Chapter 22 begins with the narrator returning from Clifton’s
funeral to find the committee waiting for him: “When I saw them sitting in their shirtsleeves, leaning
forward, gripping their crossed knees with their hands, I wasn’t surprised. I’m
glad it’s you, I thought, this will be a business without tears” (462).
Then after describing how the committee watches him, the
narrator notes: “The smoke rose in spirals from their cigarettes as they sat
perfectly contained, waiting. So you came, after all, I thought, going over and
dropping into one of the chairs” (463).
I was struck by the narrator’s use of the word “you” outside
of direct dialogue. I don’t think he’s done this elsewhere in the book (please
correct me if I’m wrong) but here he seems to be very deliberately using it
twice in a row.
I think the first “you” is probably meant to emphasize that
the narrator is glad that the committee is in his office instead of anyone
else. The “this will be a business without tears” suggests that the narrator
expects discussion with the committee to be direct and “scientific,” in
contrast to the extreme emotion of Clifton’s funeral.
The second “you” seems more ambiguous. It could be referring
specifically to Brother Jack because he is the only brother named in the
description of the committee or it could be emphasizing the distance between
the narrator and the committee within the organization of the brotherhood.
Ellison could be using it to direct a comment at the reader.
In both cases the “you” comes before the “I thought” so it’s unclear at first
whether the narrator has slipped into the second person. The description of the
committee watching him (silently) reminds me of readers watching him.
But then what is Ellison trying to tell readers? Ellison
could be reminding readers of their own similarity to or complicity with the
committee. Maybe as the committee proceeds to erroneously judge the narrator, Ellison
is reminding readers to think critically about their own judgement of the
narrator. I’m not sure why Ellison would be emphasizing the reader's judgement
in this particular scene though. At point in the book, I think most readers are thinking of the
narrator more positively than ever before; he has just galvanized a huge portion
of Harlem and given a moving speech and he is about to stand up to the
committee.
I’m really just not sure what to think of this scene so let me
know how you guys interpret it!
It seems very Ellison to subtly include a message to the reader in the middle of a confrontational dialogue, the question is truly what is its meaning. I do agree in the sense that most readers are with the narrator more than ever, however I disagree with the message of the "you" being analyze the narrator. I shouldn't say that actually, I think rather than Ellison wanting you to analyze whether the narrator is truly growing in conscious, I think its more about watching the narrator's mental health, as I thought that in the prologue of the book the narrator was a little off the wall, and I wonder if we will see the reasons for his "lack of marbles" soon?
ReplyDeleteI feel like the use of "you" is trying to call the reader's attention to the situation and bear witness to what's about to go down, so I guess in that sense the "you" would be to the narrator. I think that the narrator might be emphasizing that the meeting is an important element to his development, and wants the reader to pay attention to what's about to go down. But then again, it is weird that this is the first time that it mentions "you". Maybe this is the point where the narrator becomes disillusioned with the Brotherhood? I'm not really sure, but there's probably some reason Ellison did this.
ReplyDeleteIt's interesting to contrast this usage of "you" with the last line of the book, which is also in second person. I agree that using the word "you" brings the reader to a heightened level of attention. I'm also curious about why in this scene. I suppose this scene is significant, as it seems the reader finally realizes the absurdity of the Brotherhood ideology (or lack thereof). Nice catch, and great blogpost!
ReplyDelete