So, thus far in our class we have covered a book by Richard Wright, a book by Ralph Ellison, and most of a book by Zora Neal Hurston. The books are all part of the same curriculum and there are reoccurring themes for sure, but when dealing with a topic as complicated as African American fiction, there are bound to be differing opinions within the body of literature. All the authors wrote during a similar time frame, so I thought I would take a quick look at their relations with one another, and what they thought of each others' work.

Hurston's book wasn't very well received at first by a lot of people. Although several sites claimed Ellison was influenced by her work through the Harlem Renaissance, he actually said Their Eyes Were Watching God had a "blight of calculated burlesque". This is a creative way to phrase a really biting insult. I have a feeling he was criticizing the characters and their apparent simplicity. And if you think about it, in contrast with the narrator in Invisible Man, the characters in Their Eyes Were Watching God aren't very intellectually developed or complex. He gave the impression in his review that he thought Hurston's work (though "lyrical") was behind the times; she was apparently "unaware of the technical experimentation" influenced by Stein, Hemingway, etc. He also mentions that the "casual brutalities" of the South are not a part of the story, so I guess she wasn't political enough for Ellison, which is kind of ironic because he received similar criticism for Invisible Man. Also, he seemed to be all into the purity of art stuff, we know he wasn't aligned with the communists or the black power movement, and the movie didn't mention any active political work aside from his writing. So, I don't really know what Ellison was getting at exactly.

Anyway, moving on (and trying not to pick sides). I don't think Hurston got to be famous enough during her time to have written a lot of reviews herself (I read this thing that said she died broke and unrecognized by the literary community, which is sad), so I don't know what she thought of Ellison. Though I'm sure she was familiar with him because she lived for over ten years after Invisible Man was published. Similarly with Wright; she must have been aware of him, but I'm not sure what she thought of him.

Wright also reviewed Their Eyes Were Watching God, and took similar issue with it to Ellison. He admitted that it's written well, but insisted that she portrays her characters too simply and plays into the "minstrel" tradition forced onto African Americans (think Sambo dolls and coin bank). If you want to read the full article, here's a link: http://people.virginia.edu/~sfr/enam358/wrightrev.html  (warning, contains spoilers)

I haven't done any extra research on Wright's relationship with Ellison, but I know that they knew each other and he was kind of Ellison's gateway into the literary community. I wonder if they were still on good terms later in life given Ellison's harsh portrayal of the communist party in his novel. I can't help but see a little of Wright in Jack, given Wright's political views, and the (semi-autobiographical) book seems to depict a sudden, potentially enemy-creating split between the narrator and the communists. Then again, Invisible Man is almost an homage to Native Son, referencing it throughout and building off it's ideas. I don't know how sincere the allusions are, though. For all I know, Ellison could be mocking Native Son in a way. I bet Ellison would critique Bigger's simplicity.

I find it really interesting how much disagreement there was within the progressive, book-writing, African American community, and how, despite this, they are constantly being grouped as if they were all on the same side.
So, who do you agree with?

Jazz

In the movie in class, it was mentioned that Ellison actually started his career in music, specifically jazz. It's fairly plain that Invisible Man is a little bit autobiographical, and it seemed to me that jazz (and the desire to become a musician) to Ellison was something like writing (and the related aspirations of professional success) to the narrator. They were skills, passion even, that started to show early in life. The narrator's graduation speech is highly praised, and Ellison began playing the cornet at age 9. Both young men received a scholarship for their talent that sent them to (extremely similar) colleges. They perused their talent in college for some time before being side-tracked and leaving for New York.
In their jobs after this they abandoned their skills somewhat. Ellison worked briefly with the communist party, and the narrator's search for a job initially ended at a paint factory, where literary prowess was completely useless.
In the more long term jobs that they find after this their talents come in handy some, but are not primary requirements in the job description. I'm speaking here of the narrator's work in the Brotherhood and Ellison early literary work; short stories for magazines and what not. I do not think that these were exactly parallel times, because Ellison's job would evolve into something much more long term, while the narrator would soon become disillusioned with the Brotherhood, but both times represent old skills showing through in a new context.
Music introduced Ellison to artistic thought. More specifically, an interest in music generally comes along with some amount of lyrical consideration. In this way, Ellison was likely prepared somewhat for poetry. Jazz also influenced the style and themes of some of his writing. Ellison speaks in his introduction to Invisible man of how he drew from his training in Jazz when writing the novel. The way he describes the book coming out of itself is reminiscent of jazz improv, and Louis Armstrong's "Black and Blue" prompts the question that gets the book started.
Similarly, the narrator's oratory skills make him a useful member of the Brotherhood--it's even what gets him the occupation in the first place-- but it's not the primary aspect of the job. As we learn more and more throughout the story, he is a face more than a voice, but he builds his power as a symbol through his speeches.
I think it is important to note that, in the end of the novel, the narrator is pursuing his talent fully; writing a novel, while Ellison sticks with literature. However, the narrator is not using his talent for the job(s) he had originally intended to have. Likewise, while Ellison stuck with literature and did not return to Jazz, his fascination with music continued to influence his work (one example is his short story "Living with Music").