Thursday, February 27, 2014

What's Missing From Mumbo Jumbo

I enjoyed reading Ishmael Reed's Mumbo Jumbo, and I was completely convinced that there is something very real and tangible behind Jes Grew, but I thought a few aspects were lacking. For one thing, the book starts off too Black vs. White, when it really should clarify for its readers earlier on that it has more to do with a struggle between conservatism and liberalism, or monotheism and pantheism, or elitism and socialism. For example, there's a lot about Jes Grew that can be linked to Celtic traditions: the pantheism, the freer form of writing music, the syncopation, the rhythm.

Yet the closest Reed comes to addressing that there might be some diversity of white people is in the scene where Biff Musclewhite is bound and speaking with Thor. Musclewhite, who is a Polish immigrant, says "I know you look down on me because I come from one of the European countries under domination by stronger Whites than my people. We were your n****rs; you colonized us and made us dirt under your heels." But Musclewhite isn't a good example, because he also says, "It was then that we realized you were all we had, the way you had cultivated a theater to keep us from them, a theater with scene shifts and a changing cast of characters but always squeezing out the Bronx cheer from your bought-off claque. Then we found out what you were doing. But we didn't let on, we decided to imitate you." And at another point he says, "We used to run alongside your carriages in bare feet when you drove though out neighborhoods, and you would splash mud in our faces violate our sisters flog our fathers; but we kept coming for more because we loved your beautiful cloths, your clean hair, the charming ladies riding beside you, the way you talked..."

And this passage makes any white people with what might arguably have a more Jes Grew-oriented background because of their social class or country of origin appear eager to imitate the Atonists, showing no integrity whatsoever.

But Reed also oversimplifies the other end of the spectrum. He creates this vague concept of the good guys centering in Africa and the Middle East (even though supposedly the whole battle started in Egypt), and he offers little explanation for how Islam would have anything to do with Jes Grew and yet he says in passing that the Atonists fought the crusades to further strengthen their hold on dark magic and suppress any inclinations toward Jes Grew. Whereas for every other part of the book, everything we know about Atonism would fit well into Islam. It's monotheistic, its stricter forms prohibit dancing and even music, and it shares many aspects in common with Judaism and Christianity, all three worshipping the God of Adam, stressing moral responsibility, Judgement Day, and eternal reward and punishment.

So why is Islam frequently exempt from the harsher criticism Christianity and Judaism receive in this book, even to the point where it is implied to be linked with Jes Grew that the Crusades tried to suppress? If this was a deliberate choice on Ishmael Reed's part, then I'm intrigued. Is there something that distinctly sets Islam apart and links it to Jes Grew? Or was it almost an oversight, Ishmael Reed growing comfortable in his dichotomy of what he defined to be the white world verses the black world, not bothering to look for more overlap between the two? The West has a clear Jes Grew presence with the influence of Celtic culture and certainly other Pagan traditions as well. And this vaguely defined Afro-centric part of the world has Islam which has been a growingly Atonist presence for a long time. And yet this is almost completely overlooked throughout the novel.

On the other hand, Reed's choice to so blatantly dichotomizes the world that  this novel could possibly be perceived as a satire of itself, pointing out how impossible it is to divide people in this way, and making readers more aware of the ways in which they compartmentalize entire continents to the point where one part of the world fosters a population that can dance and sing and groove and the other part creates a population that worships a "famous sacrificial White child of the Red Sect rites" (Goya's paiting of Don Manuel Osorio de Zuniga).


Next: Taking a closer look at Reed's overlap in his dichotomy of the world.




Tuesday, February 4, 2014

Evelyn Nesbit: The Embodiment of What's Wrong with Capitalism

From the first time that Doctorow presents us with the character Evelyn Nesbit, we know her as someone strikingly beautiful whose both profited from her good looks as well as been badly hurt because of the frightening lust she stirs in powerful men. When Emma Goldman encounters Evelyn Nesbit, she sees Evelyn as the embodiment of what she believes to be the corrupt system that is capitalism. "You are a creature of capitalism, the ethics of which are so totally corrupt and hypocritical that your beauty is no more than the beauty of gold, which is to say false and cold and useless," Goldman tells Nesbit. Goldman sees Nesbit's beauty that is so prized for what it really is: something to be hoarded by wealthy men like gold or money.

Doctorow defines the “myth of individualism” in America as the idea that Americans are “entrepreneurs of themselves, tending to define themselves by anything that points up their distinction from the larger community.” Nesbit fits well into the myth of individualism, profiting off the singular distinction from the larger society that is her beauty in order to succeed in a male-dominated capitalist world. Just as Goldman argues, Nesbit epitomizes the corruption of capitalism, being robbed of the dignity she might have had in a more egalitarian society in exchange for the luxury that capitalism promises, the same kind of luxury that Tateh succumbs to in exchange for his socialist ideals, and that Ford gravitates toward in exchanges for the laborers' craftsmanship. A little luxury is gained for the few who find their way to the top, but it comes at a huge cost for the masses who must work long hours in dangerous conditions for a pittance in order for such excesses of wealth to be amassed by capitalist superstars like J. P. Morgan.

While Nesbit lives as an entrepreneur of herself and her body, she stands for the degradation that extreme capitalism can impose upon people. The fact that there are men so powerful and rich as to be able to essentially buy any woman they want for themselves shows the extent to which capitalism has enabled the maldistribution of wealth and power. In a society which Emma Goldman envisions where the masses are well supported and the wealthy is evenly distributed, someone like Evelyn Nesbit would probably not exist.