Malcolm X and A Raisin in the Sun

We did not have time to discuss Pan-Africanism in class yesterday, so I wanted to raise the topic up for discussion on our blog. The concept of Pan-Africanism represents a movement to unify people of African descent. This ideology calls for the solidarity of Africans worldwide, both in Africa and in the Diaspora, as all African people are interconnected.

In his Autobiography, Malcolm X argues that the struggle of the American black man is on an international level, an idea that he contends the “American power structure” does not want African-Americans to consider (353). He particularly emphasizes the international scope of Pan-Africanism when he says, “I said that physically we Afro-Americans might remain in America, fighting for our Constitutional rights, but that philosophically and culturally we Afro-Americans badly needed to “return” to Africa – and to develop a working unity in the framework of Pan-Africanism” (357).

Malcolm X’s call for unification here is particularly poignant and reveals his changing attitude. While he has been consistent in his emphasis on Pan-Africanism, his Autobiography illustrates the lessening of his anger. His call for a “return” to Africa, to me, raises the questions: How can one identify as both African-American and African? What are the possible positives and negatives of Pan-Africanism?

(SPOILER ALERT)

While researching Pan-Africanism, I could not help but be reminded of Lorraine Hansberry’s 1959 play A Raisin in the Sun. In the play, the character Beneatha meets a Nigerian man named Joseph Asagai, who enlightens her about her African heritage, gives her gifts from Africa, and points out ways in which she is assimilating into white, American culture. Meanwhile, Beneatha’s successful boyfriend George Murchison is fully assimilated in America and denies his African heritage, which Beneatha finds sickening. Beneatha excitedly accepts Asagai’s marriage proposal and invitation to move to Nigeria with him. In the end, her future remains uncertain, but we do know that it will be something new, whether in America or not. My question is (for those of you who have read this play, or just from reading the brief description I have provided here): what do you think of Beneatha’s attitude towards assimilation in this play? This play debuted while Malcolm X was still alive, so what links are there between this play and Malcolm X’s beliefs?

Malcolm X travels to Britain, 1965

As a British person living in America I often find it hard to relate to many of the discussions in class. One that I felt particularly hard to engage with was a conversation regarding the significance of the local American area and how politics and individuals utilised this within the Civil Rights Movement.

Studying Malcolm X has changed this. In 1965 X travelled to the little known town in the West Midlands called Smethwick. His international responsibility to stop racism “by any means necessary” brought him to this unspectacular area to prevent the re-election of Conservative MP Peter Griffith. Just nine days before his assassination, it was one of X’s final acts. 

As a Labour supporter, I have always been fiercely critical of the Conservative Party in England. However they are not as bad as they once were. The 1960s had to content with politicians such as Enoch Powell who infamously stated in his 1968 Rivers of Blood speech:

“I seem to see 'the River Tiber foaming with much blood'. That tragic and intractable phenomenon which we watch with horror on the other side of the Atlantic but which there is interwoven with the history and existence of the States itself, is coming upon us here by our own volition and our own neglect.”  

These inherently racist views were apparent at the time of the 1964 general election in Smethwick, with Conservatives chanting “if you want a nigger for your neighbour, vote Liberal or Labour”. Although not segregated by law, X noted the comparisons between this area and not only the Southern US but also Nazi Germany. He claimed that he had “heard they are being treated as the Jews under Hitler”.

The footage recorded by the BBC was perhaps the last footage recorded of X.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=crKBfIQxvTs

                Malcolm X’s trip the UK makes me feel numerous things. It makes me feel ashamed that similar views were being politically justified in the country of my birth. However the fact that X viewed a small town in the West Midlands as significant enough to put on the map in the context of the struggle for worldwide black equality makes me feel proud. What also gives me hope, although X did not live to see it, is that in 1966 the racist Griffith lost the election and was replaced by a Labour candidate. 

                To mark the anniversary of his assassination, the BBC has posted an article about the visit and how its legacy is still remembered by residents to this day:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-17102185  

Also if anybody is interested here is the Rivers of Blood speech in full. I know it’s not American history but I think it gives an interesting international insight into how extremism affected British politics in the 1960s. The text is ironically printed by the UK’s most conservative paper, The Daily Telegraph.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/3643823/Enoch-Powells-Rivers-of-Blood-speech.html

To see further what X was up against, check out the video below. All visions of England being quaint and whimsical are pretty much crushed by this video, I'm afraid. It's definitely worth a watch.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yi-XGVc9wy4

Marable vs Malcolm

Two Christmas’s ago I was given a copy of Marable’s Biography of Malcolm X by my aunt, who also had given me the autobiography several  years earlier. My first thought was that the gift might be a repetitive read, but I quickly found that Marable’s text is much more concerned about Malcolm’s life as it appeared through artifacts and to the outside eye, or as Marable seems to hold it as, the more historical version. He tries to shed light on the ‘real’ life of Malcolm and takes issue with the autobiography and more specifically Alex Haley’s misguided shaping of the autobiography. Now I should admit I did not read Marable’s text entirely (I wasn’t in high school anymore, not as much time for free-reads in college) but was eager to revisit portions of the biography and at least the intro and first chapter. Marable’s introduction is a quick build up, detailing the several weeks before Malcolm’s assassination, and the biography itself is a buildup to his eventual assassination, which in many ways added to the “legend” aspect of his life and served as the climax in his martyrdom.

When we meet Malcolm in the introduction he is about to deliver his final speech a the leader of the OOAU and is longer a member of the Nation of Islam, and has already “reinvented” himself as a proponent of “multicultural universalism rather than “militant black separatism.” The introduction is eerily vivid, and I would not be surprised  if the ominous foreshadowing and mentioning of the killers arriving  has even more of an effect on someone who has not seen Spike Lee’s depiction of Malcolm being gunned down. Although the majority of the biography focuses on the years 1962-1965 and the buildup to Malcolm’s assassination, Marable offers substantial insight into the early life of Malcolm. Marable seems to have done a great deal of research into the life of Malcolm’s father I had heard whispers of Malcolm’s father belonging to the UNIA, but I did not know how deep it went, and upon further investigation he was a president of the Nebraska and the introduction gives a glimpse of UNIA life in the south, which was definitely something even Garvey apparently struggled to understand, as he once met with KKK leaders in Atlanta.

While some could take issue with the term reinvention, I think it is fitting and is not meant to slight Malcolm. I might however take issue with Marable likening Malcolm to a “great method actor”. If Malcom’s life was about reinvention it was because he learned from his surroundings and was willing to adapt when he needed and when he saw fitting in the world around him. When Malcolm was in prison he recognized his mistakes , looked deep into himself, “Detroit Red”, and asked if he was satisfied with where he was, and adapted accordingly.  Marable paints Malcolm as a flawed individual, but  when he learned of Elijah Muhammad’s alleged affairs with young Nation of Islam secretaries he chose to distance himself from the leader. His reinventing himself is one of the main reasons he inspired others and served as proof of “ultimate salvation.”

I also take issue with his condemnation of Alex Haley’s  hand in the autobiography. As Tim O’Brien says in The Things They Carried  “I want you to feel what I felt. I want you to know why story-truth is truer sometimes than happening-truth.” Perhaps Malcolm’s autobiography was in ways shaped by Alex Haley, but it was still the life that Malcolm wanted to remembered by, and there are certain parts throughout Marable’s books that are potentially defaming. Not to say that we need to pick and choose now, but at some point in the future that decision could have an effect on Malcolm’s place in history.

In Memoriam: Martin's Dream, A Reading of Jordan's Poem

In Memoriam: Martin’s Dream

It doesn’t take a literary scholar to note that June Jordan’s “In Memoriam: Martin Luther King, Jr.” is an unconventional take on the elegy. But in any case, we've got me! (hahaha...) We don’t see MLK’s name mentioned once in the poem, let alone any details or commentary on his life, typical aspects of the elegy. The poem’s main subject seems to be violence and chaos in the US. I posit that Jordan’s poem is more directly an elegy for MLK’s vision of America than for the man himself. 

The poem contains seven stanzas in total, five of which appear in the first section. The speaker begins with a stream of images, giving us an unfettered rush of words that ignores conventional syntax. The visceral impact of the speaker’s diction is undeniable, despite that decoding the language word for word is a task nigh impossible. The speaker associates violent words like “murder,” “kill,” “violate,” and “destroy” with “U.S.A.,” going so far as to call it “the milkland [that] teach[es]...[to]...destroy the weakly freedom...from being born.” 

The next stanza is a single word: America. In a typical elegy, this might the point where the subject of the poem is invoked. In Milton’s Lycidas, which Prof. Pittman mentioned in class today, the speaker beings by cursing nature for drowning his friend before invoking his actual name. Could it be America that Jordan is really mourning? Or more specifically, the idealized America that MLK fought for and inspired legions to believe in?

After the speaker invokes America, the next stanza sees a return to violent imagery and disorganized syntax. This implies that America will not contradict that chaotic imagery; rather, it is both the victim and the purveyor of violence. “Tomorrow yesterday rip rape” in line 7 suggests that brutality is both a factor in America’s past and an undeniable element of its future. Down on lines 20 and 21, we have an instance of rhyme: “assassinate and batten up / like bullets fatten up / the raving greed.” Perhaps the speaker is criticizing the hegemony, who uses militant force to enforce its regime and satisfy its greed. Or perhaps the speaker is commenting on the cyclical nature of violence, which breeds itself endlessly. It is difficult to be sure, but such ambiguity only adds to the complexity of the poem.

Line 27 contains the poem’s climax: the word “STOP,” spelled entirely in capital letters, following a long stream of barbaric imagery. The line can be read as both an angry command and a desperate plea. It also connects to the lines before it: “death by men by more / than you or I can / STOP.” Furthermore, I read the line as being attributed to MLK. His contribution to the struggle was that he asked that we stop the violence - and unlike most pacifists, his voice was actually heard. 

This marks the end of the first section of the poem. It is important to note that the second section begins with a sentence in conventional syntax. We might imagine that MLK’s “STOP” ended the stream of violent imagery and syntax, just as his activism has promoted the philosophy of non-violence.

The first stanza of this second section begins “they sleep who know a regulated place.” It establishes a group isolated from the speaker, a group that is adjusted and comfortable in society, justified by their “universal stage direction.” The speaker calls this “obvious like shorewashed shells,” a clear criticism of that worldview. 

The last stanza begins with “we,” just as the previous one started with “they,” establishing a clear opposition between the two groups: the rebels and the followers of the status quo. Line 33 features the most obvious indication of the elegaic mode, describing “an afternoon of mourning.” The speaker goes on to say that nothing is predictable for the revolutionaries, except for “wild reversal hearse rehearsal.” This tricky line may be conflates practice for civil rights demonstrations (“reversal rehearsal”) with rehearsals for funerals (hearse, meaning the vehicle bearing the coffin).

At this point, the language deviates from regulated syntax, devolving into savage imagery once again. The poem ends with “more and more.” It is unclear what exactly the word “more” is modifying, but we might infer that the speaker is describing the unregulated syntax, which correlates with violence in America. The fact that the poem descends into chaotic language again suggests that the command-plea “STOP” (line 27) failed to have a lasting impact. If we attribute that line to MLK, a further dimension of the poem is revealed. The speaker is expressing the tragedy of MLK’s life: the fact that he was assassinated, and that his command-plea was heard for just a brief moment in time. Thus, Jordan’s unconventional take on the form comes full circle, proving to be a true elegy after all.

Vrai Américain: American Identity in Giovanni's Room

When we read The Fire Next Time a couple weeks ago, I was immediately struck by James Baldwin's prose. He is very adept at utilizing the English language, organizing sounds and rhythms, and bringing the text to life. That was one of the first comments that was made on his work, an observation that it sounded like a speech and had a “voice.” Because I considered his to be some of the best writing that we had experienced in the way of technique, I took Elizabeth's advice and I went ahead and read Giovanni's Room.

First, this is a fantastic book and I agree that everyone should read it. Both the story and the writing are great and I think its social clarity is refreshing, especially considering that it was published in 1956. It's a pretty quick read, as well. The story revolves around an American, David, living in Paris who spends some time in a relationship with an Italian bartender, Giovanni. One of the elements that I found intriguing and relevant to our class discussion is David's inability to define what it is to be American. Throughout the story, David is reluctant to return home to New York. He is running out of money in Paris and his father refuses to send him more because he simply wishes for David to return and make a life for himself in the United States. At one point during David's relationship with Giovanni, he reflects on the fact that the way he lives his life in Paris would be illegal at home. He confesses that there is French prejudice against homosexuality as well, but the legal demarcation is important in repelling him.

One passage in particular stands out as David questions the factors that define an American while he is visiting an American post office. Baldwin writes, “I was aware that they all had in common something that made them Americans, but I could never put my finger on what it was.” Further along in the passage, the text reads, “I...resented being called an American...because it seemed to make me nothing more than that, whatever that was; and I resented being called not an American because it seemed to make me nothing.” This inability to accurately define oneself is unsettling to David. There is an underlying discomfort of being defined by America. And he eventually comes to a realization: “beneath these faces, these clothes, accents, rudeness, was power and sorrow, both unadmitted, unrealized, the power of inventors, the sorrow of the disconnected.” This implies that there is some sort of power inherent in the American identity – a power derived from building a nation perhaps. Or possibly from inventing the concept of a nation in America. The power is reinforced by some kind of deception. And this power gives way to sorrow – sorrow derived from the truth that there is no connection between Americans. Their unity is rooted within their disconnection and inability to solidify their bond.

Are these the true defining factors of Americans? Have they changed?

Malcolm West

Kanye West, Gorgeous: My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy:

Verse 1:

Penitentiary chances, the devil dances


And eventually answers to the call of Autumn


All of them fallin’ for the love of ballin’


Got caught with 30 rocks, the cop look like Alec Baldwin


Inter century anthems based off inner city tantrums


Based off the way we was branded


Face it, Jerome get more time than Brandon

Verse 2:

Is hip-hop just a euphemism for a new religion


The soul music of the slaves that the youth is missing


But this is more than just my road to redemption


Malcolm West had the whole nation standing at attention


As long as I’m in Polo’s smiling they think they got me


But they would try to crack me if they ever see a black me

Link to "Gorgeous"

In light of our discussion about Malcolm X, appropriations, and radical praxis, I want to offer a short reading of some lyrical excerpts from Kanye West’s song, Gorgeous. In the song, West immediately harks to the prison and law enforcement as the site of injustice and white supremacy. He cites the cause of his musical inspiration as stemming from “the way we was branded,” thus linking the production of the “inner city” to the legacy of slavery. This continued structural inequality manifests in the observation that “Jerome” would get more time than “Brandon” due to the racial assumptions that survive in the prison industry.

In his second verse, West elucidates the complex position of hip-hop among young listeners. He juxtaposes it with “soul music of the slaves” and provocatively compares it to a “new religion.” Rather than actually analogize the different types of expression, West is pushing against traditional methods of conceiving ideology and radical resistance to oppression. He argues that his artistic career is “more than just my road to redemption, Malcolm West had the whole nation standing at attention,” in which he stresses not just the economic mobility fostered by his hip-hop production, but also his place in the legacy of Malcolm X, tied rhetorically to West himself through the moniker, “Malcolm West.”

How can we interpret the appropriation of Malcolm X in this instance? I would like to suggest that this deployment has many levels of semiotic significance, but importantly it bridges the gap between the “Malcolm Renaissance” of the early 1990s with contemporary black cultural production. West is producing after the immense popularity of Public Enemy and the release of Spike Lee’s Malcolm X. Yet he employs Malcolm’s name to tie his own project to one of larger political aspirations, larger than mere class mobility. Juxtaposing West’s career as more than a mere “road to redemption” with the famous transformations of Malcolm X can push us toward a generative discourse on Malcolm X as ideology, as Amiri Baraka suggests. In analyzing the material conditions that brought about Malcolm X’s shifts in beliefs, his messages can be interpreted and applied thoughtfully. West’s assertion that, “As long as I’m in a Polo smiling they think they’ve got me, but they would try to crack me if they ever see the black me” illustrates the ways in which class status and whiteness are still coded as mutually coextensive and highlights West’s own struggles with his presentation of his racial identity. In this way, West insightfully inhabits the contested legacy of Malcolm X and provokes his listeners to hear the resonances of X’s words today.