a jug of ancestors
A JUG OF ANCESTORS
It is
tempting to agree with Arnold Rampersad (Ralph Ellison: A Biography, page 403)
the essay "The World and the
Jug" is perhaps Ralph Ellison's "richest apologia for his life as a
writer who happened to be black, as well as for the Negro culture that had made
him….As such, I also defends all American writing that seeks to move beyond
ethnicity and toward national or universal values." Rampersad's clever
choice of words renders the temptation less enthralling. Ellison's apologia is written in a defensive
posture , a position which Lance Jeffers clearly described a few decades
ago. Read his seminal essay "The
Death of the Defensive Posture: Toward Grandeur in Afro-American
Literature" in The Black Seventies (Boston: Porter Sargent
Publisher, 1970), edited by Floyd B. Barbour.
One part of Ellison's essay was published in The New Leader, December 9, 1963.
Why fifty-five years ago did he "happen to be black"? And as if their minds have never been
energized and dignified by a reading of
Langston Hughes's classic "The Negro Artist and the Racial Mountain,"
why do some writers in 2018 "happen
to be black"? Do Bernard Malamud,
Martha Nussbaum, and Norman Mailer "happen to be Jewish"? After all, they deserve an equal opportunity
to exist in the twilight zone of "happen."
In 2018
it is convenient to believe we are all "made" of cultural
circumstances, which include racial and ethnic identity positioning. Those circumstances are at once American and
something that evades a name. When we
think of American writers, we ought to note Amy Tan is made of Chinese culture
and Rudolfo Anaya is made of a culture best described as Spanish imperialism. We are made of histories we accept or
reject. And Ellison was "made"
of cultures that he accepted with remarkable qualifications. Thus, while being "made of" is
logical, it is as ideologically problematic as "happen to be."
We need
to make use of brutal honesty. A writer
does not need to move beyond ethnicity to be universal. Those who yet sleep with ignorance need to be
informed that William Shakespeare did not move beyond his Renaissance
Englishness or British identity in a vain effort to be national and universal.
Unfortunately, at this late date in the histories of North America and the
United States, we find literary discourse afflicts writers with the AIDS or
cancer of identities and incarcerates them in jails of double, triple, or
quadruple consciousness as it urges them to "move beyond" or
transcend themselves. Such crap is out to lunch.
Ellison's
rich apology illuminates the dreadful,
existential functioning of race in American life and culture(s). The language of his essay, like the language
of Rampersad's critical judgment, exposes how unlikely it is that we shall be
free of inter-ethnic and intra-ethnic contradictions in a imagined future.
In
responding to Irving Howe's essay "Black Boys and Native Sons"
(1963), Ellison rejected the Hebraic presumption that informed Howe's attempt
to name the criteria for Negro creative writing, the permissible boundaries. Howe thought Richard Wright was the ideal
American "black boy" he could pit against James Baldwin and Ralph
Ellison. (Can you imagine the outrage
that would greet a 2018 essay entitled "Jewish Girls and Zionist
Daughters"? Would it not occasion a massive barrage of anti-defamation
bomb? ) Howe's essay belonged to the
declining leftism and ascending neo-liberalism of Hebrews who might check
"white" on a United States census form. From the perspectives of Americans married to
white supremacy, people of Howe's ethnicity are at best "honorary
whites." The sooner they admit as
much, the better. Howe's micro-aggressiveness
(speaking of a boy when we should have spoken of a man), whether intended or
accidental, still haunts all levels of discourses in our nation. It forces us ponder which writers are
"passing" for what in American literature and to think about the
absurd price some of them anxiously pay to be universal. It provides a justification for vigorously
readjusting the languages of engagement.
Ellison,
as far as I'm concerned, is still paying from the lower frequencies of his
grave for asserting his right to be an individual who happened to be an
American literary icon in full equality with Saul Bellow. Ellison chiseled his fate in a passage that
was pointedly l addressed to Howe ------
Let me end with a
personal note: Dear Irving, I have no objections to being placed beside Richard
Wright in any estimation which is based not upon the irremediable ground of our
common racial identity, but upon the quality of our achievements as writers.
…….
Consult the
text! I sought out Wright because I had
read Eliot, Pound, Gertrude Stein and Hemingway, and as early as 1940 Wright
viewed me as a potential rival --- partially, it is true, because he feared I
would allow myself to be used against by political manipulators who were not
Negro and who envied and hated him. But
perhaps you will understand when I say he did not influence me if I point out
that while one can do nothing about choosing one's relatives, one can, as
artist, choose one's "ancestors."
Wright was, in this sense, a "relative", Hemingway an
"ancestor." Langston Hughes,
whose work I knew in grade school and whom I knew before I knew Wright, was a
"relative"; Eliot, whom I was to meet only many years later, and
Malraux and Dostoevksy and Faulkner, were "ancestors" ---if you
please or don't please.
"The World and the Jug." The Collected Essays of Ralph Ellison (New York: The Modern
Library, 1995), edited by John F. Callahan. Page 185.
It
pleases me, as I consider where we are variously located in 2018, to honor the prevarication as well as a truth
in Ellison's message to Howe. Wright did
influence him along lines sketched out by Harold Bloom in The Anxiety of Influence, but he chose to project and represent himself as a quintessential American. The systemic
nature of royal ethnic battles in the USA is immortalized in the message. Let the rainbow tribes of humanity attend
however they will to the message. From
the vantage of now, of all that assaults us now, I am at peace with saying that
black writers ( who choose to construct themselves as black and know what is in
the jug of ancestors) can come down from the mountain Langston Hughes
envisioned. They can make a gift of new
commandments to American people who dare to think, like Irving Howe, that they have transcendent historical identity and color.
Black writers can freely donate
to Americans who insist they have no color, especially literary scholars and
critics, the best advice about moving beyond humanity into the digitized
communities of Hell! In that sense, they
can truly be universal.
Jerry W. Ward, Jr. January 27, 2018
Comments
Post a Comment