (here's a picture if you haven't seen the movie to show how creepy he is). His soul belongs to evil loas (his "friends on the other side", as he calls them), and he uses their power to achieve his greedy  goals, convincing the loas to continue working with him by feeding them the souls of innocent victims. He's manipulative and extremely powerful.  ...

Final thoughts

 Before I get into this, I want to start by pointing out that Jill was #1 on my most likely to die list, and she is the one who died. It feels wrong to congratulate myself, but I am a little bit proud. The ending was quite satisfying. It felt almost too good and peaceful for the end of such a wild and tragic novel. Nearly the entire group survived, they moved on from their ghosts of the past, and they have great resources that they can begin their Earthseed community with. I'm a little upset that Lauren is still in a relationship with Bankole, but it's good that there are so many relationships within their community as they plan for the future. The most surprising part of the ending was when Lauren discovered that Greyson, Emery, and their kids are all sharers. I was not expecting this at all, because sharing was Lauren's most unique trait. However, it does alienate her less from the rest of the group, and it makes the former slaves more united with the rest of the group. T...

'Hard-boiled': a post about egg metaphors

"It is awfully easy to be hard-boiled about everything in the daytime, but at night it is another thing." This line uttered by Jake is fascinating to me, and not only because he compares himself to a cooked egg. First of all, this is one of the few scenes where we see Jake admitting that he has any emotions - he spends the majority of the novel trying to be nonchalant and as stereotypically masculine as possible. We mentioned in class that a perk of Hemingway's bland style is that emotional breakthroughs are much more significant. We experience one of those breakthroughs here, where Jake is finally admitting that his personality and attitude is a façade that he hides behind. However, the thing I really want to talk about is the term 'hard-boiled' and why I think it's such an accurate description of Jake. So, I'm assuming we're all familiar with hard-boiled eggs. Hard shells, soft insides, cooked in pots of boiling water. By calling himself hard-boiled,...