Wright’s Critique of Hurston
In Richard Wright’s critique of Zora Neale Hurston’s Their Eyes Were Watching God, he says that her book has no meaning. I think he’s just saying that without having carefully read the book. I think the main message is that a woman is allowed to follow her dreams and do whatever she wants. I think the book’s main message’s purpose is to empower women, shown by Phoebe’s reaction to Janie’s story at the end.
Janie’s first two marriages were terrible. In her first marriage with Logan, she married him for security. It didn’t matter if she found him attractive (which she didn’t) or if she loved or even liked him (she really didn’t). Here she wasn’t allowed to pursue her dream of love. She was forced to work and there was no romance in their marriage, and these made her really upset. Her second marriage was with Jody, who she did find attractive and at first, liked. She later hated him because of how controlling he was of her. He told her how to act, what to wear, what to do, and what not to do. Janie was so restricted by Jody, and she hated him so much so that she was glad when he died. In this marriage, she still didn’t feel any love and she wasn’t able to do what she wanted.
Janie’s last marriage was with Tea Cake, and this marriage was actually a good one. Janie actually loved Tea Cake and he loved her. She also wasn’t forced to do anything. Logan made her work, but Janie enjoyed working alongside Tea Cake. Tea Cake didn’t act like Jody, he didn’t make her act a certain way to uphold a status or reputation. With Tea Cake, Janie learns to shoot, play checkers, and she actually talks to everyone. She is able to feel a sense of community. In this marriage, Janie was actually happy. She dreamed of love and she got it. She could do whatever she wanted; she was free.
Wright may have thought that Their Eyes Were Watching God had no meaning, but when you actually read carefully, you see that it is a book that empowers women. It shows women that they’re allowed to have dreams and follow them. They can marry someone for love, not security or status. Also, status doesn’t mean anything, you should do things that may seem “below you” (like fishing or shooting). A woman is allowed to be happy and confident in herself.
I totally agree with you in that Wright kind of missed the meaning of Hurston's novel. Honestly, I think that there are actually a lot of different things a reader can take from this novel and just because it is not explicitly protesting racism or another issue does not mean it has no meaning. I definitely see how the book portrays the message of empowering women. I feel like it's really nice to see that more and more novels these days are having these strong, independent women as protagonists and TEWWG is no exception. Although we see Janie as a strong woman who is belittled by her first two husbands, it was really great to see her rise back up and get to experience that freedom that she both deserves and thrives in. I also thought that racism was actually a pretty prominent, yet hidden, theme within the novel. Although Hurston doesn't really portray racism that strongly or blatantly in her novel, the reader is able to see little things here and there like Ms. Turner's outlook on lighter vs. darker skinned people or the treatment of black people after the hurricane. In my opinion, I think this "hidden" show of racism is just as powerful a depiction of a theme as Wright's protest novel, just in a different way. The hidden racism hidden literally shows how even as times progressed, there was still plenty of racism, just not as visible at first glance.
ReplyDeleteIt's maybe a question of what *kind* of meaning Wright values, and what he sees (and fails to see) in Hurston's novel. Remember that he's reviewing the book for a particular journal and a particular audience--a communist literary column that evaluates literature according to its political significance, or the degree to which it contributes to the struggle. "The struggle" for Wright clearly does not entail women's individual empowerment to define themselves and to navigate sexism and physical abuse in the context of marriage. When I read his review, I'm struck by how he doesn't seem to have paid particular attention to Janie's story--she and Tea Cake are not "minstrel" characters, whatever we think of them. It's like he's so distracted by what he sees as "minstrel" antics among the residents of Eatonville and the crowd on the muck that he doesn't even comment on her character at all. If there's a "meaning" in this novel, it certainly has something to do with Janie's story--and that's not a story that Wright is even trying to hear.
ReplyDelete