In Ralph Ellison's Invisible Man, Rinehart can be seen not only as a a distortion of reality but also reality itself. His multiple identities provides for others their own realities in relation to his personas, and his many classifications act as a mask for him as he's able to portray himself as multiple people. The narrator struggles with this man's life due to his inability to realize the importance of self.
When looking at the name "Rinehart," the narrator establishes two different parts of the man: rind and heart. The rind is defined as the outer layer or skin of something, whereas the heart represents an inner existence. As the narrator refers to Rinehart as "both rind and heart" (498), he contemplates the ability of man to take on so many different identities on the outside while still remaining one true identity on the inside. He relates back to the words of the veteran when he notes that Rinehart regards his world as possibility, repeating word-for-word the veteran's advice to him that "the world is possibility if only [he'll] discover it" (156). In this case, the veteran is emphasizing the discovery of this world or possibility with the reliance on the self to discover it, encouraging the narrator to write his own history rather than have others write it for him.
Rinehart is a runner, a gambler, a briber, a lover, and a Reverend in the novel. Although his identities to others appear as a mask to them, hiding the others and displaying only one at a certain time, he still remains true to himself in that his life is one of multiple identities. He chooses to use these identities out of his own mind, whereas the narrator is forced to take on names pushed onto him out of his free will.
To the men at the Battle Royal, Norton, and Mary, he's to play the part of the "destiny of [his] people" (32). The attendees of the Battle Royal conclude that the narrator will some day "lead his people i the proper paths" (32), pushing onto him the responsibility for the whole race. According to Norton, he is dependent upon the narrator to "learn [his] fate" (45), which the narrator finds bewildering as the trustee doesn't even know the narrator's name. His disregard for the narrator's identity in place of the identity he places on him shows that the narrator is not in charge of his own being. Mary also extends this leadership role onto the narrator, telling him that he has to lead and fight "and move us all on up a little higher" (255), telling him this even before she learns his name.
For Bledsoe, Kimbro, and Brother Jack, the narrator's identity is unnecessary as his only role will be to be used as a resource of sorts. Bledsoe tells the narrator that he doesn't exist, that he's "nobody" (143). This insistence on the narrator's lack of identity is held when Kimbro instructs him to obey everything he says, leading the narrator to believe that he "wasn't supposed to think" (200). This loss of thinking for one's self displays a plunge out of history in that the narrator loses control of his own history, given more pressure when Brother Jack gives him his new identity. Brother Jack informs the narrator that he is "to answer to no other" (309), encouraging him to forcibly reject his old identity in place of this new one given to him by the Brotherhood.
Throughout the novel., the narrator is unable to discover himself; he states what he "would be no one except [himself]--whoever [he] was" (311). This inability of his to realize his true identity hinders him from reaching a true freedom, from being his own father, as the veteran had advised of him. Although he realizes that "[he'll] be free" (243) once he discovers who he is, his identity is only constructed by the individuals and groups he encounters.
During part of the Norton and college-expulsion seminar, some theories were thrown out about words of the narrator's grandfather and whether they were advice towards the racial struggle or the power struggle.
In Invisible Man, the narrator recalls the dying words of his grandfather, urging his grandchildren to "keep up the good fight" (16). He compares this fight to having one's "head in the lion's mouth" (16), as though he's urging for his children and grandchildren to live dangerously yet under the command of the lion, or the stronger forces. His idea of a fight involves using deception and trickery, with which he encourages his family to "overcome 'em with yeses, undermine 'em with grins, agree 'em to death and destruction, let 'em swoller [them] whole till they vomit or bust wide open" (16). This fight represents the narrator's own inner conflict between fiction and reality, between appearing true and being true to himself.
When the narrator drives Mr. Norton around, he thinks back to his grandfather's advice and believes that his actions were, in his grandfather's words, an act of "treachery" (40). This thought comes to the narrator after Mr. Norton refers to his fate and how the narrator plays a part in his destiny. With this, the narrator appears to be under the control of Mr. Norton, although he does not realize this himself. This goes against the grandfather's advice in that he's not submissive to Mr. Norton as a way of undermining him and achieving his power, but rather in a way of seeking praise, knowing that it is "advantageous to flatter rich white folks" (38).
The grandfather's words are discouraged by the veteran at the Golden Day, a man who reveals unto the narrator his subservience to Mr. Norton. He addresses to the narrator that with Mr. Norton, he's "learned to repress not only his emotions but his humanity" (94). He also adds that the narrator's "blindness is his chief asset" (95) indicating that he's unknowing to his current level or position in comparison to Mr. Norton. As a result, the veteran later advises him to be his "own father" (156), implying that he wishes for the narrator to not be the lion's meat but rather the lion itself.
Just as the veteran represents the anti-grandfather point of view, Mr. Bledsoe reflects the lion's meat who acts as the meat but is in fact the lion. He mentions to the narrator how he says "'Yes, suh' as loudly as any burrhead when it's convenient, but [he's] still the king" (142). His actions are an exact resemblance to what the grandfather advises in that he acts submissive although he is the one in control, and "how much it appears otherwise" (142) indicates that the white men who appear to be above him are unknowing of his power.
To me, the grandfather is encouraging the narrator to please the people he comes in contact with despite his own beliefs. In this case, he's still advising that his family members cast aside their own fears and desires in order to fulfill this role as lion's meat, or a resource of some sort. However, in doing so, he believes they will be able to turn the tables and be the ones in control.
Sonnet 24
William Shakespeare
Mine eye hath played the painter and hath steeled
Thy beauty's form in table of my heart.
My body is the frame wherein 'tis held,
And perspective it is best painter's art.
For through the painter must you see his skill
To find where your true image pictured lies,
Which in my bosom's shop is hanging still,
That hath his windows glazèd with thine eyes.
Now see what good turns eyes for eyes have done:
Mine eyes have drawn thy shape, and thine for me
Are windows to my breast, wherethrough the sun
Delights to peep, to gaze therein on thee.
Yet eyes this cunning want to grace their art;
They draw but what they see, know not the heart.
Within "Sonnet 24", Shakespeare compares the beauty of an individual to beauty interpreted by the speaker, reflecting the truth of beauty that exists in the individual and the lack of true beauty in his own evaluation.
In the first quatrain, the narrator equates his own body as a painter and the depiction of the individual's beauty as his artwork. As the speakers' eyes play the part of the painter, it's as if the speaker is attempting to capture the beauty of the individual through sight. This emphasis on strictly sight establishes the idea that the one to whom the poem is addressed has only visual beauty, focusing more on appearance. The image of beauty is said to be in "table of [his] heart" (2), expressing the idea that the individual's beauty has permanently left an impression on the speaker. By describing perspective as "best painter's art" (4), the speaker is suggesting that the most skilled artist is the one who is able to most realistically and accurately portray the beauty of the individual.
By the second quatrain, the speaker continues to emphasize the true beauty as shown through the eyes as opposed to represented through other forms. As he refers to his eye as the "painter" (1), the speaker indicates that the most skilled artist would be his eyes as they are the only things that truly take in the beauty of the individual. The "true image" (6) of the individual's beauty is said to lie in the speaker's "bosom's shop" (7), referring to his heart upon which the beauty is impressed. By mentioning "windows glazèd with thine eyes" (8), the speaker is putting emphasis on the transparency of his heart as if looking onto his love for the individual is as simple as looking through the windows of a shop. In this case, it appears as though the individual's beauty is also reflected onto the speaker himself, making him beautiful as well.
The speaker highlights helpful qualities of both his eyes and the eyes of the individual as well as the almost divine beauty of the individual in the third quatrain. He illustrates the "good turns" (9) that his eyes have provided as their drawing the individual's shape, placing his gratefulness for his eyes upon the fact that they have allowed him to see the individual's beauty. For the eyes of the individual, he's thankful for their acting as "windows to [his] breast" (11), as if by looking through the individual's eyes, the speaker is able to see his own love reflected back at him. As the sun "Delights to peep" (12) through the windows, the speaker uses imagery to cast importance onto the individual. The sun's rays shine upon the individual as a reflection of the beauty that radiates onto the speaker, providing almost a sense of enlightenment in which the truth is found through the window.
A turn occurs after the last quatrain and before the couplet as the speaker suggests that the eyes do not have the power to convey the true beauty of the individual as would the heart. As the eyes simply "draw but what they see" (13), the speaker implies that eyes are limited to drawing the physical representations of beauty rather than the emotional backing of beauty. As the heart symbolizes love and emotions associated with love, the heart can capture the true beauty that the eyes cannot.
Ralph Ellison's Invisible Man and John Gardner's Grendel both feature a relationship between manipulator and manipulated. This relationship appears to be detrimental to each position in the novels, the manipulation often involving the obscurity of the truth.
Within Invisible Man, the narrator is given advice early on to "be [his] own father" (Ellison 156), or to make his own decisions, by a "mad" veteran. He is advised to do so after he is found obeying and following the orders of Mr. Norton, a rich trustee of the school he attends. Norton makes assertions that the narrator is a part of his fate and destiny, that the narrator's achievements will be his own achievements. Once realizing this, the veteran describes the narrator as "a mark on the scoreboard of [Norton's] achievement" (Ellison 95); he is also referred to as a "mechanical man" (Ellison 94) as if he is a robot doing Norton's bidding. The narrator is simply something that Norton can show off as if he were a prized possession, or even a son. This relationship between father and son is also mentioned by the veteran, who comments that the narrator is also acting as "a child, or even less--a black amorphous thing" (Ellison 95) that can be manipulated and shaped by Norton. The narrator's inability to understand the vet's word leaves the veteran believing that he fails to "understand the simple facts of life" (Ellison 94) because of Norton's distortion of the truth.
Grendel in Grendel is influenced by the Shaper, a man who maintains the innocence of the Danes by performing songs that speak to his people the "truths" of the world. However, Grendel realizes that his songs only give the people "blissfsul, swinish ignorance" (Gardner 77) as they don't sing of truth but rather warped stories to protest his people. With his eloquence as a harpist, he makes it "all seem true and very fine" (Gardner 43) even to Grendel. Grendel immediately realizes the influence the Shaper holds in shaping the minds of his listeners, believing that he had "changed the world... had transmuted it" (Gardner 43). As Grendel is unable to determine his place in society--made an outcast by all despite his cries for "Mercy! Peace!" (Gardner 51)--he confirms that he "a machine" (Gardner 123), blindly playing into the hands of fate.
The narrator of Ralph Ellison's novel first realizes the influence that others hold over him when he purchases yams from a vendor. Initially he rejected foods that tied him back to his culture, believing his refusal to be an "act of discipline, a sign of the change that was coming over [him]" (Ellison 178). His shame for his Southern background and desire to be accepted by the Northerners affects him with this rejection, though he later discards it as he realizes he's doing "what was expected of [him] instead of what [he himself] had wished to do" (Ellison 266). Despite this realization, he is still manipulated by a "father" figure found in Brother Jack, who tells him that he was "not hired to think" (Ellison 470) but rather to speak what the Brotherhood wanted him to speak. In this case, the narrator is blind to the organization's hold over him, equated with Tod Clifton's Sambo doll with a black thread in the back, which had been invisible to the narrator.
Despite his disdain for "blind mechanism ages old" (Gardner 21), Grendel feels compelled to play into the Shaper's songs and act as "the dark side" (Gardner 51). This is because he is also given an idea from the dragon that the world is meaningless, that "in a billion billion billion years, everything will have come and gone in several times, in various forms" (Garnder 70). This idea that the world will eventually become nothing upsets Grendel as he "cannot believe such monstrous energy of grief can lead to nothing" (Gardner 123). Although he knows that the Shaper's words are simply masks of the truth, he must play into his work as his is the lesser of two evils; at least through the Shaper, Grendel is given a purpose to life.
While the narrator of Invisible Man plays into the hands of his manipulators unknowingly, Grendel is forced to do so in order to keep from going insane with the possibility that the world will soon be nothing. Grendel's internal struggles greatly outweigh those of Ralph Ellison's narrator.
