I found this piece to a little confusing at first. It seemed that the author was talking down about the negro race in a patronizing manner. The male dominated emphasis on the term "his," accented a condescending tone in the innitial portrayal of the African race. Hurston characterizes the negro's as a race that talks in action words, pictures, and that they act out their speech. In many cases he also talks about the negro's as being a "primitive man" that exchanges descriptive words.
Hurston talks about how the negro's need to emphasis action upon their speach in order to be able to picture an object. This shows a complete detachment from the ability to understand a concept without being able to match it to something familiar. This alone gives the reader a sense that the author is talking negatively about this race. Some other examples are on the description of the negro's taste for art, angularity, dance, and that he describes them as "not a Christian really."
Upon reading the text however, it seems that the author changes his tone about the race. His characteristics and portrayal turn more into a society that has shaped the one we live in now. This possitive portrayal seems evident within the text on the portions of originality and imitation as a mimic through the love and desire or the art, apposed to the need or want to conform to the imitatee. It is also evident when the author talks about the Jook as bieng "the most important place in America," which was born from the negro race.
The essay in general seemed confusing. I wasnt sure what the authors true feelings were about the negro race when I finished it. It seemed that the author was trying to give a two sided representation instead of being part of either one.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment