tone / voice / style
There's so much commentary to be made about the content of the chapters we've read so far, but this time I wanted to aimlessly ruminate about something tangent to all that.
I've always been getting caught up in this while reading and thinking about the book, and I suppose I want to articulate what's been bugging me throughout this whole unit.
Invisible Man is one of the weirdest books I've ever read in terms of tone, voice, and general writing style.
I feel like I'm on drugs when I read this book, but without the high. I don't even know what being on drugs is like, but I have a constant sense of being mystified, never being on top of things, never fully grasping the meaning of anything.
I keep reverting to two words when describing large swaths of writing in this book: "fever dream." Am I just projecting my stress of not effectively keeping pace with some of the readings? No. There are truly many dreamlike qualities to the writing. And many scenes have a feverish aspect to them (the battle royal, the bar / brothel, the paint factory, the factory hospital, to name a few).
The frame narrative puts almost all of the content of the story within the power of a protagonist who seems to liberally use their storyteller's license (that is, to embellish, to represent things disproportionately, to leave out grounding details willy-nilly, and essentially solidify this as a tale rather than an account of their life). The narrator's writing is flowery, floaty, and wandering, and oftentimes I can't tell if the narrator SUCKS at writing understandably, or purposefully writes cryptically. One thing is for sure, though: the narrator purposefully leaves out basic identifying details about themselves and their life story. We're almost halfway through and somehow have never learned:
- The narrator's name.
- Almost anything about their family.
- The name of the college they went to.
- Anything about their college experience other than their one, convoluted story. Nothing about classes, nothing about social life, and nothing that could really ground us in something real. Instead the college campus and scenery is portrayed with a dreamy, nostalgic quality.
- A concrete definition of invisibility.
And I fully expect to never learn any of these things, because it seems a very deliberate choice by either the narrator, or Ellison, or both. By keeping identifying details out, yes, a funky, disconnected dreamlike world is created, but perhaps also an allegorical world, one that superimposes upon the world of many individuals finding themselves in a similar position and trajectory as the narrator.
But even considering that, there is much more about this book that makes me constantly feel like I'm absorbing information without understanding it, like I'm just along for the ride.
Can you guys tease out any particular ways you found this book confusing and share any thoughts on how deliberate or coincidental those aspects might be?
I agree! Every time I feel like I understand a metaphor, ten more things happen that completely throw me off. I feel like Ellison is writing on so many different levels it's hard to keep up. I've started having to mentally prepare myself every time I see a section written in italics.
ReplyDeleteomg don't get me started on those italicized sections. >_<
DeleteAddendum: I just remembered one particular detail that felt EXACTLY like a dream to me, which was when the narrator was running from the man from the Brotherhood in chapter 13 and came to a street with nearly a dozen funeral parlors, all with neon signs and elaborate funeral cars. I can't place what it is about that moment that makes it like a dream, but it simply seems like exactly the kind of thing to happen in a fast-paced, action-filled dream - to be running from somebody (you're not sure who) and stumble across a funeral bonanza (not the right word).
ReplyDeleteIf anyone can read invisible Man and NOT be confused and mystified as to what's actually happening most of the time they're probably not ok. It's very easy to get lost in the book as it will abruptly transition from one scene to the next and so many scenes call back to other scenes, but in weird ways. It's all kind of a mess to deal with. But also likely done purposefully. With the jumbled connections between chapters, we all probably read the book a slightly different way and have various interpretations of things like what invisible means. It's mean tot kind of throw you in the deep end and have you figure out everything yourself.
ReplyDeleteI absolutely agree! Whenever anyone else was telling a story my brain just went to mush a little bit. Like, it's a story, within the story, within the frame narrative, within the novel? And then those stories were always absolutely wild, like, Trueblood? Wooh, that was a ride. I think I honestly should have just come into the novel with more of an expectation of this being the way it would be though. After all, we are reading a story by a crazy man who fell into a hole in the middle of a race riot and then just decided to stay there, hanging up over a thousand light bulbs and and writing a novel contemplating his own existence and how nobody will ever understand him. I don't think "weird' can even start to describe that.
ReplyDeleteThis is such a good way of explaining it! I've also felt like this through the novel - kind of lost, almost understanding things on the most basic level but knowing there's more connections and metaphors and meanings underneath. All the different moving aspects make me wonder if it was even possible for Ellison to have a fully fleshed out plan for every single little part of every event that happens in the book. I also agree that not giving the narrator many traditionally necessary details might be a way that Ellison is trying to broaden the story and connect it to people who might be experiencing similar things, if somewhat less outwardly insane than Invisible Man.
ReplyDelete