-Anup Joshi
Lukács’
Notion of Art and Objective Truth in Ralph Ellison’s “Battle Royal”
This research paper explores the ideas on Art and
Objective Truth of twentieth century prominent Marxist Philosopher and
Aesthetician Georg Lukács with reference to an extract “Battle Royal” from
Ralph Ellison’s The Invisible Man. This extract picked from the opening
part of the novel, represents the “artistic reflection of reality” of the
white-centric America during early twentieth century. The story as a work of
fiction is not reality itself but an artistic reflection of the reality. The
brutal life of blacks is reflected in the story. As Luckacs claims, “Every work
of art must present circumscribed, self contained and complete context with its
own immediately self evident movement and structure” (60). The extract has also
captured the historical context of that time when whites brutally treated
blacks as animals, fueling to Lukács’ concept of “objective totality”. Though
the story is the representation of particular event of a time period, it shows
the picture of the whole social system. The unnamed narrator of the novel says,
“On my graduation day I delivered an oration in which I showed that humility
was the secret, indeed, the very essence of progress” (Ellison, 406). At that
time in America, colored people had to go through several steps of humility to
receive some reward from whites. The unnamed narrator originally gone to preach
a speech during graduation day had to go through shameful excursion in a battle
royal because of his racial identity. He is even made to grab electrocuted fake
gold coins. Only after going through several humiliations, he is able to get
the scholarship for studying in a black state college.
The
protagonist is the representative of all the black people of then America who
were victim of the racial fanaticism. Blacks were deprived of their basic
rights. It was whites who ruled the state and decided the fate of blacks. The
state affairs along with education system were in their control and their view
mattered on who should get to study. As Lois Tyson puts it, “Literature does
not exist in some timeless, aesthetic realm as an object to be passively
contemplated. Rather, like all cultural manifestations, it is a product of the
socioeconomic and hence ideological conditions of the time and place in which
it was written, whether or not the author intended it so” (66). This story is
also a part of history, culture and depicts the social hierarchy and the
ideological condition of that time. The socio-economic condition of the
protagonist is very worse. He is considered socially inferior and is
economically poor. The protagonist is the victim of the prevalent social
conventions which oppressed blacks. His pathetic condition in story is product
of his socio-economic factors. Being a Marxist critic, Lukács also advocates on
the influence of socioeconomic factors on shaping a person’s life. According to
Lukács:
The
goal for all great art is to provide a picture of reality in which the
contradiction between appearance and reality, the particular and the general,
the immediate and the conceptual, etc., is so resolved that the two converge
into a spontaneous integrity in the direct impression of the work of art and
provide a sense of inseparable integrity. (Lukács, 51).
In Ellison’s text also,
we can find the conflict between appearance and reality. The humiliation faced
by the narrator is appearance which we can easily visualize on reading story.
All the perturbing phases he has to go through the battle royal is what we
speculate. But in reality, the cause for all these prejudice is his racial
identity. Being a black man and belonging to a proletariat family, he is
despised and has little significance in the country where whites are demigods.
The narrator describes himself as an “invisible man” (405). It is not that he
is physically invisible but he is invisible to the society and to the superior
world of whites because he is just a Negro boy.
Similarly,
the grandfather of the narrator at his deathbed utters:
Son, after I'm gone I want you to keep up the good fight. I
never told you, but our life is a war and I have been a traitor all my born
days, a spy in the enemy's country ever since I give up my gun back in the Reconstruction. Live with your head in
the lion's mouth. I want you to overcome 'em with yeses, undermine 'em with grins,
agree 'em to death and destruction, let 'em swoller you till they vomit or bust
wide open. (Ellison, 406)
In his statement, the
grandfather doesn’t really mean that he is a traitor. Indeed he is a real hero.
He spied whites by secluding his anger and even lived with them. He suggests
his son to overcome white supremacy with grins and by influencing them. Only by
this method he can “Keep This Nigger-Boy Running” (Ellison, 417). Ellison
resolves the conflict between appearance and reality at the end of the story
when the narrator deciphers the actual connotation of his grandfather’s last
words.
The story also involves the contradiction between
particular and general. By presenting the particular story of the narrator, the
story generalizes the issue of whole black community. Though the story portrays
hardships of the blacks during twentieth century, it also reflects how they strived
for their progress and achievements despite all the humiliations. The story is
almost rooted in the real society and even reflects the reality more vividly
and dynamically as pointed out by Raman Seldon, “…the novel reflects reality,
not by rendering its mere surface appearance, but by giving us a ‘truer, more
complete, more vivid and more dynamic reflection of reality” (Seldon, 29).
Likewise, the story resolves the conflict between immediate and conceptual. The
picture that suddenly is projected to our mind is immediate. Whereas when we
judge all of its quality, it becomes conceptual. When we analyze the picture
presented by the story, we can assimilate the darker side of racial supremacy,
not only in America but throughout the world. The story clearly suggests us the
gruesome consequences of any form of prejudices, be it racial, theological,
ethnic, lingual or sexual.
George Lukács strongly argues in favor of marginalized
group, to which he names “partitionship of objectivity”. As M.A.R. Habib writes
about Lukács, “ The realist artist expresses a vision of the possible totality
embracing these contradictions, a totality achieved by embodying what is
‘typical’ about various historical stages…Socialist realists, moreover, view
reality from the viewpoint of the proletariat” (Habib, 541). Ellision’s story
also argues for the human rights of Blacks in America. He criticizes the oppression
of Whites by characterization of the protagonist as a black person himself. The
narrator lucidly portrays hypocrite society of white supremacy and ultimately
yearns for the end of racial prejudices. The progressive idea of the text is
highly compatible with the philosophy of Lukács. When the narrator uses the
word “social equality” during his speech, all the white audiences turn against
him. They are so stereotypical that they cannot endure even a word about
black’s right. So expecting a possible riot, he immediately replaces the word
by “social responsibility” and the tension is resolved. The narrator somehow
develops this belief throughout the story that he needs to pursue education at
any cost, even if he has to befriend whites for that. As a gifted orator, he is
determined to flourish his aptitudes. This certainly motivates the marginalized
readers to keep struggling for their goal.
Ellison creates a fictional world in his story which
though corresponds with the reality of society, is in reality an illusion. As Lukács
points out, “…this non-correspondence is merely an illusion, though a necessary
one, essential and intrinsic to art” (Lukács 61). Lukács valorizes the
artfulness fabrication of art over the objectivity of science. Similarly, as Lukács
believes a story cannot present the totality of life but can portray the whole
totality just by portraying a fragment of it. Ellison’s story does not present
every event that happened during twentieth century racist America. He only
presents a part where a black person has to go through several humiliations in
a battle royal to achieve an scholarship. The writer objectively portrays the
eccentric white mentality. The crowd of whites yell vulgarly to the black boys
who are about to fight each other blindfolded, “I want to get at that
ginger-colored nigger. Tear his limb from limb” (409). The attitude of white
people towards blacks is barbaric and they do not consider blacks any more
significant than an animal. The crowd totally humiliates those black boys, and
entertains their battle. Even the black people are deeply strangled by
hesitation that they are indifference to their own community. Tatlock severely
beats the protagonist despite his request and offer to hand him all the prize
collections. The black boys’ battle and the naked dance of the woman is just a
source of enjoyment to the so called “prestigious” whites. They enjoy by the
sight of other people’s suffering. Through his story, Ellison reflects the
pathetic life of black during twentieth century.
Lukács, as an advocate of objective realism, focuses on
the artistic refection of reality in literature. According to him, no work of realistic
literature is isolated from the part of history and society. Ellison’s “Battle
Royal” which vividly portrays the horror of racist America during twentieth
century can be taken as a perfect text in regards with Lukács’ idea. The story
successfully presents the barbaric treatment of blacks by white Supremes.
Though the story is the fabricated work of fiction, it is rooted in real
society. The readers can enjoy it along with the sense of aesthetic art. The
disgrace narrator has to undergo in the story not only reflects the brutality
of white-centric society, but also establishes idea among readers that
prejudice has very tough consequences upon the life of victim and appeals them
to denounce any form of prejudice. The narrator’s approval of his grandfather’s
suggestion to keep going in his life motivates readers to strive hardships in
life. Ellison by standing on the side of marginalized community confirms Lukács’
notion of “partitionship of objectivity”.
Works Cited
Ellison, Ralph. “Battle
Royal”. Elements of Literature. 4th ed. Scholes, Robert,
Nancy R.
Comley,
Carl H. Klans, and Michael Silverman, eds. New Delhi: OUP, 2009. 405-417.
Print.
Habib, M.A.R. A
History of Literary Criticism and Theory. London: Blackwell, 2008. Print.
Luckacs, Georg. “Art and
Objective Truth”. The Theory of Criticism From Plato to The
Present.Ed.
Seldon, Raman. London: Longman Group, 1990. 59-66. Print.
Seldon, Raman. A
Reader’s Guide To Contemporary Literary Theory. 2nd ed. New York:
Harvester
Wheatsheaf, 1998. Print.
Tyson, Lois. Critical
Theory Today: A User Friendly Guide. 2nd ed. New York & London.
Routledge,
2006. Print.
0 सुझाबहरु:
Post a Comment