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

Will the Party lose steam?

In terms of optimistic book passages, I can't say this one is at the top of my list. Basically what we learned from chapters III-V of Part Three is that the Party will rule the world for all of eternity, and there is no situation in which they will not succeed. Winston protests when O'Brien tells him this, arguing that the Party will self-destruct at some point, or at least some spiritual force in the universe will prevent the eternal rule of the Party. However, O'Brien just mocks Winston. O'Brien makes a very convincing case for the Party, but there is one potential loophole that could topple the Party - decreasing devotion to the cause.  In revolutions, the most passionate generation is the one that actually revolts (obviously). In 1984 , that is the group that is currently running the Party. However, as authoritarian regimes pass down through the generations, this revolutionary fervor dies down, and those in power either loosen their grip enough to destabilize themse...

The Curse of the Cubs

I wrote my final project about a person who embodies the Cubs' 108-year World Series drought. My story starts with the Cubs winning the 1908 World Series, and skips around to a few significant moments in the main character's life before ending with the 2016 World Series. Here's a few important things to know about the Cubs and baseball before you start reading: The World Series is a best-of-seven series, so you have to win 4 games to win To get to the World Series, teams have to win a different best-of-seven series, called either the National League Championship Series (NLCS) or the American League Championship Series (ALCS). The Cubs play in the National League, so they have to win the NLCS to advance The Cubs won the World Series in 1907 and 1908 and appeared in a few more after that, but didn't appear in a World Series from 1945-2016 The infamous Bartman Incident occurred when a Cubs fan (Steve Bartman) deflected a foul ball out of reach of Cubs outfielder Mois...

Isolating the variable: setting in The Plague

Today in class, we talked a lot about how Camus establishes the setting for The Plague . To be honest, a lot of the first section of this book blended together for me - the middle-class French men with unmemorable names, the rats (and then humans) gruesomely dying in the streets, the conversations among medical professionals - many of the finer details are difficult for me to recall. However, the description of Oran stuck with me. The narrator describes one of the blandest and ugliest towns I have ever imagined, with not very nice humans living in it.  At first, I thought it was strange that Camus had selected such a boring setting for his book. Then I realized how intentional it was, and how important. Camus is using the story of the plague as a medium through which to analyze fascism and the Nazis. That is his primary focus, and in order to fully focus on the plague he needs to eliminate all distractions (e.g. a noteworthy setting). He is isolating the variable by placing it in a...